Posted on 08/16/2014 4:38:17 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
We aren’t going to be able to stop the proliferation of the military weapons to local police forces.
It’s important, however, to change those things we can, and in this case one thing to change is our perception of those weapons.
We need to begin thinking of them as resources for our side, resources being maintained and fueled for us to use when they are needed.
I was a civilian (state employee) security guard at an Air Guard base in the 80’s after I left the service. Depending on my post that night I carried a S&W .38 revolver & 18 rounds or a FULLY AUTOMATIC (selective fire) Air-Force style M-16 with 120 rounds on my person. The local PD were actually somewhat scared of us. LOL
How about we quit breeding gibsmedats, quit inviting illegal aliens into the country ... maybe then we wouldn’t “need” uniformed thugs.
It would be a great help for the authorities to evoke more relaxed standards for self and property defense in situations of rampant lawlessness such as was the case in Ferguson.
The author is full of crap.
The problem is that when police are kitted out with military gear they will use it. Not just for riots, but they will do more mundane jobs, way down scale from riots, using the same tactics. It’s already happening, and people are already dead who should not be.
The every day cop needs his side arm and maybe a semi-auto rifle or shotgun in the trunk with a vest and helmet. Beyond that the “tactical unit” should be available for call up for specific incidents where there is a known SIGNIFICANT threat.
This does not mean serving normal warrants. If the need to serve a warrant or confront a significant threat arises then is should be executed on a rare basis rather than routine.
Not hardly, and it points to your 'us vs. them' mindset.
Police are supposed to be there to provide a service to the public. The public gets to decide how they are equipped. That's not hate, except in some twisted, steroid deranged bully's mind.
/johnny
Spot-on Brevity Award, goes to Timber Rattler!
A military uniform should be reserved exclusively for military use - it is a universally recognized symbol that the Most Powerful Force in the World has arrived to kill enemies and SAVE populations.
Bloused camo pants aren’t going to stop a bullet any quicker than police uniform pants. Departments need to bugger off with the dress-up crap and the government needs to stop acting like a damn arms dealer to agency departments. And that includes painting armoured vehicles in camo or flat grey - paint the darn thing like the police vehicle it is.
If departments insist on on their officers being dressed up like rhinestone cowboys, AND they expect to retain the support of the military, then they might want to strongly consider conducting themselves under Warrior rules and knock off fostering perceptions that make REAL warriors look bad:
Police are a tool of the local citizens, to make their life easier. The military are to kick ass, take names, and protect the sovereignty of a nation.
/johnny
Bingo. Part of the Grand Leftist Plan.
Sooner or later, the good guys are going to win. In a way, all this is a big bluff.
It’s interesting because arguing against the “militarization of police” ultimately is saying that more power has to go to State and Federal government than local.
Its somewhat analogous to 2nd amendment issue where the anti-right-to-bear side says big brother will take care of you, so you don’t need guns.
Here it is big big brother will come in and take care of your city if there are any problems, so you don’t need equipment to deal with riots or other threats to your city.
We need “good old boys” on the beat, as the US had 50 years ago. We do not need jack-booted thugs yelling “Get on the ground, GET ON THE GROUND, NOW!”
In Britain citizens don’t have guns.
Your comments are weird.
Not even the most liberal black Democrat would agree with you. (They are mostly looking to get more blacks employed as cops).
I wouldn’t walk around certain areas without being armed, many people don’t leave their home without being armed, which is probably the smartest way to go. I believe people should be armed in general; I don’t think being a cop should cause to be disarmed.
I was able to see the image by doing some unarmed investigation, reading the source html and using another browser to go directly to the site that doesn't allow hotlinking.
/johnny
Big difference between a police force with riot gear and the para-military forces of Federal Departments which shouldn’t even have a law enforcement branch.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.