[Carbonsteel]

I can see how this would worry some. Here in Lubbock, a SWAT officer was killed by friendly fire when the team was called out over a domestic dispute.

On the other hand, with gangs growing larger, stronger, and better armed, its hard not to justify it.

[Puppage]

Yes, be gentle with the armed, murderous criminals. It's not their fault they're bad.....nobody ever took the time to love them.

[camle]

they have to justify their huge cost. if they don't deploy, they cannot do so. So the most they want to stay in business, the more likely they will deploy in ever decreasing circumstances. It's called "funding justifiable mission creep".

[headsonpikes]

"The problem is that when you talk about the war on this and the war on that, and police officers see themselves as soldiers, then the civilian becomes the enemy."

To paraphrase Chairman Mao, the US Government is "building socialism with Amerrican characteristics".

[FroedrickVonFreepenstein]

"The problem is that when you talk about the war on this and the war on that, and police officers see themselves as soldiers, then the civilian becomes the enemy."

I think that line above says it all. Far too many police forces are acting as armies of occupation rather than keepers of the peace.

[LZ_Bayonet]

Also recall Columbine, where the truly first-responding officers were not allowed to enter immediately, while awaiting SWAT. The result was that the students remaining inside were left to fend for themselves until SWAT arrived, assembled, and entered. SWAT is just another tool, and is justifiable on that basis. How effective or ineffective a tool results from the decision making of the managers.

[Deguello]

"officer was killed by friendly fire"

Dallas had Officer Cox who was stitched up the back by a H&K MP5, but you are not supposed to know this.

[IronJack]

Have you ever noticed how concerned British news organizations are with American guns? Surely there's a prince somewhere these clowns can be pestering, or a cricket match that needs covering. Our 2nd Amendment must give the Brits a wedgie.

[monday]

Well, accidents happen. As long as the family is properly compensated and the officer who fired the fatal shot is fired and never allowed to work as a police officer again, then you have to say that incidents like this are just part of the price we pay to have a safe society.

The problem is, victims are rarely compensated, and the officers whose incompetence cause these tragedies are rarely even disciplined let alone fired.

Witness the two month long investigation in this case. They are desperately trying to find some way to make it the fault of their victim instead of taking responsibility for their screw up.

That is what is evil about law enforcement, not the fact that they make mistakes.

[PaxMacian]

Go ahead! Try to justify summary execution in the USA!

[George from New England]

"Yes, be gentle with the armed, murderous criminals."

This is more about excessive use of force where civilians and innocents die...cmon.

Police departments are justifying more swat call outs to increase their budgets.

Follow the $$$.

[George from New England]

Who knows the laws on wearing body armour?

Are the civilian restrictions state by state statutes or are there federal laws affecting citizen use of kevlar?

[Travis McGee]

BANG!

[Travis McGee]

Don't forget, in that Lubbock "circulaar SWAT firing squad" case, they arrested the innocent home owner and charged him with murdering the cop. Thank God he didn't own any weapons in the caliber that killed the cop.

(For those who forgot, a SWAT accidental discharge led to a firefight between the front yard SWAT cops, and the back yard SWAT cops....right through the man's house. Hundreds of rounds were fired at each other. A cop was killed, and an innocent man was being railroaded as a "cop killer." He'd be on death row today if he had owned a gun in .223.)

[King Prout]

once upon a time, there were almost no organized police forces within the United States. The people kept the peace. It was a function of the militia and private security, and was a common civic duty.

Then, police forces were founded, to some extent in response to the need to co-opt immigrants into government-funded jobs (the rise of "professional" police and fire services was in lockstep with the rise of machine politics)... however: once upon a time, police were "peacekeepers"

now, they are "law enforcement officers" in an ever-expanding "war on [whatever]" with an ever-expanding list of laws to enforce.

we, the people, are fast becoming regarded as collateral items in a war zone - not directly targeted, but... only "oops-worthy" if broken accidentally.

[jordan8]

The rise of militarized forms of policing, the LA style of policing you might call it, was more the result of ethnic conflict than the war on drugs per se, they're the system's response to ethnic street gangs, which are not merely criminal but a form of social rebellion as well. Militarized police are a necessity in a multicultural society. In a properly functioning empire they both suppress and protect minorities and by doing so protect the interests of those who built the empire and prosper from it.

British police are also edging towards militarization largely in response to ethnic crime, though the number of minorities in Britain is still quite small.

[Paul C. Jesup]

On the other hand, with gangs growing larger, stronger, and better armed, its hard not to justify it.

Gangs only get stronger when the community bans private ownship of guns.

An armed society is a polite society.

[mugs99]

On the other hand, with gangs growing larger, stronger, and better armed, its hard not to justify it

When has a SWAT team shot it out with a gang?
.

[Fury]

From the article by the BBC"

"As officers approached with their weapons drawn, tragedy struck. A handgun was accidentally discharged, fatally wounding Dr Culosi. " An acdidental discharge?

[Little Ray]

Funny. They don't seem to hunting the gangs...