motorhead0922
New member
I'm so confused. I agree with the ACLU... 
Now I have a headache.
Now I have a headache.
The Militarization of Police...A good thing?
- Thread starter johnelmore
- Start date
- Status
Topically, I agree, but I expect that most of the politicians in the US realize there is potential political if not personal peril in becoming tyrants, where many in other parts of the world have no fear of the masses. Ultimately as one moniker states in the US, 'First Amendment rights (freedom of assembly and speech) are guaranteed by the Second Amendment (civilian gun ownership).
That would come under the
And
As for the police they have to be armed to meet the threat. Like for example North Hollywood Shootout bank Of America. Most would argue that civilians should be allowed assault rifles etc, and openly carry them in the street can you then go on to say the police should not.
Last edited:
johnelmore
New member
Some people dont remember the violent 70s when crime was at a high. I wonder why back then the police didnt start carrying rifles and semi-automatic pistols. I wonder how they dealt with things carrying just a revolver. Today crime is at historical lows and people cant see the reasons, but if you were alive during the 70s then you would know.
The police in Britain have their own special problems. They had the IRA and now it looks like they have these Jihadists. One incident they murdered a man in the street with knives. Those guys need a military posture to keep order as they have been in a quasi state of war for a while. 1 out of 4 Jihadists are British. They even have recruitment videos with British telling us to come on down. If I was an officer in Britain I would certainly keep all this in mind.
The police in Britain have their own special problems. They had the IRA and now it looks like they have these Jihadists. One incident they murdered a man in the street with knives. Those guys need a military posture to keep order as they have been in a quasi state of war for a while. 1 out of 4 Jihadists are British. They even have recruitment videos with British telling us to come on down. If I was an officer in Britain I would certainly keep all this in mind.
johnelmore
New member
The SWAT team is like a fire hose or a fire extinguisher. Its a tool used for a specific purpose and sometimes goes unused. The problem with fire hoses and extinguishers is when they are used in the wrong manner just like SWAT teams. So the problem is not SWAT teams but the specific use of such teams and the top line management behind them.
What makes Americans troubled about the issues is when there is a lack of accountability. The majority of police chiefs and police unions will defend their officers no matter the situation and even when obvious mistakes are made. They should just discipline the officers involved and then develop specific training to prevent future incidents while issuing a statement that they were wrong. Instead, what you get is the chief telling us they did nothing wrong.
Accidents happen. Someone rearended my car the other day. It wasnt a problem until the other guy got out and started telling me he did nothing wrong...
What makes Americans troubled about the issues is when there is a lack of accountability. The majority of police chiefs and police unions will defend their officers no matter the situation and even when obvious mistakes are made. They should just discipline the officers involved and then develop specific training to prevent future incidents while issuing a statement that they were wrong. Instead, what you get is the chief telling us they did nothing wrong.
Accidents happen. Someone rearended my car the other day. It wasnt a problem until the other guy got out and started telling me he did nothing wrong...
Foxy two noted
I had the chance as a civilian contractor to go with Phoenix SWAT team on a drug bust, including the briefing. In a follow up discussion with the commander explained the goal was to get not kill the BG,unless absolutely necessary. He was proud they had NOT shot anyone in the last year, but made it clear that was a sign of strength not weakness.
While there are some entry teams that have the "kill them all and let God sort it out" in the Middle East (where the focus is on killing the BG not saving the hostage), I would tend to say some SWAT attitudes or procedures are bad. LA, ABQ and a few others seem to propagate the bad stereotype.
I had the chance as a civilian contractor to go with Phoenix SWAT team on a drug bust, including the briefing. In a follow up discussion with the commander explained the goal was to get not kill the BG,unless absolutely necessary. He was proud they had NOT shot anyone in the last year, but made it clear that was a sign of strength not weakness.
johnelmore
New member
There is some reason why they shoot first in the Middle East. First, they are in the middle of a quasi-war and such things happen in war zones. Second, a minority of players is responsible for the majority of deaths in the Middle East. The FBI had examined 160 defused and exploded ieds. It was determined 44 of those IEDs were created by 1 person. So if they are able to kill the right people then it saves lives of many others. Lastly, with the justice system in the Middle East the way it is some captured people ultimately are let go. Thus the more aggressive policy over there. Those conditions, however, are not present here.
If the police considered myself a threat it would only be by mistake. In the case of such a substantial mistake there would be a substantial lawsuit.
If the police considered myself a threat it would only be by mistake. In the case of such a substantial mistake there would be a substantial lawsuit.
Aguila Blanca
Staff
Lawsuit won't help you much if it's filed by your widow ...johnelmore said:
QUOTE:
Quote:
The police and the stations have being militarised here in the UK for years, I don't see it as a problem.
No disrespect intended, but I believe most Yanks point to a related reason 240 years ago as a reason to revolt. He who has the guns, makes the rules, a lesson many European countries have found out the hard way, ala Tyrants vs. unarmed civilians = no bueno. __________________
Well those living in the U.K. wouldn't see it as a problem now would they?
I haven't a clue what the Brits are taught about the colonization of the world at that time but I know what I was taught.
NO disrespect to our Brit cousins either. We are STILL related in many ways and allies for always.
And I'm glad of it.
We'd only be to glad to bail out the U.K. from aggressive nieghbors.
And the Brits would do the same for us.
But to the point.
I served 22.5 years in a mid sized city of mixed cultures & ethinicities, a crime rate way over the top. It was in fact in the top 10 violent crime cities in Ohio.
The year I was disabled in the line we hit #1.......again.
I had a great mentor in the form of an older black Sgt. who recognized that I might, someday, make a good police officer. IF I could be taught some things.,
1) You don't have to arrest everyone.
2) Treat all people as well as they will let you.
3) Respect ALL varieties of humans......he took me to all black parties & pig roasts & I was pall bearer at his mothers funeral. The ONLY white guy there.
There is much, much, more but most important thing he taught me is that police were PART OF not APART FROM the community in which they SERVE!
Serve.
Military tactics have no place in police work. (there are special circumstances that require special responses--I was Lt. SWAT when hurt)
Militarization of police is awful.
After I left police work & healed up I learned the new Chief was one of those that aspired to the position as a working retirement.
The fellows, the young & new, [...]wear sap gloves, jump boots, carry unauthorized AR's in the squad cars, make an arrest over anything for any excuse & "resisting arrest" is a way too common charge.
Citizen complaints & law suits are ordinary these days.
Glad I'm not there. I EARNED the respect of the ethinic communities, had many friends that looked to me for help & some risked thier butts to help me.
Community policing is spot on correct.
Police might be held to a higher standard than citizens but ordinary citizens they are.
Quote:
The police and the stations have being militarised here in the UK for years, I don't see it as a problem.
No disrespect intended, but I believe most Yanks point to a related reason 240 years ago as a reason to revolt. He who has the guns, makes the rules, a lesson many European countries have found out the hard way, ala Tyrants vs. unarmed civilians = no bueno. __________________
Well those living in the U.K. wouldn't see it as a problem now would they?
I haven't a clue what the Brits are taught about the colonization of the world at that time but I know what I was taught.
NO disrespect to our Brit cousins either. We are STILL related in many ways and allies for always.
And I'm glad of it.We'd only be to glad to bail out the U.K. from aggressive nieghbors.
And the Brits would do the same for us.
But to the point.
I served 22.5 years in a mid sized city of mixed cultures & ethinicities, a crime rate way over the top. It was in fact in the top 10 violent crime cities in Ohio.
The year I was disabled in the line we hit #1.......again.
I had a great mentor in the form of an older black Sgt. who recognized that I might, someday, make a good police officer. IF I could be taught some things.,
1) You don't have to arrest everyone.
2) Treat all people as well as they will let you.
3) Respect ALL varieties of humans......he took me to all black parties & pig roasts & I was pall bearer at his mothers funeral. The ONLY white guy there.
There is much, much, more but most important thing he taught me is that police were PART OF not APART FROM the community in which they SERVE!
Serve.
Military tactics have no place in police work. (there are special circumstances that require special responses--I was Lt. SWAT when hurt)
Militarization of police is awful.
After I left police work & healed up I learned the new Chief was one of those that aspired to the position as a working retirement.
The fellows, the young & new, [...]wear sap gloves, jump boots, carry unauthorized AR's in the squad cars, make an arrest over anything for any excuse & "resisting arrest" is a way too common charge.
Citizen complaints & law suits are ordinary these days.
Glad I'm not there. I EARNED the respect of the ethinic communities, had many friends that looked to me for help & some risked thier butts to help me.
Community policing is spot on correct.
Police might be held to a higher standard than citizens but ordinary citizens they are.
Last edited by a moderator:
It's actually a little different than that in the Middle East, John.
It is more a religious / act of faith issue, and your or my or their dying for a cause gets you Heavenly rewards as a martyr.
Saudi Air Defense really will fire multiple missiles at an air intruder (and anyone friend/foe) in the area, if initial Air Force contact is not able to splash the intruder, and they really have / will "let God sort it out". Other organizations have similar policies.
It is more a religious / act of faith issue, and your or my or their dying for a cause gets you Heavenly rewards as a martyr.
Saudi Air Defense really will fire multiple missiles at an air intruder (and anyone friend/foe) in the area, if initial Air Force contact is not able to splash the intruder, and they really have / will "let God sort it out". Other organizations have similar policies.
tahunua001
New member
it's an interesting dynamic to be sure. on one hand, they are an arm of the government and the possibility of a police state is always there. however, they are not an arm of the federal government which means that they don't have to obey and executive orders should SHTF, like for instance, leave their jurisdiction to protect another region, or fight for any particular side in a civil war.
if you would have asked me a couple years ago I would have said it was a bad thing but believe it or not I had an epiphany while playing a video game. in this video game a fictitious military/terrorist agency attacks a major population center and because the local police agencies don't have as much training, armor, or weaponry at their disposal they are essentially annihilated while trying to defend the city. as unrealistic as such a scenario may sound, it is a very real threat and should any part of the US be attacked, it would take national guard several hours if not days to mobilize and establish a strategy, during which it is up to the police to protect and serve. in that case, I would welcome some training, full autos, and armored vehicles.
if you would have asked me a couple years ago I would have said it was a bad thing but believe it or not I had an epiphany while playing a video game. in this video game a fictitious military/terrorist agency attacks a major population center and because the local police agencies don't have as much training, armor, or weaponry at their disposal they are essentially annihilated while trying to defend the city. as unrealistic as such a scenario may sound, it is a very real threat and should any part of the US be attacked, it would take national guard several hours if not days to mobilize and establish a strategy, during which it is up to the police to protect and serve. in that case, I would welcome some training, full autos, and armored vehicles.
Tennessee Gentleman
New member
I agree with the ACLU.
In every country I've been in where there is no real difference between the police and the military it is bad.
Remember, in many countries, having the police show up is often not good for you.
I hope we keep the police CIVILIAN and let the military fight wars overseas.
Seems to work.
In every country I've been in where there is no real difference between the police and the military it is bad.
Remember, in many countries, having the police show up is often not good for you.
I hope we keep the police CIVILIAN and let the military fight wars overseas.
Seems to work.
rwilson452
New member
A tad off topic. I recall many years ago a naval officer did a survey of the Marines at Camp Pendelton. He ask if you were given an order to go out in the community and collect all their firearms, would you obey the order? The majority of the junior enlisted and officers said yes. the senior enlisted and middle grade officers had very unkind words about the order and anyone that gave such an order. What happened in the aftermath of Katrina I think would give any LEO a pause to consider such an order.
That all depends on what the police are coming up against. If the police are coming up against people with automatic weapons, then the police have to be armed with the firearms and equipment to stop the threat. The police are not being deliberately targeted in America so would not need the same weapons and equipment that they need here.
- Status