Reviewing Police Officers' use of 'military grade' equipment...

[Shadow8088]

Obama orders review of U.S. police use of military hardware

oh, and Obama ordered it, so it must be socialism...

 

[ViperJock]

Are you trying to be ironic? Cause that was a pretty lame troll....

 

[singlesix]

Why? Seems about right for INGO.

 

[possum_128]

Uh, yeah, either that or he just loves our country, NOT!

 

[IndyDave1776]

Let's see...

Given the incident tweaking his interest in the subject, his motives are highly suspect in my reckoning. No kudos here in the even of accidentally doing the right thing for grossly wrong reasons.

Assuming that it just took a major incident, not the particulars of this one to get his attention and he is approaching it with genuine proper motives, I would be much more impressed. I would also point out that even a broken clock is right twice a day, and while he has a very long way to go toward this less than lofty goal, being right once or twice a year is a start.

 

[Classic]

They will review it, appoint a commission to study it, receive a report and do nothing.

 

[BogWalker]

They will review it, appoint a commission to study it, receive a report and do nothing.

I'm sure they'll find some way to make it fit the agenda.

"Now, uh, you, uh, see, uh.... our cops are becoming too, uh, militarized. Now, uh, that's because, uh, they face, uh so many threats during the course of their, uh, job. So the only clear solution, is to, uh, ban the assault weapons that, uh, pose so much danger to our, uh, police."

Throw in more stuttering and stammering as you see fit.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Funny. Military style weapons. Where have I heard that term before?

Strange bed fellows on the cosmetics=militarization argument. Careful what you wish for.

 

[IndyDave1776]

I'm sure they'll find some way to make it fit the agenda.

"Now, uh, you, uh, see, uh.... our cops are becoming too, uh, militarized. Now, uh, that's because, uh, they face, uh so many threats during the course of their, uh, job. So the only clear solution, is to, uh, ban the assault weapons that, uh, pose so much danger to our, uh, police."

Throw in more stuttering and stammering as you see fit.

Follow that up with "Now, uh, you see, uh, I am accustomed to a better standard of living, uh, I don't really want to go back to Chicago and draw unemployment, uh, Michelle and I deserve better, uh, we need an amendment to repeal the 2 term limit, uh, THIS ISN'T FAIR!" and we will have a winner!

 

[IndyDave1776]

Funny. Military style weapons. Where have I heard that term before?

Strange bed fellows on the cosmetics=militarization argument. Careful what you wish for.

Excellent point. My objection starts with things which are either not available or else are artificially expensive hence unaffordable on account of .gov infringements.

 

[ultra...good]

Uh, yeah, either that or he just loves our country, NOT!

Obama loves America like OJ loved Nicole.

 

[in625shooter]

 

[Shadow8088]

If the only tool you have is a hammer, you tend to see every problem as a nail –Abraham Maslow

 

[phylodog]

I've never seen or heard of an agency who's only tools were military hardware. I've never seen a police officer conduct a traffic stop for speeding while armed with a rifle.

 

[vitamink]

Can I have all your hammers? I'd hate for you to become the next active shooter by virtue of owning "military grade assault weapons"

 

[Kirk Freeman]

INGOer drops insight on police militarization: View From The Porch: The Good Ol' Days

Insight at 1:21:30: NRA News | Cam & Co.

 

[Denny347]

INGOer drops insight on police militarization: View From The Porch: The Good Ol' Days

Good article

 

[cobber]

The good old days were kinda rotten.

 

[jamil]

I've never seen or heard of an agency who's only tools were military hardware. I've never seen a police officer conduct a traffic stop for speeding while armed with a rifle.

Well, gosh. That's not really what we're talking about.

Why do the police need to use SWAT for all these little ****s? Did granny in E-ville really pose that big a threat? If they didn't know there was only a grandmother living in that house, WHY THE **** NOT? You guys have ****ing detectives, please DETECT SOMETHING! Why are the cops not absolutely red faced ashamed and embarrassed over that ****up?

If you really think you need SWAT to serve a warrant, the end result better damn well be that a really bad guy, who would have done really bad things otherwise, was taken off the streets. Whenever the end result is "OOPS" that means you ****ed up and you need to be accountable in the the most proportionate way for that.

If you need SWAT to handle granny, you're not doing the job we're asking you to do. How about this: No more raids on grannies. No more shooting people's pets just because. No more "wrong house" raids. No more misplaced flashbangs. NO MORE "OOPS". If you can't handle your toys responsibly, if you keep "OOPSing" like that, you're going to get your toys taken away. If you're going to use the hammer MAKE DAMN SURE you're actually swinging at a real nail. That's all I'm saying.

See what you've done? Now Obama has to renege on his promise to create his great civilian army.

 

[IndyDave1776]

How good the 'good old days' were is always going to be a topic full of contention. Equality is always going to be the favorite issue to be thrown up so far as they were a lot more good if you happened to be white, protestant, and at least middle class. The problem with 'progress' here is that rather than raising up those who were, well, not enjoying such a good time, the standard for everyone has been lowered in a number of way particularly those ways pertaining to personal freedom.

In 1930, the police may well have had BARs and Thompsons along with the willingness to use them and expect about zero pushback for doing so. On the other hand, I could have gone to the hardware store and bought one myself at market price and had just as much of an advantage if the local bank robbing or bootlegging crew decided to act up in a way that endangered my family. So far as I am concerned, the objection comes down to non-recognition of the phrase 'shall not be infringed' and agents of .gov having available to them things which have been made not realistically available to me through outright prohibition or else prohibitively expensive through artificial scarcity and hyperinflation of price on account of that artificial scarcity.