Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Big government baby... big government. And that's exactly what the left and liberals are about. Only the people want the checks but not the police services.
I believe the local police don't have enough fire power to deal with the animals of today
btw the national guard is for STATE emergencies, not city/town or even county emergencies....so there ends that argument .
even currently in st Louis..what is happening...riots...but not only riot, the animals are also looting and raping, and destroying property...all because they 'think or feel' they were wronged....that's animal mentality, and should be handled like animals
look at the current 'fad' of the 'knockout game'....sorry that is no game...but the animals have no conscious
look at the gangs in Chicago...they are so strong the cops are even afraid.....
Camden, nj...... animals run the joint...cops afraid
Compton ca...animals run the joint...cops afraid
sorry your precious heart doesn't like it, but the cops do need more power to handle the animals of today
what you have posted here is the absolute truth....also, let all these people including women who think they know better, put them out on these streets for one night and then see if they feel differently, they have no clue, not one.
Years ago, I saw a special on TV about cops working in NYC....and every 3 or 5 years they had to rotate the cops, due to psycological problems b/c of what they see and what animals they have to handle.
These same people in this thread, who are saying it's wrong to train them with military tactics adn equipment....HAH....they'd be the first ones to shoot.
When your dealing with a crowd of protestors, first, there are people who are using Michael Browns death to go down there and start trouble...thugs who will loot, and get these locals all riled up...you go and work in a swat team of police one night against these thugs....as far as I'm concerned, that guy that was threatened and the police officer left go, had every right to do and say as he pleased cuz the guy would not listen, took 3 cops to wrestle him to the ground....
You go out and face a crowd and try and keep the peace? Not an easy task at all....and especially when your outnumbered....
we had a man lose it, in a very small community where I lived, he caught his wife cheating on him, and when the cops came, he was still pumping bullets into his wifes body, yelling at her....you deal with something like that, and that's not a bad one....I believe cops should come into this thread and tell these people what they have seen every day....people coming at you, wrestling you to the ground, with knives, guns, etc.....you people have no freakin idea!
You have people beating and killing babies....you go on one of those calls and see if you can hold it together.
Whenever you go out on a call, domestics are the worse, you have no idea what will happen, b/c your dealing with high adrenoline, anger you've never seen before and weapons.
Children being shot to death by drive by's....and you have to witness that, and that happens all the time in Philly.....
I swear, ya'll.. think a cops shift is playing tiddily winks or something? Unbelievable how when people have no clue what in the world is going on out there, they seem to be experts on these subjects.
Towns Say 'No Tanks' to Militarized Police - WSJ
Six-figure grants from the Department of Homeland Security have been funding BearCats and other heavily fortified vehicles in towns and cities nationwide since soon after the 2001 terrorist attacks. Beginning last summer, the government also has handed out 200 surplus vehicles built to withstand mines and bombs in Iraq and Afghanistan, and is considering requests from 750 more communities.
Yet people scream and shout about budget deficits.
Well despite scoffing at and scorning people as conspiracy freaks and tinfoil crackpots, the militarization of police is just but one facet in the imperialist's plan to establish world gubbermint.
I agree that militarizing our local police forces isn’t the best idea. Our local police forces in this country shouldn't be supplied with any military weapons or supplies (M16 assault rifles, flash grenades, etc.) because the police are a separate institution from the military. American law enforcement agencies resemble the military since they’re organized along quasi-military lines. However, they don’t resemble the military in all respects. The police serve a citizen population rather than fight a foreign enemy. They provide services designed to help people, and these services are often requested by individual citizens. Also, the police are constrained by laws protecting the rights of citizens and routinely exercise individual discretion. Military personnel are trained and expected to operate as members of military units. A quasi-military style isn’t suitable for the police in American communities. For the sake of citizens, many experts believe the military ethos cultivates an “us against them” attitude. This attitude is used to justify mistreatment for citizens. Even the simplest aspect of police uniforms seem to give off a “superior” notion. Some small police departments have abandoned their military roots by not using the traditional rank designations. However, the public was so used to the military-style uniforms that it was difficult for the department to depart from the norm. There has been a past report of police militarization in Fresno, California. Fresno police forces pursue their goal of “proactive policing” by moving into inner-city neighborhoods coined as “war zones” in group of 40 officers. These officers are equipped with full military garb and weaponry with a goal to “suppress” the gang, drug, and crime problems. In my opinion, this is taking it too far. America shouldn’t be a “police state.” In the late twentieth century, the drug war became the most important excuse for police militarization. However, is it really worth it? I would say I’m against legalizing certain drugs, but I don’t believe it is right for police officers to invade homes at their will to search for drugs in areas that they believe drug possession is more common. Some experts also believe the quasi-military style encourages the idea of a “war on crime” that is inappropriate for serving a citizen population. The authoritarian command style is contrary to democratic principles of participation. The rank structure evident in the police forces also fails to provide sufficient job satisfaction for police officers, so it hurts the police forces along with the general public. Police militarization is practically policing going from a community institution to a government entity. However, I have always seen policing as a community institution. In my opinion, the police are here for our protection and the protection of our communities from harm. Police militarization is the complete opposite.
I agree that militarizing our local police forces isn’t the best idea. Our local police forces in this country shouldn't be supplied with any military weapons or supplies (M16 assault rifles, flash grenades, etc.) because the police are a separate institution from the military. American law enforcement agencies resemble the military since they’re organized along quasi-military lines. However, they don’t resemble the military in all respects. The police serve a citizen population rather than fight a foreign enemy. They provide services designed to help people, and these services are often requested by individual citizens. Also, the police are constrained by laws protecting the rights of citizens and routinely exercise individual discretion. Military personnel are trained and expected to operate as members of military units. A quasi-military style isn’t suitable for the police in American communities. For the sake of citizens, many experts believe the military ethos cultivates an “us against them†attitude. This attitude is used to justify mistreatment for citizens. Even the simplest aspect of police uniforms seem to give off a “superior†notion. Some small police departments have abandoned their military roots by not using the traditional rank designations. However, the public was so used to the military-style uniforms that it was difficult for the department to depart from the norm. There has been a past report of police militarization in Fresno, California. Fresno police forces pursue their goal of “proactive policing†by moving into inner-city neighborhoods coined as “war zones†in group of 40 officers. These officers are equipped with full military garb and weaponry with a goal to “suppress†the gang, drug, and crime problems. In my opinion, this is taking it too far. America shouldn’t be a “police state.†In the late twentieth century, the drug war became the most important excuse for police militarization. However, is it really worth it? I would say I’m against legalizing certain drugs, but I don’t believe it is right for police officers to invade homes at their will to search for drugs in areas that they believe drug possession is more common. Some experts also believe the quasi-military style encourages the idea of a “war on crime†that is inappropriate for serving a citizen population. The authoritarian command style is contrary to democratic principles of participation. The rank structure evident in the police forces also fails to provide sufficient job satisfaction for police officers, so it hurts the police forces along with the general public. Police militarization is practically policing going from a community institution to a government entity. However, I have always seen policing as a community institution. In my opinion, the police are here for our protection and the protection of our communities from harm. Police militarization is the complete opposite.
Uh hate to burst your bubble, the Supreme Court disagrees with you on that.
See Warren vs. District of Columbia for further info.
Police serve government and protect its interests, any benefit to you is purely coincidental.
I agree that militarizing our local police forces isn’t the best idea. Our local police forces in this country shouldn't be supplied with any military weapons or supplies (M16 assault rifles, flash grenades, etc.) because the police are a separate institution from the military. American law enforcement agencies resemble the military since they’re organized along quasi-military lines. However, they don’t resemble the military in all respects. The police serve a citizen population rather than fight a foreign enemy. They provide services designed to help people, and these services are often requested by individual citizens. Also, the police are constrained by laws protecting the rights of citizens and routinely exercise individual discretion. Military personnel are trained and expected to operate as members of military units. A quasi-military style isn’t suitable for the police in American communities. For the sake of citizens, many experts believe the military ethos cultivates an “us against them” attitude. This attitude is used to justify mistreatment for citizens. Even the simplest aspect of police uniforms seem to give off a “superior” notion. Some small police departments have abandoned their military roots by not using the traditional rank designations. However, the public was so used to the military-style uniforms that it was difficult for the department to depart from the norm. There has been a past report of police militarization in Fresno, California. Fresno police forces pursue their goal of “proactive policing” by moving into inner-city neighborhoods coined as “war zones” in group of 40 officers. These officers are equipped with full military garb and weaponry with a goal to “suppress” the gang, drug, and crime problems. In my opinion, this is taking it too far. America shouldn’t be a “police state.” In the late twentieth century, the drug war became the most important excuse for police militarization. However, is it really worth it? I would say I’m against legalizing certain drugs, but I don’t believe it is right for police officers to invade homes at their will to search for drugs in areas that they believe drug possession is more common. Some experts also believe the quasi-military style encourages the idea of a “war on crime” that is inappropriate for serving a citizen population. The authoritarian command style is contrary to democratic principles of participation. The rank structure evident in the police forces also fails to provide sufficient job satisfaction for police officers, so it hurts the police forces along with the general public. Police militarization is practically policing going from a community institution to a government entity. However, I have always seen policing as a community institution. In my opinion, the police are here for our protection and the protection of our communities from harm. Police militarization is the complete opposite.
Very good points all, I appreciate. One has to wonder why tactics banned in international warfare & against international laws (use of tear gas, rubber bullets, etc.), are used by US Citizens against US Citizens. One might also wonder where else on the planet would it be possible (& incredibly applauded by some) for a person to receive the 'death penalty' by a PO acting as judge, jury, & executioner for the 'crime' of jay walking. 6 bullets.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No but its getting very close!!!!!!
