Separate names with a comma.
Are you a current member with account or password issues?
Please visit following page for more information
Discussion in 'The Breakroom' started by kertap75, Jan 16, 2014.
Odd...I didn't see the cops in the bus wearing seatbelts
Just like you never see them in their patrol cars driving and talking on their cell phones.
I was thinking about this thread while driving past the police station this morning, they’ve had their armored car out this week... it’s kind of disturbing to see something you’d expect see at a road crossing in Fallujah sitting it the parking lot of a small town station.
About a week after the no texting while driving law went into effect here, I stood on the sidewalk in front of a friends business and watched a cop blow right through a stop sign while texting on her phone. Normally I'm a no harm, no foul type but I would have called it in if I hadn't been too stunned to get a plate number.
Here in Oregon and up in Washington, emergency services personnel are exempt while on duty. I don't know if that is the case there, but I've seen the same thing here. I'm sure the only way to get any discipline on the officer would be to get it on video and send it to local news agencies.
Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
Just my thoughts---
Our military is getting smaller and smaller; right now.
Someone is building an alternative army. They just bought over 6 billion rounds of ammo and other military equipment.
Could it be that there is a plan to disarm those who would be a hindrance to this plan? Including the Armed Forces.
Sounds wacky, even to me.
Like I said; just my thoughts.
One more---I heard that the supreme court just gave the president and the military the right to arrest and detain anyone (indefinately) they deem to be a "troublemaker".
Could be just heresay?
Just started this book. Scary stuff, thanks for the recommendation.
(Speaking as a Troublemaker, of course...)
It's the NDAA, signed late in 2011, and, yes, it allows for the indefinite detention of you and me. This is why people smarter than you and I, long ago affirmed our natural right to self defense in the 2A.
As for your theory, not whacky at all and, if the limited number of cadets at the recent West Point graduation that didn't give the President a standing ovation (more than 75%) are any indication, the military knows that your whacky theory is possibly less wacky than any of us are will to think aloud.
Remember when the President went to Iraq or Afghanistan once a few years ago, to speak to the Troops and share a meal? They took the silverware from the soldiers, so the media reported. And the fact that they chose to report that lended to its credibility in this case, at least for me.
Mark Owen of "No Easy Day" notoriety also explains that all NSWG personnel whom were commended by BHO after the UBL raid were thoroughly searched, wanded, and put through metal detectors.
An American President shouldn't have to do that
I've seen those videos before, Indigo. They've been around for awhile. They're a powerful message for people who understand history, Evil, and can imagine the almost inconceivable. Sadly, most people will not be able to wrap their minds around the that sort of thing even being possible.
In a world country where far, far too many people don't even know how many Senators each state has, much less complicated concepts like Liberty, I don't think there is much hope to save the ship. We are already taking on water from below the water line and very few people, present company excluded, are even willing to put on a PFD.
Wait, wait.... you EDC a PFD?!?! You're my hero.
Thing is, if I was a cop I'd want to make sure that I outgun everyone else so if you allow ordinary citizens access to advanced weaponry, then I'd take the vests, automatic weapons and big vehicles to make sure I still had the edge. IMHO.
Someone here recently schooled me on the concept of a "flat brimmer" and I was most surprised that the "flat brimmer" was the smartest guy in that video. Perhaps that guy was an exemption to the rule.
Now, to AutomaticJack's point, I have absolutely no problem with law enforcement being gunned up and equipped for rare and extraordinary days. The real problem isn't the hardware, it's the fact that it seems like they think they need it everyday for every contact with the general population. You don't need SWAT to make a traffic stop to alert a motorist that their taillight is out.
Now, that was an absurd example that probably hasn't really happened, but we are inching ever closer to that sort of thing.
I personally would feel a lot better if their were more Oath Keepers and LEOs who just generally understood history, philosophy, and our Constitution and if the general public was both as well armed as law enforcement and paying attention. If people would only care enough to understand our form of government, our history, and the like and were paying enough attention to the government and all the many agencies and bureaucracies at every level, then maybe enough outrage and noise could be brought to bare and things would be better.
I guess, in the end, the problem isn't the militarization of law enforcement or anything else that goes on, but, rather, our collective apathy.
At first glance this makes sense, but many in the enforcement industry realize, and have admitted, that swat tactics in many cases increase the danger to officers
I'll go with that, kerta and thcone, I was thinking of using this stuff in exceptional cases and not daily.
If we break down that statement, I am going to have to disagree with that. Militarization in law enforcement is most definitely a problem.
mil·i·ta·rize (mĭl′ĭ-tə-rīz′)1. To equip or train for war.
If you had instead used the term "modernization," I probably would have had less problem with the statement.
A slew of weapons systems and despite political rhetoric, that's what they, are is trickling down from the military.
LRAD, MRAP, V-MADS and it's not being used against hardened criminals but the average citizen and in some cases innocent bystanders.
Then you have the 1033 program which was/is less about what a law enforcement organization needs and more about
"What can I get"
"How large is my slice of the pie"
If I don't take it, some other city/county is going to get it: "Municipalities' stockpiles have grown exponentially with billions of dollars' worth of weaponry and equipment they simply do not need. This giveaway has created a shopping frenzy among law enforcement officials keen to scoop up equipment before someone else does."
As a part of the 1033 program:
In a small county in upstate New York with a population of roughly 120,000 people, county legislators approved the receipt of a 20-ton Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicle, donated by the US Defense Department to the county sheriff.
Richland County's (South Carolina) sheriff acquired a tank with 360-degree rotating machine gun turrets.
A small town in Georgia without a body of water acquired boats and scuba gear. The same town ordered a shipment of bayonets, which is now collecting dust.
Some other 1033 program "boo boos":
A sheriff in Illinois was accused of lending the assault rifles, which he got through the 1033 program, to his friends. Meanwhile, a firearms manager in North Carolina pled guilty to selling his on eBay. Worse, 11 districts in Indiana were completely suspended from the program because of the high volume of weapons they lost. And a county in Arizona acquired $7m worth of weapons and Humvees before giving them to unauthorized persons and attempting to sell them to boost their budget.The lack of oversight is appalling. State coordinators admit that they conduct very few in-person inspections. In New York, the state is apparently outsourcing the majority of their inventory work to a part-time, unpaid intern. And in Mississippi, it took six years before federal authorities discovered that a state office, which was ineligible for the program, had received $8m worth of equipment, despite the fact that the Defense Department is supposed to review the program every two years.
Equipment acquired through the 1033 program is "grant based" incurring little cost outside of administration overhead. However....
"Authorities often claim that the program assists local law enforcement without incurring costs for taxpayers. Yet the program requires that localities accept equipment "as is", meaning that taxpayers foot the bill (pdf) for all repairs, storage, or maintenance of the growing stockpile. Thus, the arms race ignited by these policies is as wasteful and costly as it is dangerous."Perhaps one of the more disturbing aspects of all this is that when the government starts giving local municipalities billions of dollars worth of hammers then every problem starts to look like a nail.
Up until recently SWAT utilization wasn't tracked, but in recent years more and more states have passed laws requiring state's police agencies to report statistics about how and how often they use their SWAT and tactical teams.
Some statistics filtering back from Maryland:
Since the law passed in 2009, the data have consistently shown that on average there are about 4.5 SWAT raids each day in Maryland.
Prince George’s County alone averaged well over one SWAT raid each day in 2012 (510 in total).
In 2012, nearly 90 percent of the SWAT raids in Maryland were to serve search warrants.
About two of every three SWAT raids used forced entry.
The rise of SWAT teams nationwide, the number of annual SWAT deployments in the U.S., has gone from a few hundred in the ’70s, to 30,000 per year in the early ’80s, to 50,000 in 2005.
"Utah rave SWAT raid"
"Mayor Cheye Calvo"
"SWAT team unpasteurized milk"