Posted: 9/30/2002 7:30:05 PM EDT
|
Many people seem to be under the mistaken impression that this is somehow new. Soldiers & Marines reaching their EAS have always been drawn into the very natural transition into Law Enforcement. Military equipment has also always worked it's way into LE armories. After WW1 lots of police agencies got surplused Tommy guns and even BAR's. The modern equivelent would be giving your local PD H&K MP5's and M249SAWs. Follwing WW2 lots of agencies got M1 Garands and M1 Carbines. The Modern Equivelant would be giving Mayberry PD M16A2's and M4A1's. This is not a new trend. Soldiers and Marines getting out of the service will always be drawn into Law Enforcement. DRMO'd equipment will always be made available to LE agencies. |
|
Guy, I know you are attempting reason, but it's just not going to work with some of these guys. You see, they need this sort of drivel to support their world view. It does not matter whether information given is correct or not, (look at the "Raid" thread with all the harping about no knocks when it's obvious in the story no such thing took place.) They are in "true believer" mode and are not going to listen to you. |
|
Law enforcement is great. Something we need desperatly to deal with the real criminals. Law enforcement needs to turn its attention towards Washington. Law enforcement is also needed to bust all the people hooked on drugs that the CIA ships in. This is an indisputable fact, don't take my word, check it out. PROBLEM, REACTION, SOLUTION. Militarization of the police is just another leap towards tyranny. WWW.INFOWARS.COM BrettA |
|
Quoted: [url]www.ar15.com/members/albums/SPECTRE%2F575304%2Ejpg[/url] Ok, maybe you swat apologists can explain the need for johnny rambo here to have an M60. Or how about the bomb that the Philly police department used to burn down an entire neighborhood... |
|
I've thought about this subject a lot and I've decided that one of the biggest things driving this trend is the industry that provides equipment and training to law enforcement. How many times have we seen an ar15 dealer selling "entry" weapons? Jesus, every issue of SGN features an M-16 "rifle" whose barrel is shorter than the one in the previous issue. At what point is your loaded chamber indicator the actual bullet poking out the end of the barrel? And have you seen a Gall's police catalog? It's unbelievable! No cop, no matter what their job, could possibly use all of that gear in there. It's a toy catalog for people who spend other people's money and really enjoy it. Mix that with a lot of men who have military experience and enjoyed all the military toys, along with wealthy suburban towns flush with cash, add a war on drugs, and you have the makings for I don't know what, but it sure is ghastly. I am not anti-SWAT, I know there is a need for those people at certain times. What I am against, is the patrol cop who rides around giving people tickets but thinks he should be able to wear black BDUs and a drop-leg holster because he is tactical. WTF is up with that? I also dislike the cops who wear masks. Police work should not be a secret agent game. Finally, no police agency should need a belt-fed anything, ever! Yes, I said "need." If it's that serious, you can call out the National Guard! |
|
Quoted: explain the need for johnny rambo here to have an M60. Personally, I think Belt fed weapons are unecessary for 99% of police agencies. The one exception is agencies with ports and harbors where a weapon capable of stopping large boats is sometimes necessary. I have argueed against my agencies Swat teams request for a 50BMG rifle. They however believe it would be usefull for diabling vehicles in hostage situations. We have occasionally had to deal with lunitics using dump trucks and passanger buses as weapons. So they may have a point. But how far to you let that type of "logic" develop? SDPD had a guy go on a rampage in an M60 Tank, so do you let the SWAT team have a TOW2 system? Current law doesnt allow asking for military help even in those extreme situations. |
|
Trickshot, you're really on target with that, but there is an additional factor. Media hysteria. I give you the LA shootout for example. Police are only human, and they see that on TV and say: Holy Crap! We gotta do something about that, or we'll be toast if it happens here! Look at the planning and expenditures the Y2K hype brought about. How many people here bought thousands of dollars worth of generators, guns, cases of ammo, water filtration systems and MRE's? Same thing. Please answer one thing for me. What earthly difference does it make what kind of pants he wears? |
|
johninaustin, please do yourself a favor and start caring. THIS IS AMERICA. If you have kids or when you have kids are you not concerned about the world they will grow up in? Learn the Bill of Rights... Memorize them. Tune your radio to KWNX 1260 in Austin from 9pm to Midnight weekdays. |
|
HEY GUYS! Every once in a while I reply to these (well thought out) discussions. Being former military and now an active LEO, I wonder who really needs magazine fed or belt fed weapons, except for police and military. Have you ever seen the need to knock of ducks with your AR's? Have you ever taken your SA M60 semi auto and slain some white-tail? You fear that me and my types are going to kick in your door and take em right? Come on. Most of us who are LEO's have fought for YOUR right to own these things with our service in the military or at home. We go in the streets everyday and face these things so you whinny assholes can go home and run a patch down your barrel of the closest thing you can get to a real one cause you do not have the balls to earn the right (i.e. serve the military or LEO) yourself. I would hate to pull up on a home of a felon, who got his hands on an AK, M16, M60, etc...(believe it or not there is some legal shit out there) with my Glock 23 and a Benelli 12 gauge. So, while you wax philosophical, write your check to Barb Striesand's fund and let the protectors of your Freedom do our work. We believe in your rights so much, we are willing to die for it. How's about you? |
|
Quoted: HEY GUYS! Every once in a while I reply to these (well thought out) discussions. Being former military and now an active LEO, I wonder who really needs magazine fed or belt fed weapons, except for police and military. Have you ever seen the need to knock of ducks with your AR's? Have you ever taken your SA M60 semi auto and slain some white-tail? You fear that me and my types are going to kick in your door and take em right? Come on. Most of us who are LEO's have fought for YOUR right to own these things with our service in the military or at home. We go in the streets everyday and face these things so you whinny assholes can go home and run a patch down your barrel of the closest thing you can get to a real one cause you do not have the balls to earn the right (i.e. serve the military or LEO) yourself. I would hate to pull up on a home of a felon, who got his hands on an AK, M16, M60, etc...(believe it or not there is some legal shit out there) with my Glock 23 and a Benelli 12 gauge. So, while you wax philosophical, write your check to Barb Striesand's fund and let the protectors of your Freedom do our work. We believe in your rights so much, we are willing to die for it. How's about you? Ummm, this thread's rhetorical question has now been answered and this thread should now be locked.[;)] 'Nuff said. (joking, kinda) |
|
Quoted: HEY GUYS! Every once in a while I reply to these (well thought out) discussions. Being former military and now an active LEO, I wonder who really needs magazine fed or belt fed weapons, except for police and military. Have you ever seen the need to knock of ducks with your AR's? Have you ever taken your SA M60 semi auto and slain some white-tail? You fear that me and my types are going to kick in your door and take em right? Come on. Most of us who are LEO's have fought for YOUR right to own these things with our service in the military or at home. We go in the streets everyday and face these things so you whinny assholes can go home and run a patch down your barrel of the closest thing you can get to a real one cause you do not have the balls to earn the right (i.e. serve the military or LEO) yourself. I would hate to pull up on a home of a felon, who got his hands on an AK, M16, M60, etc...(believe it or not there is some legal shit out there) with my Glock 23 and a Benelli 12 gauge. So, while you wax philosophical, write your check to Barb Striesand's fund and let the protectors of your Freedom do our work. We believe in your rights so much, we are willing to die for it. How's about you? Major Law Enforcement Organizations that Supported the Federal Assault Weapons Ban in 1994 Fraternal Order of Police (FOP) Hispanic American Police Command Officers Association (HAPCOA) International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) International Brotherhood of Police Officers (IBPO) Major Cities Chiefs Association (MCCA) National Association of Police Organizations (NAPO) National Organization of Black Law Enforcement Executives (NOBLE) National Sheriffs' Association (NSA) Police Executive Research Forum (PERF) Police Foundation |
|
Aimless, I don't support them any more than you do. Haven't even heard of some of these groups. So why do I (and others) get ragged for it? The AFL-CIO does more anti-gun work than anyone, and is a direct sponsor of some if not all of the groups you mention. Does anyone rag on union members for it? The hostility against police is very real. It has even affected plans to go to AR15.com shoots and get togethers. ETH's shoot is the latest casuality. It's hard to forget there are some folks on the firing line mentally painting a target on your back. At the most recent Centex shoot I had to walk away from a poster that tracked me down specifically to harass me about a post from 6 months previously. About friggin seatbelts. Why? The 2nd amendment fight is all about making allies not enemies. It isn't about tin foil, seat belts, gays, or a host of other things, but any sort of police post is practically guaranteed to turn combative. |
|
Quoted: Aimless, I don't support them any more than you do. Haven't even heard of some of these groups. So why do I (and others) get ragged for it? The AFL-CIO does more anti-gun work than anyone, and is a direct sponsor of some if not all of the groups you mention. Does anyone rag on union members for it? The hostility against police is very real. It has even affected plans to go to AR15.com shoots and get togethers. ETH's shoot is the latest casuality. It's hard to forget there are some folks on the firing line mentally painting a target on your back. At the most recent Centex shoot I had to walk away from a poster that tracked me down specifically to harass me about a post from 6 months previously. About friggin seatbelts. Why? The 2nd amendment fight is all about making allies not enemies. It isn't about tin foil, seat belts, gays, or a host of other things, but any sort of police post is practically guaranteed to turn combative. I guess there is the vocal "jack booted thug/tin foil hat crowd" here that blather on every cop post that crops up-but I don't give them anymore weight than the racists or anti semites that lurk around the edges here. Some of the stuff that gets posted here on other issues ticks me off too, but I think getting pissed and taking my ball and leaving just lets them win. My personal experience with people from this site has been overwhelmingly positive, I'm sorry yours was different and I guess I can understand your concern since I have had similar concerns for different reasons. I suspect most guys here are like me-I'll bitch and moan about cops giving tickets or crab about some accidental police shooting but I don't think it's fair to infer that I wouldn't buy you a beer or let you shoot my guns. Heck if you aren't going to Eric's you can go to THE GREAT SOUTHERN FREEDOM SHOOT!!! [url]http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=8&t=137905[/url] I'll even let you shoot my guns and I promise not to try and shoot you or let anyone else do so, however I might spill a beer on you tho [:D] E-mail if you're interested, I'll even pick you up at the airport. |
|
Quoted: HEY GUYS! Every once in a while I reply to these (well thought out) discussions. Being former military and now an active LEO, I wonder who really needs magazine fed or belt fed weapons, except for police and military. Have you ever seen the need to knock of ducks with your AR's? Have you ever taken your SA M60 semi auto and slain some white-tail? You fear that me and my types are going to kick in your door and take em right? Come on. Most of us who are LEO's have fought for YOUR right to own these things with our service in the military or at home. We go in the streets everyday and face these things so you whinny assholes can go home and run a patch down your barrel of the closest thing you can get to a real one cause you do not have the balls to earn the right (i.e. serve the military or LEO) yourself. I would hate to pull up on a home of a felon, who got his hands on an AK, M16, M60, etc...(believe it or not there is some legal shit out there) with my Glock 23 and a Benelli 12 gauge. So, while you wax philosophical, write your check to Barb Striesand's fund and let the protectors of your Freedom do our work. We believe in your rights so much, we are willing to die for it. How's about you? WTF? Please tell me that you are being sarcastic and it did not come across. You wonder why some of these guys hate LEOS? Read your post. You really believe you have to face M60's every day[rolleyes], and I'm the nut? You "fight for my rights" but don't really believe that I have the right because I didn't serve in the military? [rolleyes] "We believe in your rights so much, we are willing to die for it. How's about you?" you "whinny assholes" [rolleyes] Please don't compare yourself to a real cop. I know a few good cops and they would never say something so ignorant. |
|
Quoted: [url]www.ar15.com/members/albums/SPECTRE%2F575304%2Ejpg[/url] Ok, maybe you swat apologists can explain the need for johnny rambo here to have an M60. SPECTRE whats wrong with you! He earned the right to carry whatever weapon he wants. If you question anything about LEO actions then you are a TERRORIST!!!!! If you are a terrorist then LE will have to serve a no-knock raid on your residence after they blow it up with the department tank! So be good, and don't hurt rambos feelings. |
|
Aimless, I need to emphasize something. I'm not worried about getting shot for real, I meant figuratively being a target. I have met some wonderful folks thru this board, some I interact with on an almost daily basis. However, there is that factor of the one a-hole that wants to push things, and I'd rather not be the magnet for trouble. Especially as an invited guest. I discounted that factor once, and it was a very unpleasant experience. I thought the CENTEX shoot was relatively safe since it was alcohol free. I have no doubt I'll go out with groups of AR15 COMers in future, but it's going to only be those I meet first. Not to worry, I'll get together with a few of the other guys and go try for Kingfish in Port Aransas. However, back to the subject. I am concerned that anytime any sort of group with police in the name comes up with something stupid, it'll come right back on us. It's almost as if posters see police as some sort of monolithic entity, where if something goes down in Wisconsin, obviously the cops in Nevada had a hand in it. People demand explantions and make accusations. We make a guess since we have background but no more information than they do, and then we get more accusations and attacks. Eventually it boils down to how the "Raid" tread ended, with insults, name calling and animosity. It's bed now, I'll catch your answer in the morning. |
|
Quoted: Many people seem to be under the mistaken impression that this is somehow new. Not new, just becoming more prevalent and disturbing. Soldiers & Marines reaching their EAS have always been drawn into the very natural transition into Law Enforcement. Which can present very serious psychological problems (us versus them, combative mentality when dealing with the public). Military equipment has also always worked it's way into LE armories. After WW1 lots of police agencies got surplused Tommy guns and even BAR's. The modern equivelent would be giving your local PD H&K MP5's and M249SAWs. Just because it has happened in the past doesn't make it acceptable. Follwing WW2 lots of agencies got M1 Garands and M1 Carbines. The Modern Equivelant would be giving Mayberry PD M16A2's and M4A1's. Nope. Project Northstar gives LE a whole hell of a lot more firepower and military equipment than the old demil programs ever did. This is not a new trend. Soldiers and Marines getting out of the service will always be drawn into Law Enforcement. DRMO'd equipment will always be made available to LE agencies. Does that make it [i]right[/i]? I would contend that police arming themselves to fight a "war" does little to aid them in the reality of law enforcement. You can't "fight" crime, get over it. The only thing you can do is attempt to maintain the peace; weapons, tactics, armor, vehicles, and aircraft from the military has shown to make police no more effective in the performance of their jobs (ergo, crime rates). HEY GUYS! Every once in a while I reply to these (well thought out) discussions. Being former military and now an active LEO, I wonder who really needs magazine fed or belt fed weapons, except for police and military. Have you ever seen the need to knock of ducks with your AR's? Have you ever taken your SA M60 semi auto and slain some white-tail? You fear that me and my types are going to kick in your door and take em right? Troll meter spiking. Hunting ain't mentioned in the 2nd nummy. The police have no more need for magazine or belt-fed weapons than the civilians, because, newsflahs, you ARE FUCKING CIVILIANS!! Come on. Most of us who are LEO's have fought for YOUR right to own these things with our service in the military or at home. We go in the streets everyday and face these things so you whinny assholes can go home and run a patch down your barrel of the closest thing you can get to a real one cause you do not have the balls to earn the right (i.e. serve the military or LEO) yourself. So what? Because you served, we can't question your actions? Were you born a total jackass, or did you have to eat a lot of paint chips? I would hate to pull up on a home of a felon, who got his hands on an AK, M16, M60, etc...(believe it or not there is some legal shit out there) with my Glock 23 and a Benelli 12 gauge. And just how often does that happen? If you are afraid, get another fucking job. So, while you wax philosophical, write your check to Barb Striesand's fund and let the protectors of your Freedom do our work. We believe in your rights so much, we are willing to die for it. How's about you? All hail the police state. We know better. Do not question our protection. I'm willing to KILL for it, how's that? I'm willing to make widows out of a lots of LE wives if it comes to the wire. The point is not to die for your country (or beliefs), but to make the other son-of-a-bitch die for his. Law enforcement is an evil necessity of governed society, not the friend of the free. Maybe you should take a few history courses if you believe otherwise. |
|
Redmanfms "I'm willing to KILL for it, how's that? I'm willing to make widows out of a lots of LE wives if it comes to the wire. The point is not to die for your country (or beliefs), but to make the other son-of-a-bitch die for his. Law enforcement is an evil necessity of governed society, not the friend of the free. Maybe you should take a few history courses if you believe otherwise." WHOA WHOA WHOA I really enjoy this site too and am also LEO but what is this all about...what wire are you talking about..Its that kind of attitude and statement that gets me .....well lets say I don't think you are bridging the gap here..man some of you guys are spring loaded...I just cant see how you could make statements of killing a Law Enforcement Officer and how the moderators of this site can allow such behavior shame on all of you.... |
|
Oh joy, another Bashfest. FWIW, the first department I was on had a 1919BMG. It was great fun to trot out to the range. But then again we had a college in our county known for riotous behavior. Can't ever recall the need for 1919, nor did it ever go anywhere but the range in anyone's memory, but I guess its better to have and not need, than need and not have. Oh, and the whole militarization thing, well that got started in about 1970 here in Ohio and spread nation wide. See, it seems there is a findamental difference in philosophy between police and military. You see the military is great at shooting things and blowing them up. The police on the other hand always seek to minimize any damage and look on force as a last resort. The idea therefore was that when dealing with real nasty shit, its still better to give the cops a few more tools than to turn loose the military on the domestic population. See we in these parts have experience with calling in the national gaurd, and we didn't like it one bit, nope, not at all. Never again. Thats why we have a separate police and military structure. Different jobs, different philosophy. |
|
It must be the end of the month, LEO militirization comes up again. I'm so looking forward to the 1 wk of the month abusive force, followed by the 2 wk W-O-D's........... You know before we get all wound up we may want to consider some things. Attacks on officers, even with much better training and tactics continue to creep up. The only reason we don't have more officers killed than in the "blood yaers" of the '70's is because of 3 things, vests, better medical care, and more effiecent commo. Yes the police became more "militarized". Part of that was because of liability, and increased oversight. That's right. Back in the '20's if there was a bank robbery and the cops got there they would rush in. This resulted in lots of crooks getting shot. It also resulted in a lot of cops, and bystanders getting killed. Same thing for a "barricaded subject". If he won't come out we'll go in....... This type of tactic continued until the '70's or later. The reason it stopped wasn't because of the number of cops that it killed. It was because there are now much stricter use of force rules, and law suit due to wrongful deaths. Think about that. What were the use of force rules in the '20's or the '50's?? Before you answer I have a good idea having listened to some of the stuff people got away with years ago and the stories of the war protests. Not to long ago a police car running lights and siren had an absolute right of way on the road. They don't anymore. If you have to handle barricaded subjuects, and do it so you don't get sued, or torn apart by the media or public opinion. You have to do it in a way that is very controlled, and in such a way that you don't do anything that someone could claim the police made the situation worse. That's why they have negotiators, because the police don't want to enter the area where the barricaded subject is. Not becuase they are afraid of him. But they don't want to get sued, or painted as tigger happy. Sure they didn't have all the fancy teams "back in the day" But they didn't really expect much performance then either. The job has become more complicated, and litigious. Sure they didn't have "snipers" in LE 35 years ago. But then again a person winning a lawsuit against the police was unheard of, and it was also before the Munich Olympics. Unfortunatley, the police get pulled into the "nanny state" as much as any type of government service. Some of it is unreal. I regularly hear officers dispatched because people have lost electrical power, or water service at their house. When did you local PD become the after hours power and light guys? On the other hand, you can't say as a police dept. "What happen if "X" happens"? And answer "we have no plan for that, so we will continue to ignore that threat". That's wouldn't be very smart. As far as weapons. I'm sorry I don't beleive in a double standard. If [red]YOU[/red] are smart enough to decide what weapons you want for yourself, other people have that option too. |
|
Quoted: The hostility against police is very real. It's hard to forget there are some folks on the firing line mentally painting a target on your back. And don't you forget that for one damned minute! My advice to any local LEO is "You live here too". Before you want to act like "The Enforcer" remember this, we know where your wife does her shopping, we know where your kids go to school. Now, can we get some mutual respect? I have seen the "Big Badge-Little Weinie" syndrome far too many times. Yes, there are some "good cops" out there just like "good citizens". But I have seen and been subject to some despicable behavior by LEO's. It IS a mexican-standoff of sorts........ Like the Dentist and the patient who has the Dentist's balls in his hand as he says "Now we're not going to hurt each other are we?" There is enough "real crime" to keep you guys very busy. Lay off the small crap like seatbelts and stuff. Or do you just enjoy the swaggering? |
|
Hey John. I am just sending a quick note to you as I read this thread here. I just want to say thanks, I assume that you are a LEO and I really think we need more people like you in LE. Frankly, I think you should be able to get and use the same firearms that are used against you. I live up here in Chicago and it wasn't until recently that Daley started allowing the Chicago PD to carry semi-autos. I've got a buddy who is with CPD and those guys really have their backs up against the walls. Anyhow, keep up the good work and thanks for keeping our streets safe. -pete |
|
I would argue that the reverse is true, and not necessarily a bad thing. LE led the way with the true advances in body armor. Only recently has the military gotten serious about body armor (the Interceptor armor) and it has already saved lots of lives in Afghanistan. CQB tactics underwent a real serious revolution in the 80s and 90s, and it was pioneered by LE, who got tired of losing engagements in the 70s. The military paid attention, and borrowed many of these concepts. The military has gotten a lot more selective and directed in how they apply force, particularly in urban environments. This was borrowed from LE, who can't throw a grenade into every room and shoot thousands of rounds into a house (unless it is the SLA). The military is using more advanced less-lethal tactics, again borrowed from or developed by LE, who can not legally kill everyone who resists. As to why an LE agency needs crew-served weapons, there are instances where it would be appropriate. A barricaded/fortified person who is actively shooting requires a weapon capable of accurately engaing an area target (such as a bunker or a heavily fortified room in a house), and the weapon needs to be capable of penetrating heavy barrier materials. While these situations are infrequent, the police tactical realm often deals in contingencies. Mayberry probably doesn't need one, but a large municipal agency or state tactical unit might. Why would you argue that nobody needs one? i am of the opinion that if Joe Citizen wants a crew-served MG, he should be able to get one as long as he pays for the tax stamp like everyone else. The only difference with LE, is that we don't have to pay for the tax stamp, and we can get Post 86 MGs. Once you start saying "nobody has a reason to own that kind of weapon," you use the same logic that the anti-gunners employ. |
|
Redmanfms What do you do for a living? You talk tough about putting a bullet in someone, have you??? Do you think in that small moment in time you may freeze up or you might be lucky and all the training you have had, the years of QBC, live fire, etc.. will pull your head out of your ass so you can survive? If you have not been there, I guess you really do not know what the F**K you are saying. We should be proud that folks like you will be there when society crumbles and the wire is stormed. By the way most 2nd amend chest thumpers use the "I need anything I want because I'm a sportsman." argument to make their point. Look I agree whole heartedly that we (Citizens) have the right to anything we can legally obtain. If Redmanfms wants a BAR, M249, LAW, whatever he can have it. But if he uses it in the manner that is illegal (in commission of a crime) we need to bury him under the jail. Trust me if you get the opportunity to be down range of bullets inbound, it is a sobering thing. The shit is for real and your day will radically change soon. I have had .38 to AK's fired at me. If I was scared I would have never become a Police Officer. I feel that service to my Country and Society is the best job of all. |
|
Tumor, I did have respect for you until that post, the same goes for Redmanflms. You have to be the most pathetic piece of sewer drinking scum on the planet. Threatening to murder women, children and police. How brave of you. Do you load AK magazines and masturbate to that thought? Where have I seen that exact line before? Well, it's popular with cowardly militia scum. I've made no secret of what I do for a living, I've made no secret of my location. You and any other filthy slobbering cretins that agree with you are quite welcome to drag your smelly pathetic asses over here and take your best shot. Just for clarification, I have no wife. I do have a daughter. I'm a model of restraint compared to her, and she's VERY good with that 357 and AR of hers. She should be. Been to several of the best shooting schools in the country on my dime. She's been to those schools because you're not the first runny pile of manure to make those threats. I'm tired of you and you inbred kin. It's time to actually accomplish something positive. I'm going to break out the rifles and head for the range. Deer season's coming, have to work up those reloads. The people I'm going to meet are going to be nice normal gun owners, not some discussion board freak of nature. (To the owners and other responsible sane people on this board, whether discussion adversaries or friends, please accept my apologies for the above rant. The only thing I can say in my defense is that it's very rare.) |
|
Quoted: Come on. Most of us who are LEO's have fought for YOUR right to own these things with our service in the military or at home. We go in the streets everyday and face these things so you whinny assholes can go home and run a patch down your barrel of the closest thing you can get to a real one cause you do not have the balls to earn the right (i.e. serve the military or LEO) yourself. Compare this to the thread topic, and make your own call.... |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Come on. Most of us who are LEO's have fought for YOUR right to own these things with our service in the military or at home. We go in the streets everyday and face these things so you whinny assholes can go home and run a patch down your barrel of the closest thing you can get to a real one cause you do not have the balls to earn the right (i.e. serve the military or LEO) yourself. Compare this to the thread topic, and make your own call.... You know if you were involved in something that could end in a gunfight at fist fight range, using handguns that will kill a person slowly in most cases, giving them more than enough time to kill you even after you have effectively killed them.............I had more why don't you think about the dynamic of that encounter for a second. REALLY THINK. In the recent past I can think of just a few office involved shootings in my area. TRT shoots bank robber who had been barricaded in a hotel room for 12 or so hours refusing to come out, negotiations broke down 2 hours prior. Gunfight took place inside a bathroom. Subject had pointed a hangun at the entry team. Later determined to be a BB gun. Was also the gun he used in several robberies. 2 officers go to arrest a subject for a Lewd and Lascivious warrant. They are let into the house by the subjects parents. The go to the basement where the subject is. They tell him about the warrant. The shooting starts at about 10' range. 1 officer shot, and the subject was closing and continuing to shoot. The other officer shoots and kills the subject. Officer contacts a person fishing on a railroad trestle, tresspassing. Finds the person has a minor (less the $250) warrant tells him about the warrant, and escorts him along the railroad trestle. Subject not handcuffed because the officer was afraid the subject might fall off the trestle and drown if he tripped while handcuffed. When they hit dry land the fight is on. Subject knocks the officer down, gets on top of him, and tries to flatten his head with a large rock (big as your head). Officer shoots him, dead. Officer chasing a domestic abuse subject, the subject goes down an alley, and slows down so the officer closes in. The subject then turns holding a homemade weapon that looks like a gun. He gets shot once. The Detective for some reason had FMJ 9mm rounds instead of "duty ammo", hollowpoints. Subject minor injury, through and through. Subject attacks an officer, who had been sent to check on a possibly intoxicated person. Subject pulls a knife and runs at the officer. Shot once, survived, now in a mental institution. Subject tries to get overly "friendly" with neighbors. Police called, find career criminal in the apt hallway with a knife with a 14" blade, not sober, bleeding, not fully clothed. Subject chases initial on scene officers around. Officers avoid him and requiest help. Next officer enters apt bldg. going up the stairs as the subject is running down the stairs. 2 shots subject ends criminal career. These aren't "selected" they are 5-8 years of officer involved shooting for 1 dept. 1 officer was involved in 2 of the incidents. The incidents are certainly different, but there are some common threads. Extreme close range, except for the TRT incident they all are very sudden. That's part of the "problem" with law enforcement. Everything can be hunky-dory one second and the next you are in a life or death struggle, in someplace that you are probably familiar with, possibly with a person you were just talking to. In order to be prepared for that LEO's need to be aware of their surroundings, options, etc. To be scooting along oblivious to the sad fact that the world is a dangerous place is an invitation to tragedy. "Miltarization" isn't whats going on. It's being realistic, that bad things happen, and when they do you need to be aware of what is going on and react. EDIT----------------------------------- It's also a matter of perspective. If you need assistance from your local LEA, you want "Officer Friendly". If you are the victim of a crime you want "Joe Friday". If the person that wronged you is making himself tough to find, you want a determined street smart officer looking for him. Depending on the situation, the police must have a apropriate tactic for a response. Sometimes it may be "go time", other times it "talk time". But officers need to be able to go to both extremes. When the FBI "profiled" officers that were killed they found that most thought they were "people persons" and were very hard working. It isn't JBT's that get killed...... I wonder how many of those "people person" officers would be around today if they were just a little more proficient in the dynamacs of confrontations......... |
|
Quoted: "Miltarization" isn't whats going on. It's being realistic, that bad things happen, and when they do you need to be aware of what is going on and react. I'm not saying that the police should have their teeth pulled whatsoever. There are indeed scenarios where extreme force and tactics should be employed. The problem is that when some PDs acquire the tools/tactics for the extreme, they too often see every situation where there is danger as extreme. The rationale is for determining the need becomes "officer safety". The problem is how to balance officer safety with civil rights. What needs to be understood is that you are policing a free people with civil rights. You cannot declare that their rights are null and void for your safety. It is part of what makes police work dangerous. All people like myself ask is that good judgement be used based on intel and the crime that is actually being committed. It's a balancing act with severe consequences if there is an error. |
|
Driftpunch, I agree with you to a degree that we need to way the balance of Officer safety to civil rights of the citizen. The many difference is that if we error on the side of the citizen to much an officer or other innocent citizen may get hurt, or on the other hand a citizen gets part of his civil rights infringed. As has been my experience there are very few times that an actual innocent citizen is the center of the attention. They are normally a suspect to a crime or an incident that warrants police action. We can get on a medley of ideas to look at the issue at hand; military style policing. The fact is that we need the advantage to apprehend and gather evidence against criminals. Do you think the AMBER ALERT is wrong. It helps spread the word of a child abductors Lic plate and description to public. Is that infringing of the owner of the car. He may be innocent and here he is being pulled over and "Terry stopped" by the police. We need to work to get the message out that LEO are here for everyone "except" the criminals. The gun grabbers are not LEO's we use guns as much as anyone. You will be hard pressed to find one who does not. The fact is with the idea of the 2nd amend = assualt rifles today for the regulated militia, then wouldn't an LEO need the same or more as anyone? |