[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Conversation with LEO (Page 1 of 4)
Posted: 9/21/2014 9:59:19 AM EDT
| The other day, local community college had a open house. They teach criminal justice so all the LEO agencies had a presence there,(city, county and state) The county had a table where they had all their "assult" gear laid out to impress the locals along with an armor plated hummer. I asked a skinny county deputy with bad teeth why it was necessary to go around dressed like they were in the 'Stan. What I got was a confused reply about needing protection from AK47's all the local drug dealers were packing, as well as; "I want to be able to go home to my family at the end of the day, (this theme seemed to be his main response throughout the discussion. I mentioned that I had been seeing a lot of instances where LEO went overboard in their dealings with civilians, and the things they could and couldn't do under the constitution. This really set him off, I never even brought up the 2nd admendment yet he kept yammering on about "no one's after your guns." Everytime I brought up the subject of the constitution he would go off on a tangent about being able to go home to the wife and kids at night. I also asked why they had to wear all that mollie gear as well as armor vests, he wasn't in the military anymore and that police work isn't the same as combat. "I used to be a marine," was his reply. "You're not in the marines anymore," I told him, this just brought on more arguement on his part, he never answered my questions concerning the constitution, always falling back on his "AK47" defense. I asked him why the county needed an armor plated "hummer." He then went into a bunch of BS about all the meth and drug dealers in the county toting AK's and AR's as well as one example of one dealer who had two Barrett .50 cal rifles which seemed to be the justification for the Hummer. I could see the conversation wasn't going anywhere so I just left, but the attitude even down to the local yokel level bothered me, obviously I was talking to someone who had no idea about the constitution much less cared. |
|
I actually had the opposite experience a few months ago during crime prevention week at our local mall. A State Police officer took the time to show me the gear they use and was very polite. I found it very interesting in how all the equipment functioned.
He never once asked me to lick his boots. 
|
|
I have no issues with local LE having access to anything that makes them feel or look tacticool. I am old enough to remember the Hollywood bank robbery shoot-out and quite frankly that was an embarrassment for the LE community. And yes there have been shootouts with gangsters with AK's. Hell there was one in Stockton CA just this summer.
I do however have an issue with them when they cry and complain that citizens shouldn't have access to things like SBR's, suppressors, body armor because it might lead to whatever, fill in the blank. This whole militarization of the police is a non issue and I for one wish it would just go away. |
|
Quoted:
The other day, local community college had a open house. They teach criminal justice so all the LEO agencies had a presence there,(city, county and state) The county had a table where they had all their "assult" gear laid out to impress the locals along with an armor plated hummer. I asked a skinny county deputy with bad teeth why it was necessary to go around dressed like they were in the 'Stan. What I got was a confused reply about needing protection from AK47's all the local drug dealers were packing, as well as; "I want to be able to go home to my family at the end of the day, (this theme seemed to be his main response throughout the discussion. I mentioned that I had been seeing a lot of instances where LEO went overboard in their dealings with civilians, and the things they could and couldn't do under the constitution. This really set him off, I never even brought up the 2nd admendment yet he kept yammering on about "no one's after your guns." Everytime I brought up the subject of the constitution he would go off on a tangent about being able to go home to the wife and kids at night. I also asked why they had to wear all that mollie gear as well as armor vests, he wasn't in the military anymore and that police work isn't the same as combat. "I used to be a marine," was his reply. "You're not in the marines anymore," I told him, this just brought on more arguement on his part, he never answered my questions concerning the constitution, always falling back on his "AK47" defense. I asked him why the county needed an armor plated "hummer." He then went into a bunch of BS about all the meth and drug dealers in the county toting AK's and AR's as well as one example of one dealer who had two Barrett .50 cal rifles which seemed to be the justification for the Hummer. I could see the conversation wasn't going anywhere so I just left, but the attitude even down to the local yokel level bothered me, obviously I was talking to someone who had no idea about the constitution much less cared. You should stop by the English departments table next time and ask about paragraphs Gr |
|
Quoted:
Yes it is. I'm not against police owning anything I can own, but for fuck sake... Are you blind? Quoted:
Quoted:
This whole militarization of the police is a non issue and I for one wish it would just go away. Yes it is. I'm not against police owning anything I can own, but for fuck sake... Are you blind? Blind to what? What is it that gets your panties in a bunch? Seriously. |
|
Quoted:
You should stop by the English departments table next time and ask about paragraphs Gr Quoted:
Quoted:
The other day, local community college had a open house. They teach criminal justice so all the LEO agencies had a presence there,(city, county and state) The county had a table where they had all their "assult" gear laid out to impress the locals along with an armor plated hummer. I asked a skinny county deputy with bad teeth why it was necessary to go around dressed like they were in the 'Stan. What I got was a confused reply about needing protection from AK47's all the local drug dealers were packing, as well as; "I want to be able to go home to my family at the end of the day, (this theme seemed to be his main response throughout the discussion. I mentioned that I had been seeing a lot of instances where LEO went overboard in their dealings with civilians, and the things they could and couldn't do under the constitution. This really set him off, I never even brought up the 2nd admendment yet he kept yammering on about "no one's after your guns." Everytime I brought up the subject of the constitution he would go off on a tangent about being able to go home to the wife and kids at night. I also asked why they had to wear all that mollie gear as well as armor vests, he wasn't in the military anymore and that police work isn't the same as combat. "I used to be a marine," was his reply. "You're not in the marines anymore," I told him, this just brought on more arguement on his part, he never answered my questions concerning the constitution, always falling back on his "AK47" defense. I asked him why the county needed an armor plated "hummer." He then went into a bunch of BS about all the meth and drug dealers in the county toting AK's and AR's as well as one example of one dealer who had two Barrett .50 cal rifles which seemed to be the justification for the Hummer. I could see the conversation wasn't going anywhere so I just left, but the attitude even down to the local yokel level bothered me, obviously I was talking to someone who had no idea about the constitution much less cared. You should stop by the English departments table next time and ask about paragraphs Gr 
|
|
Quoted:
The other day, local community college had a open house. They teach criminal justice so all the LEO agencies had a presence there,(city, county and state) The county had a table where they had all their "assult" gear laid out to impress the locals along with an armor plated hummer. I asked a skinny county deputy with bad teeth why it was necessary to go around dressed like they were in the 'Stan. What I got was a confused reply about needing protection from AK47's all the local drug dealers were packing, as well as; "I want to be able to go home to my family at the end of the day, (this theme seemed to be his main response throughout the discussion. I mentioned that I had been seeing a lot of instances where LEO went overboard in their dealings with civilians, and the things they could and couldn't do under the constitution. This really set him off, I never even brought up the 2nd admendment yet he kept yammering on about "no one's after your guns." Everytime I brought up the subject of the constitution he would go off on a tangent about being able to go home to the wife and kids at night. I also asked why they had to wear all that mollie gear as well as armor vests, he wasn't in the military anymore and that police work isn't the same as combat. "I used to be a marine," was his reply. "You're not in the marines anymore," I told him, this just brought on more arguement on his part, he never answered my questions concerning the constitution, always falling back on his "AK47" defense. I asked him why the county needed an armor plated "hummer." He then went into a bunch of BS about all the meth and drug dealers in the county toting AK's and AR's as well as one example of one dealer who had two Barrett .50 cal rifles which seemed to be the justification for the Hummer. I could see the conversation wasn't going anywhere so I just left, but the attitude even down to the local yokel level bothered me, obviously I was talking to someone who had no idea about the constitution much less cared. The behavior you exhibited is indicative of a douche bag. Guys took time to interact and try and build a positive rapport...you are rude and pugnacious. Well done, well done. |
|
You know, when you actually need that stuff....you really need that stuff.
But, we are boys, so when we have the STUFF for times of need, we like to get it out and play with it at every opportunity. My department has a pretty large swat team with the toys. Some specialized units get outer plates for search warrants. And us road guys have AR's and shotguns. Not really my definition of militarized police dept. But when we have search warrants or barricaded subjects, then SWAT roles with the heavy equipment. They aren't required to take a bullet in the name of not offending the OP. |
|
Quoted:
So you basically went to troll the local agency that was trying to interact with the community on a positive basis. Congratulations. Were you wearing your plate carrier and nods at the time? No plate armor, I was just curious where our county mounties stood of the constitution as well as going overboard on raids...Now I know |
|
I don't have an issue with EQUIPMENT. I have an issue with ATTITUDE.
If I can buy armor as a civilian, why do I care if LEOs use it? If I can buy military style weapons and standard capacity magazines, why do I care if LEOs have them. I have several LEO close friends, and I want them to have the best tools to do their job. Where I have an issue is where you have LEOs that believe that they ARE THE LAW, and where they believe that they are some lordship role in society. Unfortunately, they exist. No amount of equipment-- or lack of equipment-- alters that. This is a problem with perception. However, like gun control, you do not "punish" the good for the attitude of the bad. |
|
Quoted:
I have no issues with local LE having access to anything that makes them feel or look tacticool. I am old enough to remember the Hollywood bank robbery shoot-out and quite frankly that was an embarrassment for the LE community. And yes there have been shootouts with gangsters with AK's. Hell there was one in Stockton CA just this summer. I do however have an issue with them when they cry and complain that citizens shouldn't have access to things like SBR's, suppressors, body armor because it might lead to whatever, fill in the blank. This whole militarization of the police is a non issue and I for one wish it would just go away. the thing that bothered me the most was his attitude, he seemed obsessed with the idea that he needed all this gear because you never knew when he and his buddies were going to come up against a bunch of people all armed with AK's |
|
Quoted:
The behavior you exhibited is indicative of a douche bag. Guys took time to interact and try and build a positive rapport...you are rude and pugnacious. Well done, well done. Quoted:
Quoted:
The other day, local community college had a open house. . The behavior you exhibited is indicative of a douche bag. Guys took time to interact and try and build a positive rapport...you are rude and pugnacious. Well done, well done. Great vocab word! I award you+1 internets. OP. nice troll work 
|
|
Quoted:
The behavior you exhibited is indicative of a douche bag. Guys took time to interact and try and build a positive rapport...you are rude and pugnacious. Well done, well done. Quoted:
Quoted:
The other day, local community college had a open house. They teach criminal justice so all the LEO agencies had a presence there,(city, county and state) The county had a table where they had all their "assult" gear laid out to impress the locals along with an armor plated hummer. I asked a skinny county deputy with bad teeth why it was necessary to go around dressed like they were in the 'Stan. What I got was a confused reply about needing protection from AK47's all the local drug dealers were packing, as well as; "I want to be able to go home to my family at the end of the day, (this theme seemed to be his main response throughout the discussion. I mentioned that I had been seeing a lot of instances where LEO went overboard in their dealings with civilians, and the things they could and couldn't do under the constitution. This really set him off, I never even brought up the 2nd admendment yet he kept yammering on about "no one's after your guns." Everytime I brought up the subject of the constitution he would go off on a tangent about being able to go home to the wife and kids at night. I also asked why they had to wear all that mollie gear as well as armor vests, he wasn't in the military anymore and that police work isn't the same as combat. "I used to be a marine," was his reply. "You're not in the marines anymore," I told him, this just brought on more arguement on his part, he never answered my questions concerning the constitution, always falling back on his "AK47" defense. I asked him why the county needed an armor plated "hummer." He then went into a bunch of BS about all the meth and drug dealers in the county toting AK's and AR's as well as one example of one dealer who had two Barrett .50 cal rifles which seemed to be the justification for the Hummer. I could see the conversation wasn't going anywhere so I just left, but the attitude even down to the local yokel level bothered me, obviously I was talking to someone who had no idea about the constitution much less cared. The behavior you exhibited is indicative of a douche bag. Guys took time to interact and try and build a positive rapport...you are rude and pugnacious. Well done, well done. I never got rude, I was just curious to see where this guy stood on people's civil rights, I don't know, maybe the guy had been too long in the "bush" and simply wasn't aware that not everybody in the county is cooking meth |
|
Quoted:
Ask him why they don't go arrest the drug dealer with the 50 cal for being a prohibited person in possession of a firearm He was speaking of the Barrett's as though they were full auto. In fact, I got him to admit that the cases he was citing in which they delt with AK's the weapons were semi-auto |
|
Quoted: No plate armor, I was just curious where our county mounties stood of the constitution as well as going overboard on raids...Now I know Quoted: Quoted: So you basically went to troll the local agency that was trying to interact with the community on a positive basis. Congratulations. Were you wearing your plate carrier and nods at the time? No plate armor, I was just curious where our county mounties stood of the constitution as well as going overboard on raids...Now I know So joinder was not created? He said no one was after your guns, so where is your confusion on where they stand on the constitution? Do the local drug dealers have ak47s? Do they have Barretts? |
|
Quoted:
The other day, the local community college had an open house. They teach criminal justice so all the LEO agencies had a presence there,(city, county and state). The county had a table where they had all their "assault" gear laid out to impress the locals along with an armor plated armored hummer. I asked a skinny county deputy with bad teeth why it was necessary to go around dressed like they were in the 'Stan. What I got was a confused reply about needing protection from AK47's that all the local drug dealers were packing, as well as; "I want to be able to go home to my family at the end of the day, (this theme seemed to be his main response throughout the discussion). I mentioned that I had been seeing a lot of instances where LEO went overboard in their dealings with civilians, and the things they could and couldn't do under the Constitution. This really set him off, I never even brought up the 2nd admendment Amendment yet he kept yammering on about "no one's after your guns." Everytime I brought up the subject of the Constitution he would go off on a tangent about being able to go home to the wife and kids at night. I also asked why they had to wear all that mollie Molle gear as well as armor vests, he wasn't in the military anymore and that police work isn't the same as combat. "I used to be a Marine," was his reply. "You're not in the Marines anymore," I told him, this just brought on more arguement on his part, he never answered my questions concerning the Constitution, always falling back on his "AK47" defense. I asked him why the county needed an armored plated "hummer." He then went into a bunch of BS about all the meth and drug dealers in the county toting AK's and AR's as well as one example of one dealer who had two Barrett .50 cal rifles which seemed to be the justification for the Hummer. I could see the conversation wasn't going anywhere so I just left, but the attitude even down to the local yokel level bothered me, obviously I was talking to someone who had no idea about the Constitution much less cared. Your lack of spelling, punctuation, capitalization, and grammar bothers me, as well as your run on sentences and lack of paragraphs. |
|
Quoted:
Yes it is. I'm not against police owning anything I can own, but for fuck sake... Are you blind? Quoted:
Quoted:
This whole militarization of the police is a non issue and I for one wish it would just go away. Yes it is. I'm not against police owning anything I can own, but for fuck sake... Are you blind? The Blue Uniform being of course a variation of the Army Uniform and of course very tacticool in it's day, that day of course has passed. Andy in Mayberry was fiction. It never really did exist anywhere beyond the writer's imagination. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The other day, local community college had a open house. They teach criminal justice so all the LEO agencies had a presence there,(city, county and state) The county had a table where they had all their "assult" gear laid out to impress the locals along with an armor plated hummer. I asked a skinny county deputy with bad teeth why it was necessary to go around dressed like they were in the 'Stan. What I got was a confused reply about needing protection from AK47's all the local drug dealers were packing, as well as; "I want to be able to go home to my family at the end of the day, (this theme seemed to be his main response throughout the discussion. I mentioned that I had been seeing a lot of instances where LEO went overboard in their dealings with civilians, and the things they could and couldn't do under the constitution. This really set him off, I never even brought up the 2nd admendment yet he kept yammering on about "no one's after your guns." Everytime I brought up the subject of the constitution he would go off on a tangent about being able to go home to the wife and kids at night. I also asked why they had to wear all that mollie gear as well as armor vests, he wasn't in the military anymore and that police work isn't the same as combat. "I used to be a marine," was his reply. "You're not in the marines anymore," I told him, this just brought on more arguement on his part, he never answered my questions concerning the constitution, always falling back on his "AK47" defense. I asked him why the county needed an armor plated "hummer." He then went into a bunch of BS about all the meth and drug dealers in the county toting AK's and AR's as well as one example of one dealer who had two Barrett .50 cal rifles which seemed to be the justification for the Hummer. I could see the conversation wasn't going anywhere so I just left, but the attitude even down to the local yokel level bothered me, obviously I was talking to someone who had no idea about the constitution much less cared. You should stop by the English departments table next time and ask about paragraphs Gr +3 Paragraphs are your friend. I got a headache trying to read that wall of text. |
|
Quoted:
the thing that bothered me the most was his attitude, he seemed obsessed with the idea that he needed all this gear because you never knew when he and his buddies were going to come up against a bunch of people all armed with AK's Quoted:
Quoted:
I have no issues with local LE having access to anything that makes them feel or look tacticool. I am old enough to remember the Hollywood bank robbery shoot-out and quite frankly that was an embarrassment for the LE community. And yes there have been shootouts with gangsters with AK's. Hell there was one in Stockton CA just this summer. I do however have an issue with them when they cry and complain that citizens shouldn't have access to things like SBR's, suppressors, body armor because it might lead to whatever, fill in the blank. This whole militarization of the police is a non issue and I for one wish it would just go away. the thing that bothered me the most was his attitude, he seemed obsessed with the idea that he needed all this gear because you never knew when he and his buddies were going to come up against a bunch of people all armed with AK's Hell, I work on Civie Street in the 'burbs, and that's the exact reason I have all this gear. |
|
Quoted:
I never got rude, I was just curious to see where this guy stood on people's civil rights, I don't know, maybe the guy had been too long in the "bush" and simply wasn't aware that not everybody in the county is cooking meth Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The other day, local community college had a open house. They teach criminal justice so all the LEO agencies had a presence there,(city, county and state) The county had a table where they had all their "assult" gear laid out to impress the locals along with an armor plated hummer. I asked a skinny county deputy with bad teeth why it was necessary to go around dressed like they were in the 'Stan. What I got was a confused reply about needing protection from AK47's all the local drug dealers were packing, as well as; "I want to be able to go home to my family at the end of the day, (this theme seemed to be his main response throughout the discussion. I mentioned that I had been seeing a lot of instances where LEO went overboard in their dealings with civilians, and the things they could and couldn't do under the constitution. This really set him off, I never even brought up the 2nd admendment yet he kept yammering on about "no one's after your guns." Everytime I brought up the subject of the constitution he would go off on a tangent about being able to go home to the wife and kids at night. I also asked why they had to wear all that mollie gear as well as armor vests, he wasn't in the military anymore and that police work isn't the same as combat. "I used to be a marine," was his reply. "You're not in the marines anymore," I told him, this just brought on more arguement on his part, he never answered my questions concerning the constitution, always falling back on his "AK47" defense. I asked him why the county needed an armor plated "hummer." He then went into a bunch of BS about all the meth and drug dealers in the county toting AK's and AR's as well as one example of one dealer who had two Barrett .50 cal rifles which seemed to be the justification for the Hummer. I could see the conversation wasn't going anywhere so I just left, but the attitude even down to the local yokel level bothered me, obviously I was talking to someone who had no idea about the constitution much less cared. The behavior you exhibited is indicative of a douche bag. Guys took time to interact and try and build a positive rapport...you are rude and pugnacious. Well done, well done. I never got rude, I was just curious to see where this guy stood on people's civil rights, I don't know, maybe the guy had been too long in the "bush" and simply wasn't aware that not everybody in the county is cooking meth Yeah I bet dude. You're such a badass. |
|
Quoted:
the thing that bothered me the most was his attitude, he seemed obsessed with the idea that he needed all this gear because you never knew when he and his buddies were going to come up against a bunch of people all armed with AK's What's the harm in having a set of plates in the trunk? Better to have and not need/than to need and not have. I can tell you firsthand that good armor is a confidence builder when you are taking rounds. |