[Military State] Ferguson, MO

Read. I posted several examples. If you won;t read them, not sure what else I can do...

 

The adults are talking here. Go do your homework.

(I mean really, I don't understand what *I* posted? )

 

A lot of officers got shot because they had 9mms and those guys had body armor. Are you trolling or being serious?

 

Bandwagoner,

You need to make the case that the cops don't need this equipment. If you want to take something away, or you want to prohibit its use, then it is incumbent upon you to make the argument for its removal. You need to show how deployment of these tools is truly detrimental to society and the police's relationship with the public. You need to explain how that outweighs the PD's obligation to protect the public when necessary from extreme threats.

Most of what we have seen so far is easily fixable with revised training and SOPs. Why not fix it that way, but allow the police to maintain these tools for those times when they will need them? There WILL be more mass shootings and other active shooter situations. There WILL be terrorist attacks at some point that demand an agile, yet robust response. This equipment WILL be needed by cops at some point, even if not by all of them. But you can't predict when and where and who will need them. It's not possible. And it needs to be readily available, not locked up in armories, because response time is paramount when dealing with such situations.

You haven't presented a compelling reason to disarm the cops yet. There are several compelling arguments - that have gone unanswered - for allowing them to have these tools. There's no dispute that there is room for inappropriate deployment of these tools, and that's a problem that needs to be fixed.

This is not a "my 5 year old drew on the walls with a crayon so I'm taking his crayons away" argument. This is more like a "my 21 year old college student son sent my work email a file full of goddammed p*rn and IT saw it and I'm in hot water, so I am going to take away his laptop" argument. Well, your son might have done something stupid, but he needs that laptop to write papers. What, you expect him to write a paper with his iPhone?

 

Really? 'Bout every cop I know (well more than 150+) are pro gun. And most of them, or most of the ones I know and work with, we're in the military.

LMAO!!!

I do carry an AR-15. The department encourages it.

And this is why almost every beat cop has an AR. Our department is 140 sworn has a SWAT team of 12. The earliest you can get a team there and organized is 45 mins, maybe 30 mins. And that's with most of them on duty (day shift).

 

So your position is that you'd rather have no one there while Adam is popping the kids in the head than have the admittedly nonexpert cop there with his AR?

I'd rather have the good guy with a gun there any day of the week, even if he can't disassemble and reassemble his firearm blindfolded. It just might save someone's life.

 

Great interview from Killer Mike

http://youtube.com/watch?v=c9dZctr84QY

 

I honestly don't think he cares about the kids. I think he only cares about cases where there can be some political controversy. Much more to troll with on basketball forums.

 

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/st-louis-official-reporters-arrested-ferguson-michael-brown

This is the first definitive eye witness to come out openly. She's saying brown was executed.

 

There's no real justification for using military gear on a civilian population other than we wasted a ****load of blood and money on two extravagantly wasteful wars and now as we ramp down overseas this "surplus gear" is up for dibs or the junk heap.

Scenarios like the North Hollywood incident are more exception than the norm, but having that **** around 24/7 and in YOUR neighborhood takes a toll on the people as well as the police armed and geared up to the teeth with it.

Driving an armor plated vehicles designed to withstand IED blasts doesn't make it ****ing Fallujah up in here.

 

So... Do you have a rational argument as to why the police shouldn't have this gear? Can you explain why they should not have it at their disposal for an active shooter situation? And if they should have it for that purpose, how will they access it? Where will it be located? In a central armory, or in the trunk of the squad car? If in a central armory, what sort of response times are acceptable for such an event? Is 45 minutes acceptable? An hour?

Your response was emotional, not rational. I am looking for rational responses here.

 

Clear cut case of suicide. Seriously though, someone needs to give the St. Louis cops some tasers.

 

I found this story interesting because the title - "St. Louis Police Release Video Of Kajieme Powell Killing That Appears At Odds With Their Story" is so misleading. The video actually jibes very well with the story. Dude with a knife moves at the cops yelling "Shoot me! Shoot me!", he gets close, they oblige him.

If you want to keep breathing, coming at a couple of cops with knife in hand yelling "Shoot me!" is about the worst possible strategy you could take.

Suicide by cop is going to work almost every time.

 

Must you be a rifle expert to know how to take one apart, clean it and shoot it?

 

Bottom line is the response was botched, as you note. It was botched because the police response was way over the top. I don't care if you keep an AR-15 in your trunk as a backup piece, but in no way should we have seen the mitarized police response in Ferguson that we have. The amount and type of equipment we've seen photos simply is not needed there and inexcusable.

I'm OK with appropriate use of heavier weapons and gear by police provided the use is actually ****ing appropriate. What the police have now show us is that they are willing to use this heavier gear inappropriately in an attempt to intimidate and cow those they are their to protect & serve.

 

I assume you can competently operate a motor vehicle. Does this mean you're a master mechanic as well?

 

Your whole point is predicated off of fear and paranoia without a reliable root cause.

If there were actionable data that all small suburban towns like Ferguson needed this military gear to provide "acceptable response times" for "active shooter situations" then this incident of the police overreaching with excessive force would be the exception rather than the norm.

It's the opposite, and the trend is growing all over the nation.

Before rushing into the logistics of preparing for some hypothetical boogeyman lurking around the corner waiting pounce on your safety, consider the chances of it happening and the impacts of a civilian security force military grade weapons in abundance to patrol against typical civilian level threats.

Sometimes the only way to get any of this through is to imagine these people armed to the teeth, stopping you in a normal traffic pullover with your family in the car and the cop having a bad enough day to make you feel uncomfortable.

 

Very credible witness.... until she talks about getting out of her car with gunfire going off. Who does that?

 

Maybe someone who realizes that cars don't protect you from gunfire.