After Dallas - No such thing as militarization of police

[Hoop]

I do not in anyway condone the assassination of police officers. However if you consider some (not all) of the lethal force used against some (but not all) on some black males, at what point in time do the actions become the actions of a tyrannical government. The exact circumstances the second amendment was written for.

I sort of agree.

We are already living under that tyranny here in CA the question is what will people do about it. At least the BLM crowd are willing to march. IMHO that is what we really need and what the NRA should be geared around as the courts aren't on our side around here.

[QQQ]

No thanks. I fear a police state much more than I do the criminals that they supposedly protect me from.

Yup.

And if you think that the heavy-handed, overmilitarized response to the Boston attacks was appropriate, then you might want to relabel yourself as someone who doesn't care for individual liberty.

[LBDamned]

I'm conflicted about this. Police need access to the equipment they need to do their jobs and protect themselves and the people. However, over-militarization of the police can also lead down a dangerous road of sacrificing too much liberty for security. No one wants to see lawless rioting, but no one wants a heavily armed police state ready to squash anyone the government doesn't agree with. It's a double-edged sword, a tightrope that needs to be walked carefully.

Smart post.

Logic over emotion is Always the best method.

Its too soon for answers... And anyone that thinks otherwise is likely operating on emotion.

[QQQ]

How's that going to work for the numerous vets that are LEO? Are they too dangerous to be LEO or is there an exemption in that law that covers LEO? Would that ban apply to any vets getting out who wanted to join an LEA? Would you have had to have been an LEO in the military to be considered for the exemption to join an LEA post service?

If being a vet alone is enough to trigger a ban (and not even requiring a combat tour), do the vets have a right to petition the gov for potential lost wages because they are retroactively banned from a future position? Do we pre-emptively ban anyone who might want to join the military from having 2A rights as they would eventually become a veteran?

So confused...

LEOs are working for the government. So it's unlikely that a LEO with military training would be viewed as a threat by the government in the absence of other factors. That might not apply to former military members who are not working for the government, though, especially if they express views contrary to the views of the folks in power.

[LBDamned]

Really? A SKS? Anyone have a link?

Everything I've read said SKS... are you really just realizing this?

Please tell me you guys aren't getting all your info from the talking heads on TV and Internet forums...

[Blade Gunner]

You're falling into the trap of a state sponsored army of occupation. The police are peace officers and should not be armed as an offensive military force. They are already exempted from almost all Cali gun controls.

[LBDamned]

I do not in anyway condone the assassination of police officers. However if you consider some (not all) of the lethal force used against some (but not all) on some black males, at what point in time do the actions become the actions of a tyrannical government. The exact circumstances the second amendment was written for.

The same time it happens against other races?... What does "Black Males" (even in the context of "some") have to do with it?

[Devon]

Will worsen problem

I feel the police looking more and more armed and menacing, will worsen public perception. The more power they display, the more people hate them. I myself would avoid anyplace where police were armed with rifles, and wearing body armor and face shields. The perception is that I would be entering an unsafe environment to begin with. Why would I want to be in an environment like that, this is not Baghdad.

[ironpegasus]

I think that part of the problem with the militarization of the police forces is less equipment as it is mental. You get all these words about military equipment and weapons of war out there and it changes everyone's mindset. You use those words and everyone - including LEO start thinking of it as a paramilitary gig. We need to get back to community policing and improved relations. How we get there from here, I have no clue.

Do I worry about an officer being armed with an AR with a standard capacity mag? Only to the degree that some officers lack sufficient discretion in picking their targets (like the ladies in the blue Tacoma delivering papers found out in the Dorner incident) and that I am not allowed to have firepower parity in case the government goes rogue or society breaks down in a race war and there are no LEOs to protect me and mine. Other than that, MRAPs are okay as long as they're not suddenly mounting TOW launchers and remote weapon stations rocking a ma deuce or Mk-19. Push comes to shove, those things are sitting ducks anyway. An Abrams is out of the question for law enforcement, IMO.

I have some reservations about the drone bomb too. It's a short journey from the fact that in this instance it was expedient and potentially saved lives to it becoming SOP to use the drone in any encounter. And then you lose the ability for an officer to interact with and get a feel for what a suspect is actually doing and whether things can be de-escalated without further violence.

Additionally, if it was a drone/robot/whatever, did we need to neutralize the dude with a bomb? Not saying that he didn't totally have it coming, but since there weren't any other lives at risk, was it possible to have used some less lethal option to incapacitate rather than hand BLM another thing to be angry about? "See, they killin' us with drones now!"

As to the actions of the police and a tyrannical government, it's something of a mixed bag. That guy Messerly or whatever who shot the guy on BART a couple years ago - bad stuff, although I doubt that was a deliberate execution. Same for Garner in New York being arrested and dying over selling loose cigarettes. That should have been an infraction at most, IMO and therefore a ticket and not an arrest. The real focus there should have been on the injustice of the law itself. Brown in Ferguson was a clean shoot - yet he's the poster child for BLM right next to Saint Trayvon. Freddie Gray in Baltimore - looks like he offed himself by being stupid. These latest two? Hard to tell. The Minnesota one looks like a nervous rookie that made a mistake that he'll regret for the rest of his life. The other one just doesn't look pretty at all, but the video I saw cuts away before the shot and there seems to be a struggle right before that so it's difficult to make a call there one way or the other.

But it goes beyond that - no knock warrants served on the wrong addresses, flashbangs tossed into cribs... those have impacted more than just black people and ought to generate real conversations when police don't do anything more than just say "sorry" when those types of mistakes happen. They need to be transparent about the fact that they screwed up, identify openly how the problem happened and then work to correct the issue openly top ensure public trust. Because otherwise, with zero accountability, they do become that tyrannical government the 2A was written for.

Similarly, communities need to own up to the fact that some of these "innocents" had it coming and were hardly role models to embrace as model citizens. Until they acknowledge that they need to follow the same laws as everyone else and work hard at enforcing that within their communities by working with LEOs to get rid of the bad actors without viewing such behavior as snitching, the issue will similarly not resolve itself.

[choprzrul]

Rainbows and unicorns viewed through my rose colored glasses......I envision the ideal law enforcement structure like this:

1. Current LE perform criminal investigations and traffic duties. Traffic cops are unarmed and do most things using combined radar and video cameras.....minimal if any direct contact with citizens.

2. Armed law abiding citizens provide security for themselves, those around them, and their neighbors.

3. If things get beyond where armed citizens can handle it, have a quick reaction force within the National Guard.

This will cover immediate personal security, criminal investigations, riots/active shooters, and traffic. Keep in mind, the armed citizen should be available if called upon to assist at any time.

[Blade Gunner]

The same time it happens against other races?... What does "Black Males" (even in the context of "some") have to do with it?

If it happens to anyone, it constitutes tyranny. Race is not the issue, the media and politicians have made it so in the current state of crisis (the second rule of politics, never let a good crisis go to waste). Pitting one group against another is a classic case of political elitism, and it's so easy to fall into the trap. Some of the worst gun laws in Cali where passed while Reagan was Governor and the NRA supported the these laws to rein in the Black Panthers..

[EspoMan]

Although they should have access to rifles and shotguns, I am not in favor of the police having much more than that in the realm of military arms.

A response to the incident in Dallas should have used the National Guard, not police.

And I thought the libtards were "tards."

[gruntinhusaybah]

I do not in anyway condone the assassination of police officers. However if you consider some (not all) of the lethal force used against some (but not all) on some black males, at what point in time do the actions become the actions of a tyrannical government. The exact circumstances the second amendment was written for.

Which incedents are you referring to?

Same for Garner in New York being arrested and dying over selling loose cigarettes. That should have been an infraction at most, IMO and therefore a ticket and not an arrest. The real focus there should have been on the injustice of the law itself.

No. He didn't die for selling loose cigs. He died for fighting cops. Full stop.

His arrest would have happened with no issues had he not fought the police, but he decided to fight cops, and his asthmatic, bloated heart gave out.

He was outside a convenience store, where cigarettes are sold, stealing business from a legitimate business. Just like most police use of force incedents, had the perpetrator not fought, it would have happened with no drama.

If you want the laws changed, lobby representatives.

[roostersgt]

Rainbows and unicorns viewed through my rose colored glasses......I envision the ideal law enforcement structure like this:

1. Current LE perform criminal investigations and traffic duties. Traffic cops are unarmed and do most things using combined radar and video cameras.....minimal if any direct contact with citizens.

2. Armed law abiding citizens provide security for themselves, those around them, and their neighbors.

3. If things get beyond where armed citizens can handle it, have a quick reaction force within the National Guard.

This will cover immediate personal security, criminal investigations, riots/active shooters, and traffic. Keep in mind, the armed citizen should be available if called upon to assist at any time.

What freaking world do you live in? Your ideas are so full of FUD it's not worth addressing each statement individually. Wow! You have a lot of human history and life's lessons to learn!

[LBDamned]

If it happens to anyone, it constitutes tyranny. Race is not the issue, the media and politicians have made it so in the current state of crisis (the second rule of politics, never let a good crisis go to waste). Pitting one group against another is a classic case of political elitism, and it's so easy to fall into the trap. Some of the worst gun laws in Cali where passed while Reagan was Governor and the NRA supported the these laws to rein in the Black Panthers..

If we always make it a race thing - it will always be about race.

I'm an oddball - I just don't get it.

ETA: I shouldn't have to say this - and it goes against my understanding of social awareness - but I realize some people need to relate... I grew up white protestant on a SoCal suburb street with Black, Hispanic and Korean (Dad white, Mom Korean) friends... Dated many races (almost married half Italian half Mexican) and current love to hopefully be my wife is 100% Mexican... If a black chick entered my life and we hit it off, she'd be my love... Point is RACE doesn't matter - and why the hell should it???

IMO anyone that makes social problems a racial issue - is a Racist! Period. No more BS. Society needs to stop find around with the decisive sht. Race is only an issue when you make it one.

And for the record - I think it's irresponsible and utterly pathetic that Obama and Clinton perpetuate racial division.

*I'm proud but frustrated that I managed to get that all out without a dozen expletives that I feel (CGN doesn't condone, and they are one of a few where I will honor) otherwise - it would be much more clear how angry I am about racial division.