This will send the anti cop members into a tizzy

[Trooper]

I am also against corruption of this nature.

Not sure what it has to do with the discussion at hand.

Because it is not just the police with armored vehicles. It is rich democrats being given rights that they want to take from you.

 

[steveh_131]

Because it is not just the police with armored vehicles. It is rich democrats being given rights that they want to take from you.

I am against armored vehicles for police and I am against 'rich democrats' taking away my rights.

Ok?

 

[Cameramonkey]

Because it is not just the police with armored vehicles. It is rich democrats being given rights that they want to take from you.

And the rich Republicans too... Like for instance They are exempt from the federal shutdown. They still get their money regardless. I bet this shutdown would be less likely to happen if it actually hit them in the pocketbook instead of the peons.

They also cant afford the premiums of ObamaCare so they are granted a waiver and take our tax dollars to supplement their health care costs "because they cant afford it and we dont want to lose good talent." Really Captain Obvious? What about those of us in the private sector? We cant afford it either.

I am against armored vehicles for police and I am against 'rich democrats' taking away my rights.

Ok?

Devil's advocate: Even if they are being "recycled" for $1 to transfer them from the military inventory to the police property? Even if it effectively cost the local taxpayers nothing? Or is it strictly a power thing?

What I am sick of is all these administrative alphabet soups getting their own security force with ARs and such. Why does the USDA really need ARs to do raids? IRS too. If its so dangerous that you cant go in with just clipboards or maybe sidearms, call the pros at the FBI, the local LEOs, etc. That's what they are there for... public safety. Let them clear the building and make it safe so you can do what you are supposed to do... push paper, inspect, audit, etc.

ETA: Im ok with the electrified door handles. Paparazzi are lower than lawyers and JBTs.

 

[Trooper]

I am against armored vehicles for police and I am against 'rich democrats' taking away my rights.

Ok?

What about private armies? Could I put together a "militia" with my own armored vehicles, weapons and such? Then use it to pressure you? To make you bend to my will? That has happened in the US.

The founders feared that the mob (the masses) would be as a great a threat as any despot. Or that a few would gain control of most of the property. Oligarchies do not have to be limited to government.

 

[steveh_131]

Devil's advocate: Even if they are being "recycled" for $1 to transfer them from the military inventory to the police property? Even if it effectively cost the local taxpayers nothing? Or is it strictly a power thing?

I think it should be left up to the locality that employs them.

I would vote against it in my locality, even if it was free.

What about private armies? Could I put together a "militia" with my own armored vehicles, weapons and such? Then use it to pressure you? To make you bend to my will?

'Yes', 'Yes', 'No', and 'No'.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Any edge you can give the cops in a bad situation is a good thing. This would be for very specialized missions. I think every major city should have at least one for the SWAT team. And as for free, well that is a matter of perspective. They have already been paid for. So free to the cities.

Hell Chicago cops should probably have a dozen of them.

Any edge you can give the cops in a bad situation is a good thing.

Does that include the point at which they become the sharp end of completing the transformation of the republic into an authoritarian socialist state?

This would be for very specialized missions.

That is what we have been told about every step of increased militarization which promptly morphs from 'few and specialized' into every damned time--you know, like no-knock warrants.

I think every major city should have at least one for the SWAT team.

The feds seem to think that there should be at least one for every place big enough to have a PD.

They have already been paid for. So free to the cities.

So as long as Uncle Sugar is squandering our money rather than the city or county council, then it's OK?

 

[TopDog]

Does that include the point at which they become the sharp end of completing the transformation of the republic into an authoritarian socialist state?

Oh most assuredly. I look forward to the police in jack boots playing Nazi storm troopers. Please apply purple where appropriate.

 

[rambone]

These cost half a million dollars, minimum. With accessories, up to $1.2 Million. There is nothing free about them. Why ISN'T the Pentagon selling them? Put them on the market. Auction them off. Sell them to foreign governments. Recoop some of the billions of dollars wasted on the war.

I'm not into these "free" federal gifts. That just means that American taxpayers are subsidizing military equipment being sent to local departments. How is that right? Why are taxpayers in Indiana responsible for paying for some bogus armored truck in Idaho?

These are rhetorical questions. Obviously the economics of this whole situation are appalling. The Pentagon has a long history of militarizing local police. Could they have an ulterior motive in spending $50 Billion on trucks they didn't need? It works out pretty well for the war industry, and it gives the Feds a convenient excuse to make domestic USA look more like a foreign warzone.

 

[Trooper]

Does that include the point at which they become the sharp end of completing the transformation of the republic into an authoritarian socialist state?



That is what we have been told about every step of increased militarization which promptly morphs from 'few and specialized' into every damned time--you know, like no-knock warrants.



The feds seem to think that there should be at least one for every place big enough to have a PD.



So as long as Uncle Sugar is squandering our money rather than the city or county council, then it's OK?

Let the police start the jack booted thug routine first in democrat neighborhoods. Think of the reaction if cops did house to house searches in the inner city in minority neighborhoods. Or that many minorities have more weapons and are more likely to use them than you are.

 

[2ADMNLOVER]

They are FREE so what's the harm?

Yeah your right what could possibly go wrong with every department having one of these ?

I mean , it's not like they would mount an LRAD on top and go blaring down a residential street during a G8 / G20 conference would they ? Yeah never mind that video that was posted on here showing exactly that .

I'm sure that was just another isolated incident , probably never happen again .

 

[Frank_N_Stein]

Yeah your right what could possibly go wrong with every department having one of these ?

I mean , it's not like they would mount an LRAD on top and go blaring down a residential street during a G8 / G20 conference would they ? Yeah never mind that video that was posted on here showing exactly that .

I'm sure that was just another isolated incident , probably never happen again .

Who were they directing the LRAD toward? I haven't seen the video.

 

[jbombelli]

You guys can get your own armored trucks, you know. They're not that hard to get if you look around a little bit.

If *I* can buy an armored vehicle, I don't have a problem with the police having an armored vehicle.

 

[2ADMNLOVER]

Who were they directing the LRAD toward? I haven't seen the video.

It was about 2-3 years ago in Philadelphia , some college kids were protesting and got the usual treatment .

For some reason the officers decided to roll down a nearby residential street with the thing blasting away . In the video you didn't see folks in the street protesting .

It only looked like the folks that lived there , not a bunch of kids in bandannas and back packs in the street being hooligans .