Local Law Enforcement Using Military Equipment Questioned

[Bear44]

To be fair, that pic really is just an SUV with some extra plating... nothing you as an average citizen couldn't whip up perfectly legally in your garage.

Just because it looks military, doesn't make it so. After all, that's what we're fighting the gun control industry about right now isn't it?

There is a line that is constantly being drawn between how 'military' the police should be. Post 9/11 that line has shifted to the point where (supposedly) the NYPD has surface-to-air missiles at their disposal. To me that's probably too far, but you can certainly debate it.

Certainly protective vehicles and gear, select-fire firearms, etc. all fit well within the scope of police activities. However I don't think that they should be limited to police only.

If police are allowed a certain type of equipment, there is no reason that non-LE citizens should be denied that same piece of equipment. After all, police are simply regular citizens that we authorize to act on our behalf by granting them 'police powers'.

They are citizens who have accepted extra duties, extra responsibilities and restrictions on their behavior, but that does not mean they have constitutional rights that are any different than other citizens.

A police officers ability to have any type of weapon is based on their Second Amendment rights as a citizen, not on their additional duties as a police officer.

I would say that the if LE has the ability to have weapons that the average civilian can not (something I am not aware of, BTW) all it means is that their 2nd Amendment rights are simply less infringed upon than ours have been.

 

[chucklenut]

I fully intended to get into it. They were the ones that made the statement that it was debatable, but didn't want to "get into it".

is that when you volunteered that blanket generalized opinion about law enforcement? the same one that justifies wasteful spending on a presumed need (like their life is somehow more important than the average tax payers). and then to add a further bellicose tone, you baited the opposition by referencing the fact that there is actually a dissenting opinion regarding your claim

you have no intention of debating, you have your mind clearly made up and just wanna argue for the sake for arguing it looks like (am i doing that, or is there room for me to be swayed in this debate)

ill ask, what the hell does a local police department need an armored vehicle for? clearly to better serve the citizens with, right? (cause they aint getting no ****ing cat out of a tree with a armored car)

 

[Inbonuscivis]

They need em to protect the rest of us from all those Right Wing Gun Nuts....

 

[spavent]

I'm not worried about full auto guns in cops hands, but overwhelming firepower becomes similar to military occupation when civilians are not afforded similar capability by the law. It's not that I don't want them to have the best tools to fight criminals, but I question the disparity we have compared to them, not to mention that most of it will never be used so I question what the intended purpose is really.

Agreed here! This at a time when many of those same LEO's and politicians that thing this is GREAT would like to see you with a 10rd mag.

 

[spavent]

LOL! What tanks? Nobody said anything about tanks.

Armored Personal Carries Which even though they get them for free there are upkeep, training, and lots of other tax payer dollars that go into having these vehicles deployed. By there own admission in the article they don't use them? I can remember being in NYC post 911 and have officers on street corners with sub machine guns. As an american I just don't like it.

 

[Bear44]

is that when you volunteered that blanket generalized opinion about law enforcement? the same one that justifies wasteful spending on a presumed need (like their life is somehow more important than the average tax payers). and then to add a further bellicose tone, you baited the opposition by referencing the fact that there is actually a dissenting opinion regarding your claim

you have no intention of debating, you have your mind clearly made up and just wanna argue for the sake for arguing it looks like (am i doing that, or is there room for me to be swayed in this debate)

ill ask, what the hell does a local police department need an armored vehicle for? clearly to better serve the citizens with, right? (cause they aint getting no ****ing cat out of a tree with a armored car)

Obviously you don't understand the roll of law enforcement. It's the fire department that rescues cats. LOL!

 

[Bear44]

Yeah, I guess you guys are right. Let's keep LE from being able to stay alive on the job because we are so fearful of anyone that might have more guns than we do. It is often said that cops are under paid and under appreciated. This thread sure shows the under appreciated part.

175 officers in the US were killed in the line of duty in 2011.

 

[legalizefreedom1776]

Yeah, I guess you guys are right. Let's keep LE from being able to stay alive on the job because we are so fearful of anyone that might have more guns than we do. It is often said that cops are under paid and under appreciated. This thread sure shows the under appreciated part.

175 officers in the US were killed in the line of duty in 2011.

There have been 127 fatalities associated with credible excessive force allegations within 2010, which means approximately 8.1% of reported excessive force cases involved fatalities. Of these excessive force fatalities, 91 were caused by firearms, 19 were caused by physical force, 11 by taser, and 6 by other causes.
*Note: fatalities listed are only those involved in cases where excessive force or unnecessary force was reported. This does not include all fatalities related to police use of force.

cato institute

 

[KenM]

This comment is comming from the mouth of a 20 cop. I am of the mindset if can afford to purchase a weapon you should be able to do so and legally possess it as long as you are not crazy or a felon. I have "stormed" a house during an active shooter incident in which a man inside opened fire on family members.Two folks died during that incident...Not by officers hands. I would have not felt we could enter such a situation if we had not had our AR15s and and our extended tubed shotguns. You as a citizen should be able to feel the same level of comfort if you are victimized by a person that is intending to do you harm in such a violent attack.

Armoured vehicles are a must to protect officers in certain situations....Meth labs...Drug houses ect. They should not be used without ptoper thought in any situation. Every situation an officer encounters is regulated by the constitution. I stress this to the officers under my command.

In the case of officers comming to disarm you when things go bad...Not gonna happen. It will be the hired guns already here on this continent.

 

[chucklenut]

Obviously you don't understand the roll of law enforcement. It's the fire department that rescues cats. LOL!

That's right, law enforcement writes tickets, I forgot about that