Press freedom? Police target media, arrest and teargas reporters at Ferguson protests - Polidicks

[QUOTE=SexualShark;45695261]by the logic of some people in this thread, if the military no longer wanted/needed these, the police should be able to have them. [img]http://www.militaryimages.net/photopost/data/501/M1A2-with-TUSK.jpg[/img][/QUOTE] FUCK YEAH I'd steal that motherfucker in a heartbeat.

First you fight for people to get these stupid powerful weapons and then you get mad at the police being able to be more powerful than these weapons the people get.

[QUOTE=Sailor Mars;45695824]Because you instill the mentality that there's something they need to be protected from. You give a guy an assault rifle and an armored vehicle and he's gonna assume he needs to use it.[/QUOTE] There's been 28 police deaths this year, they should be protected any way they can be.

[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;45699730]There's been 28 police deaths this year, they should be protected any way they can be.[/QUOTE] Most officers don't die in a riot situation, I doubt outfitting them with MRAPS or anything designed to take a massive beating is going to have any significant improvement with "keeping them save" rule of diminishing returns and all. I think Sailor Mars sums it up very well. [QUOTE=Sailor Mars;45695933]That's totally a stupid nit-pick. The vehicle isn't even relevant. The question is at what point are we instilling too much into police officers this idea that they're part of a military operation in a "combat zone" and not something unfolding into their own community? It's important because communities aren't like countries you can invade. The US leaves countries after invading them all the time and they don't have to deal with the aftermath. Not a single US soldier has to deal with the structural consequences of the Iraq war. Nothing about the US military is structurally different after that. Not the same with communities. You kill a single kid, you destroy the relations between the police and the people and your job starts to change. Suddenly the community starts to work against you and every interaction is loaded with paranoia so now you feel like you need stuff to protect yourself from the community you police and the interactions become impersonal and violent.[/QUOTE] The police shouldn't have IED-resistant vehicles because they don't need them: it's because they should never COUNT on needing them; no police force should go "Hey, you know what if we have a riot, we should be fully equip to handle the whole population resisting". There was a book I read a few years ago that goes over this (It's called Little Brother, it's free online IIRC), and I think especially for the future in the US it holds a ton of really valid points, that the US is just going to get more controlling of it's population in situations like these.

[QUOTE=glitchvid;45699882]Most officers don't die in a riot situation, I doubt outfitting them with MRAPS or anything designed to take a massive beating is going to have any significant improvement with "keeping them save" rule of diminishing returns and all. I think Sailor Mars sums it up very well. The police shouldn't have IED-resistant vehicles because they don't need them: it's because they should never COUNT on needing them; no police force should go "Hey, you know what if we have a riot, we should be fully equip to handle the whole population resisting". There was a book I read a few years ago that goes over this (It's called Little Brother, it's free online IIRC), and I think especially for the future in the US it holds a ton of really valid points, that the US is just going to get more controlling of it's population in situations like these.[/QUOTE] So they can either, get cheap surplus armored cars from the military, or order much more expensive armor car just because it scares people that they were once used in a battleground. With that stupid ass logic, GPS, humvees, littlebirds, or kevlar vests shouldnt be used by the police/public because they were originally used for the military. Just because the MRAP is bomb proof doesnt mean its still just an armored transport.

[QUOTE=codemaster85;45700186]So they can either, get cheap surplus armored cars from the military, or order much more expensive armor car just because it scares people that they were once used in a battleground. With that stupid ass logic, GPS, humvees, littlebirds, or kevlar vests shouldnt be used by the police/public because they were originally used for the military. Just because the MRAP is bomb proof doesnt mean its still just an armored transport.[/QUOTE] Nice false dichotomy. Stop acting like we don't have a surplus of other armored vehicles, because we do: or if we didn't, we could just sell them to another country (It's not liken no one is buying) and use that to pay for police oriented work. Furthermore, not all of what they get is "just surplus" most of those trucks look brand new, police get funding and access to that hardware often regardless of it being surplus. I'm not saying they shouldn't BE protected, I'm saying they should not EXPECT to need it, the more "military seeming" equipment you give to police, the more power they have, feel they have, and will abuse: just take a look at this incident and incidents from around the world.

[QUOTE=deadoon;45695291]Note the word variants. And why do you want police to use lower quality equipment anyways? If they can allot the funds for the maintenance of one, why should they not use one?[/QUOTE] I don't know, maybe because we're in the middle of a [I]fucking recession[/I] and people don't feel like spending anymore on taxes for a local police force to squander it on a big scary looking vehicle; which realistically provides no additional protection compared to the armored vehicles they already have?

[QUOTE=AlbertWesker;45700597]I don't know, maybe because we're in the middle of a [I]fucking recession[/I] and people don't feel like spending anymore on taxes for a local police force to squander it on a big scary looking vehicle; which realistically provides no additional protection compared to the armored vehicles they already have?[/QUOTE] That first part is a pretty terrible reason, the great recession is virtually over (or totally over by some accounts), so we're not really in the middle of a recession. Besides, If the government actually needed them then they would just get them, austerity measures don't really carry any weight when it comes to preventing riots.

[QUOTE=ilikecorn;45700227]Or.. or.. they could stop taking deliveries of MRAP's because they are humongous money pits and are fucking useless for anything that isn't cross country travel. It makes no sense other than "oh cool, we got an intimidating vehicle". The military is actively getting rid of them because now that we're not getting fucked up every day, we see all of the downsides the MRAP has. We can't just scrap them because then some congressman will get pissed, so we'll sell them to the police departments, who haven't a fucking clue what they're getting themselves into.[/QUOTE] Implying they would be used daily as police cars or traveling/being used constantly or in an environment like a desert thats wears on vehicles massively. Its a special operation vehicle meaning its used for crowd control or tatical operations. Its not a damn squad car thats going to see tons of milage. If no other nation wants to buy them and they are sitting in a garage with literally no use, why not give it for special operations. As long as you take care of it in an garage, I doubt, even with some of its problems, it would wear down as much with maybe 100-300 miles of use a year in an normal climate.

[QUOTE=ilikecorn;45701078]Lol... It's like you don't understand the fact that even if it's going completely unused it still is going to need more maintenance than other tactical vehicles.[/QUOTE] All i see is MRAPs having trouble with rough and unpaved roads that are uphill and low hanging electrical lines in 3rd world urban areas due to rolling over and hitting them with the gunner position. i would love to see any modern car fall apart for no reason in an climate controlled garage if its at least started every other month.

Is it really important with what vehicles the cops are running over reporters and protesters?

[QUOTE=glitchvid;45699882] no police force should go "Hey, you know what if we have a riot, we should be fully equip to handle the whole population resisting".[/QUOTE] Why not? Should they just step down and watch the city burn? Just evacuate the FD and EMS because it's unsafe for them to operate, and just abandon the city and everyone left inside to their fate? Part of the Police' job is to maintain order, and sometimes you have to be a bit heavy-handed to do so, like in a riot situation. Stepping back and going "oh they'll tucker themselves out" is not how you end a riot, that's how everything that isn't bolted down is stolen and buildings burn to the ground.

i cant believe there's people here who think cops need a fucking mrap the 19 year old marine who's about to get his leg blown off by an ied needs it

[QUOTE=Rofl_copter;45703066]i cant believe there's people here who think cops need a fucking mrap the 19 year old marine who's about to get his leg blown off by an ied needs it[/QUOTE] The military has more mraps than they need now due to mass purchasing a vehicle based on a standard chassis that was able to carry people and take a mine. These vehicles didn't exist 10 years ago and we have thousands of them now, with the wars winding down, there are less and less needed in the field (and many which never even got shipped out due to various issues). Likely in the next set of APC's and Humvee-like vehicles will introduce the features of an mrap and will be more well designed.

[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;45702796]Why not? Should they just step down and watch the city burn? Just evacuate the FD and EMS because it's unsafe for them to operate, and just abandon the city and everyone left inside to their fate? Part of the Police' job is to maintain order, and sometimes you have to be a bit heavy-handed to do so, like in a riot situation. Stepping back and going "oh they'll tucker themselves out" is not how you end a riot, that's how everything that isn't bolted down is stolen and buildings burn to the ground.[/QUOTE] What is a loaded question, for 500. How do you handle riots? I don't know how to handle them, I do know it's not with teargas, assault rifles, and explosive-resistant vehicles.

[QUOTE=glitchvid;45704791]What is a loaded question, for 500. How do you handle riots? I don't know how to handle them, I do know it's not with teargas, assault rifles, and explosive-resistant vehicles.[/QUOTE] They're not assault rifles. They're sporting rifles.

[QUOTE=Code3Response;45704912]They're not assault rifles. They're sporting rifles.[/QUOTE] Most of the pictures show police officers equip with M16s, M4s, or another AR platform rifle. Regardless of how we're going to define these weapons, they are NOT what you use to quell riots. if I lived in Ferguson right now I'd be out protesting simply because of the massive overkill response to protests (Teargas) and how they're treating media, not just because "oh no they have military weapons", I personally like weapons, I like owning weapons; but I don't think police should have them simply "because they're surplus!", since there's no other reason to have them.

[QUOTE=glitchvid;45704941]Most of the pictures show police officers equip with M16s, M4s, or another AR platform rifle. Regardless of how we're going to define these weapons, they are NOT what you use to quell riots. if I lived in Ferguson right now I'd be out protesting simply because of the massive overkill response to protests (Teargas) and how they're treating media, not just because "oh no they have military weapons", I personally like weapons, I like owning weapons; but I don't think police should have them simply "because they're surplus!", since there's no other reason to have them.[/QUOTE] So they cannot use a light-weight high velocity rifles for cheap? Seriously, they do not want to have another North Hollywood shootout where they needed to quickly purchase ar-15s from a local dealer in an emergency.

[QUOTE=deadoon;45704957]So they cannot use a light-weight high velocity rifles for cheap? Seriously, they do not want to have another North Hollywood shootout where they needed to quickly purchase ar-15s from a local dealer in an emergency.[/QUOTE] Yes they can, just not one for every officer and his dog; it's perfectly fine if they have them available (I'd rather the FBI or another department handle it, instead of the Police) for cases when they need them. This riot is not a situation where they need them, a simple sidearm or shotgun would suffice most situations encountered in this riot right now. You're also forgetting them getting extremely hard to maintain IED resistant vehicles for simple because "why not"; they're NEVER going to run into a situation they actually need them and it only perpetuates the "we have control over you" attitude that these situations bring on officers. Really, why should a POLICE force be completely outfitted with M16s, M4s, and IED resistant vehicles? Aside from the speculative "It's cheap/surplus" side, there is NO reason I can see for them having any use for it unless there's a full scale shootout (in which case, sure, bring out the big guns, not to a fucking riot).

[QUOTE=glitchvid;45704984]Yes they can, just not one for every officer and his dog; it's perfectly fine if they have them available (I'd rather the FBI or another department handle it, instead of the Police) for cases when they need them. This riot is not a situation where they need them, a simple sidearm or shotgun would suffice most situations encountered in this riot right now. You're also forgetting them getting extremely hard to maintain IED resistant vehicles for simple because "why not"; they're NEVER going to run into a situation they actually need them and it only perpetuates the "we have control over you" attitude that these situations bring on officers. Really, why should a POLICE force be completely outfitted with M16s, M4s, and IED resistant vehicles? Aside from the speculative "It's cheap/surplus" side, there is NO reason I can see for them having any use for it unless there's a full scale shootout (in which case, sure, bring out the big guns, not to a fucking riot).[/QUOTE] Seriously, you want to have to call the FBI and wait for them to arrive, when they could just as easily have the equipment available to them? If they can afford the new equipment maintenance costs(which is expensive), why limit their use to what they can only buy new? And if they can buy these new, why prevent them from doing so?

[QUOTE=deadoon;45704998]Seriously, you want to have to call the FBI and wait for them to arrive, when they could just as easily have the equipment available to them? If they can afford the new equipment maintenance costs(which is expensive), why limit their use to what they can only buy new? And if they can buy these new, why prevent them from doing so?[/QUOTE] Never said buying new, there are plenty of second hand sidearms and non-explosive-resistant vehicles that come from the military, that or as I said before; they could just sell them out and buy new cheaper to maintain vehicles. I also never said not having any equipment, I said having enough to deal with shootouts, giving almost every cop on the force their own AR platform is WAY overkill though, especially for only a riot. Also, why limit their use? [QUOTE=glitchvid;45704984]This riot is not a situation where they need them, a simple sidearm or shotgun would suffice most situations encountered in this riot right now. [/QUOTE] [QUOTE=glitchvid;45704984]it only perpetuates the "we have control over you" attitude that these situations bring on officers.[/quote] [QUOTE=Sailor Mars;45695933] It's important because communities aren't like countries you can invade. The US leaves countries after invading them all the time and they don't have to deal with the aftermath. Not a single US soldier has to deal with the structural consequences of the Iraq war. Nothing about the US military is structurally different after that. Not the same with communities. You kill a single kid, you destroy the relations between the police and the people and your job starts to change. Suddenly the community starts to work against you and every interaction is loaded with paranoia so now you feel like you need stuff to protect yourself from the community you police and the interactions become impersonal and violent.[/QUOTE] And you still have yet to answer [QUOTE=glitchvid;45704984] Really, why should a POLICE force be completely outfitted with M16s, M4s, and IED resistant vehicles? Aside from the speculative "It's cheap/surplus" side, there is NO reason I can see for them having any use for it unless there's a full scale shootout (in which case, sure, bring out the big guns, not to a fucking riot).[/QUOTE] Your logic seems to be if they have a large shootout, which again: having a number of AR platforms available is perfectly fine IF needed, if it's that large of a shootout FBI or other units can be brought on the scene: NOT police. My logic is that police should not just HAVE heavy armor and lots of ARs ready to throw into an already tense situation, only enough that if there is a legitimate shootout they can hold their own until properly trained units can be on the scene.

Giving the FBI control over it would only work if the FBI was an actual police service with departments all over the country.

[QUOTE=ilikecorn;45705024]I do believe the police should have the ability to conduct riot control. But you know what I'd rather they spend money on, rather than they spend a fuckton of money on an MRAP over the course of it's operational lifetime, i'd rather they hire more cops, actually walk the beat and become a part of the community, and stop hiding in their cars. Doing something like this would not only improve community relations, but would also make it easier for the police to do their jobs, and would reduce incidents of police brutality as well; as you're less likely to beat the fuck out of someone who you know properly. You know what's better than having a riot section of your police? Not needing a riot section for your police.[/QUOTE] So back to the don't need it so don't have it? Police thought that they didn't need high velocity rifles(too bulky and unwieldy for close quarters, especially for swat in a house), then North Hollywood happened and they were caught with their pants down. He is not arguing just against the MRAP, but also using ex-military M16 and M4 rifles, which I am referring to mostly.

[QUOTE=deadoon;45705059]So back to the don't need it so don't have it? Police thought that they didn't need high velocity rifles(too bulky and unwieldy for close quarters, especially for swat in a house), then North Hollywood happened and they were caught with their pants down. He is not arguing just against the MRAP, but also using ex-military M16 and M4 rifles, which I am referring to mostly.[/QUOTE] I'm against using them in riot situations. I'm against them being ordered in bulk. I'm not against police being able to handle shootouts, but they are NOT a trained military force and should NOT be relied on as such.

[QUOTE=ilikecorn;45705024]But you know what I'd rather they spend money on, rather than they spend a fuckton of money on an MRAP over the course of it's operational lifetime, i'd rather they hire more cops, actually walk the beat and become a part of the community, and stop hiding in their cars. Doing something like this would not only improve community relations, but would also make it easier for the police to do their jobs, and would reduce incidents of police brutality as well; as you're less likely to beat the fuck out of someone who you know properly.[/QUOTE] You know what else it would do? Dramatically increase response times, because responding on foot takes 20x as long as responding in a car. And if it's one thing we're not great at already, it's response time. [QUOTE=ilikecorn;45705024]Why do you think the stories of police beating the shit out of people come out of the cities. Because in small towns the police actually walk around, and are part of the community. They walk down the main street and say hello, and are approachable. In a city you're lucky to see a cop outside of his car, unless he's arresting someone.[/QUOTE] I live in a small town and I've only seen a cop on foot once or twice (not counting times where the car was parked nearby). In fact when I went to NYC, I saw many officers on foot, nearly as many as in vehicles. Also, you're not going to get the 'personal' effect in a city simply due to the sheer number of people. Iirc there's literally a 'hard cap' on how many people the human brain can keep even loose relations with at one time.

[QUOTE=ilikecorn;45705092]Because you're totally going to take their cars away and make them walk everywhere..[/QUOTE]You've been saying they need to stop using their cars for everything and start walking the streets again. Even if their car is only a couple of blocks away, that is a dramatic, dangerous, stupid increase to response time.

[QUOTE=ilikecorn;45705092]Because you're totally going to take their cars away and make them walk everywhere..[/QUOTE] How else will you "walk the beat"? Not in a car I assume...

[QUOTE=glitchvid;45705039]Never said buying new, there are plenty of second hand sidearms and non-explosive-resistant vehicles that come from the military, that or as I said before; they could just sell them out and buy new cheaper to maintain vehicles. I also never said not having any equipment, I said having enough to deal with shootouts, giving almost every cop on the force their own AR platform is WAY overkill though, especially for only a riot. Also, why limit their use? And you still have yet to answer Your logic seems to be if they have a large shootout, which again: having a number of AR platforms available is perfectly fine IF needed, if it's that large of a shootout FBI or other units can be brought on the scene: NOT police. My logic is that police should not just HAVE heavy armor and lots of ARs ready to throw into an already tense situation, only enough that if there is a legitimate shootout they can hold their own until properly trained units can be on the scene.[/QUOTE] So you want to gimp the police force to using worse equipment than civilians? You can go out and buy the very same armor they are using online(except for Connecticut I think), the vehicles are not exactly restricted either, the manufacturers just don't sell to normal citizens usually. The FBI are a federal institution, designed for larger scale crimes than local incidents, leaving them as the heavier swat option further makes them a required local presence.(they are not everywhere you know) The Ar platform is cheap, lightweight, and accurate, if they need to shoot at something farther or reliably stand someone down from a distance, they have both the range and the power to do so. A shotgun is limited to close range and does not have the AP capability an AR does. Having your first responder able to deal with a wider variety of situation is always better in my opinion. Yes a shotgun would be better in the situation, but think for a moment, how many more situations would a rifle be better in? The only things that a Shotgun has is less than lethal loads(which are in specific shotguns mind you and still can do a whole hell of a lot of damage) and overall wide spread damage at range. A better less lethal weapon would be a pepper ball gun. AKA a paintball gun with special shots. Limited bruising, limited physical damage, lighter weight and semi/fully automatic.

[QUOTE=ilikecorn;45705103]So response times are already high as fuck, so hiring more police to cover more beats is a bad idea? God forbid they'd have to walk around a bit and get to know the community.[/QUOTE]God damn you keep droning on about how "Ohh god the fucking community! They have to be part of the community! They're not part of the community! Someone get Dan Harmon involved so they can be in the fucking community!" That's a crap answer. That doesn't do as much as you think because much of the problem stem from issues outside the control of the police, that they have next to nothing to do with. They influenced by these same problems just as the communities are. And in many places, trying to get involved in the community is an actively dangerous thing. In pretty much every urban center, there are neighborhoods and areas they are not only warned to stay away from, but actively told not to go to unless absolutely necessary and with back up because of how exceptionally dangerous it is for them, because idiots will see it as an opportunity to drop a cop. How the hell do you integrate in to that? And quite acting like the police are supposed to be [I]just[/I] civilians. They haven't been that longer than anyone has currently been alive. They are a distinct body that is ultimately supposed to have more power on average than civilians, its basically inherent to them even being able to carry out their intended role. They cannot be a force of policing without having powers the ordinary civilian lacks. They are restricted in just how far they can take them, but they still have them. I'm not sure where your ideas of what the police are or how they are supposed to function came from, but they are delusional. They haven't existed even close to that for ages, and as it happens, that's overall been a good thing for people. I've bit my tongue enough, this crap has gotten annoying.

[QUOTE=ilikecorn;45705121]The vehicles are highly restricted, if you would have read my 5 other posts on the matter: According to the ATF: any vehicle that is classified as "armored" must have 80% of it's armors surface rendered inoperable by drilling holes in said armored surface, that way the police can kill you easily if you ever bother driving the damn thing anywhere but your own property. The AR platform, while common, isn't an M4 or M16, which the police can get simply by asking. Meanwhile a civilian can't acquire an M4 or M16 without paying a massive price and waiting 6-12 months for the ATF to decide whether or not they are worthy of owning a select fire weapon, and then they get to fork over the 10k+ for the weapon itself. An M4 would actually require 2 tax stamps, as it's barrel length is around 14.5 inches, so that's another 6-12 months of waiting.[/QUOTE] Can you please cite where an armored car is illegal for personal ownership, as I have found nothing saying that. and looking up armored car 80% finds GTA stuff mostly. And one Site I found said only California require permission to drive one publicly. Also, I believe that police should be able to purchase ordinance that they are legally allowed to purchase. It is kind of hard to imagine a swat team without a MP5 or similar weapon.