America's police are looking more and more like the military; program transfers military-grade weapo - Polidicks

[QUOTE=GunFox;42458331]Sheriff's departments are usually the smaller one when compared to city cops. City police have a much higher density of tax payers to fund them and also require more police. County departments (sheriffs) are usually poorly funded because their jurisdictions mostly fall into rural areas with low population densities (although they do maintain jurisdiction in cities that fall into the county, there is little reason for them to patrol the cities due to the presence of city police.) City police, as a result of superior funding, are often also better trained and have more stringent job requirements than their deputy counterparts. (Though not always) The only law enforcement agencies that might be more local than sheriff's deputies are University police. That said, the University police are often actually relatively well funded and are functionally identical to city police, but focus on campus calls.[/QUOTE] I just prefer that the resources such as this would vo to the more overreaching group rather than something like a specific city, so not even smaller in actual size but smaller in the area that is placed under their control. The county having the MRAP to use for those in the county is better, in my opinion, than a specific city or something having it and sending it off. Just seems a bit better to me.

[QUOTE=Swilly;42456239]Indeed, a lot of this is to avoid the death of comrades and friends.[/QUOTE] Uh, no, its to fill the pockets of military contractors and the people who manufacture this shit. God you are ignorant.

I'm going to be frank; this looks like a case of fighting fire with fire. I live in upstate NY and the last time the police had to use their firearms, it was when they shot an innocent civillian by accident. More firepower= more casualties.

[QUOTE=Swilly;42455527]Those are probably in one of the many military scrap yards or being used by a third world nation.[/QUOTE] They're just parked in a big parking lot in a field somewhere. [QUOTE=Wizards Court;42456448]i'm pretty sure soldiers in a lot of nations have less gear than these cops lol.[/QUOTE] Yeah, in Africa [QUOTE=wraithcat;42456665]Special responses forces usually have similar amounts of gear. The main differences are in the gear of riot police (which varies a lot) and standard beat cops which ranges from relatively well decked out to not even carrying firearms.[/QUOTE] Riot Police don't even use the same gear as SWAT Teams. Riot Police usually use more armour and shield to protect against blunt and bladed weapon attacks, not bullets. [QUOTE=GunFox;42458331]The only law enforcement agencies that might be more local than sheriff's deputies are University police. That said, the University police are often actually relatively well funded and are functionally identical to city police, but focus on campus calls.[/QUOTE] You're forgetting town police, who even less funded than the Uni / Sheriffs are. My town relies on the state police to provide support for anything that requires more than 2 officers to deal with.

How is this even in the slightest news? Its an opinion article.

I think people are overreacting-- do you truly believe a police officer will pull someone over and bring a semi-automatic weapon in full body armor threatening you out to get your ass out of the car before they shoot you?

[QUOTE=Judas;42455633]fuck cops[/QUOTE] Was someone arrested for "Going the same speed as everyone else"? Anyways, I think it's perfectly fine for them to have it when they need it. I highly doubt cops are going to start driving around in tanks.

[QUOTE=a203xi;42458622]Uh, no, its to fill the pockets of military contractors and the people who manufacture this shit. God you are ignorant.[/QUOTE] Assuming you're serious: do you even know what contractors are?

[QUOTE=Map in a box;42459047]I think people are overreacting-- do you truly believe a police officer will pull someone over and bring a semi-automatic weapon in full body armor threatening you out to get your ass out of the car before they shoot you?[/QUOTE] What matters is if they [i]wanted[/i] to they have the means to do so readily at their disposable

If anything strikes as militarisation it's not the armour itself, it's the colour of it. As far as I can tell the standard uniform of the Boston Police is dark navy blue, so it seems wierd that the SWAT teams have a khaki uniform, which is normally associated with the military. The UK has similarly armed and armoured police in the form of Specialist Firearms Officers, but they wear black and navy blue uniforms which (and it must just be me) look less military and more police like, simply because of the colours I associate with both of them. [thumb]http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/04/27/article-2136289-12CD080E000005DC-432_634x416.jpg[/thumb]

[QUOTE=Judas;42455633]fuck cops[/QUOTE] Oh perfect. I love it when people say this. It allows me to post this: [quote] [B]Fuck The Police *[/B] *Except if are ever rendered unconscious and the the police have to call for medical assistance. Except if any of your friends or family members are murdered or raped and the crime requires investigation. Except if an armed madman is holding your child hostage and a police sniper takes him out. Except if someone breaks into your house and destroys its. Except if someone fleas the scene of an auto-accident that leaves you paralyzed. Except if the police return your missing daughter. You know, fuck the police.... Until you need us. [/quote]

[QUOTE=SgtCr4zyGunz;42459366]What matters is if they [i]wanted[/i] to they have the means to do so readily at their disposable[/QUOTE] Why do you always assume the police are all out to get us? Police are still citizens, they're not some malevolent force bent on conquering America.

you can dislike the way police act and still rely on them you know [editline]8th October 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=plunger435;42459520]Why do you always assume the police are all out to get us? Police are still citizens, they're not some malevolent force bent on conquering America.[/QUOTE] the only one making assumptions here is you. the police are an organization that are given the power to enforce law. that isn't something to be taken lightly. such an abusable position requires consistent attention and care by the people for whom the police maintain order for. you don't give them the benefit of the doubt ever.

This thread seems to have turned in to a debate between 'civilians have access to higher power weaponry than cops, so cops should have access to it too' and the opposing viewpoint that they shouldn't because that's scary. The one and only mention of gun control was against it. Hello from Australia, this shit doesn't really happen here. Additionally, I'm not too scared that a cop is going to show up at my house and shoot me with an AK that he has and I don't either.

I don't disagree with giving them the equipment, especially since as Areolop pointed out it's not like the police are going to be doing traffic stops in tanks. What I do disagree with is the attitude of militarization, because they're [I]not[/I] the military, they're enforcing the law. For them to look and act military sends the wrong message about them.

[QUOTE=Arid;42455219]I think i'd just give up if the Roman army came busting down my door[/QUOTE] I'd shit myself if it was Hannibal with war elephants instead.

[QUOTE=Mr. Magoolachub;42459968]This thread seems to have turned in to a debate between 'civilians have access to higher power weaponry than cops, so cops should have access to it too' and the opposing viewpoint that they shouldn't because that's scary. The one and only mention of gun control was against it. Hello from Australia, this shit doesn't really happen here. Additionally, I'm not too scared that a cop is going to show up at my house and shoot me with an AK that he has and I don't either.[/QUOTE] Initiating a debate for gun control here can be considered political suicide if there is no major cause for it. The latter part is purely anecdotal, and is not really able to be made relevant due to you do not have the current gun culture that the united states does.

[QUOTE=Swilly;42455170]And in many ways, most cops are still under powered compared to the sheer volume of weapons that can be found within private citizen hands. Half of the tactics used by SWAT are because they're trying to protect their own lives during a raid. Up until the 1990s, most police forces didn't even have the semi-automatic rifles or body protection that they do now. Most still don't, the consistent fear of the 'militarization' is merely them picking up equipment that's run its shelf life and is usually severe downgrades to current standards. Its riot and swat gear being grabbed. The regular police officer doesn't wear half the shit people freak out about because its bulky and gets in the way.[/QUOTE] An example would be like after the 1998 shooting at the Capitol, that's when they switched from 9mm Hydro shock rounds to the .40 S&W, they needed a round that would stop the shooter, not just go straight through him/her. Or maybe when the re chambered the mp5 because 9mm couldn't punch through body armor.

[QUOTE=deadoon;42460143]Initiating a debate for gun control here can be considered political suicide if there is no major cause for it. The latter part is purely anecdotal, and is not really able to be made relevant due to you do not have the current gun culture that the united states does.[/QUOTE] I in no way understand your usage of the term political suicide. I am also quite aware that what I typed was an anecdote, thank you for pointing out the obvious.

[QUOTE=Mr. Magoolachub;42460187]I in no way understand your usage of the term political suicide. I am also quite aware that what I typed was an anecdote, thank you for pointing out the obvious.[/QUOTE] Political suicide means an action that would destroy your political career and would alienate your voting base. You would unlikely be able to re-elected again. The reason I had pointed out your anecdote is because of it's irrelevance.

[QUOTE=Camundongo;42459461]If anything strikes as militarisation it's not the armour itself, it's the colour of it. As far as I can tell the standard uniform of the Boston Police is dark navy blue, so it seems wierd that the SWAT teams have a khaki uniform, which is normally associated with the military. The UK has similarly armed and armoured police in the form of Specialist Firearms Officers, but they wear black and navy blue uniforms which (and it must just be me) look less military and more police like, simply because of the colours I associate with both of them. [thumb]http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/04/27/article-2136289-12CD080E000005DC-432_634x416.jpg[/thumb][/QUOTE] SWAT Team uniforms and equipment vary greatly among different police departments. Unlike many countries where specialised police are handled by a federal agency, most SWAT are often handled at the state and city level, although FBI SWAT exists.

Almost all police departments in the country are participating in a Government program that gives them surplus D.O.D equipment, nothing to be alarmed about

[QUOTE=TheChantzGuy;42460262]Almost all police departments in the country are participating in a Government program that gives them surplus D.O.D equipment, nothing to be alarmed about[/QUOTE] Nothing to be ignorant about either.

[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;42460252]SWAT Team uniforms and equipment vary greatly among different police departments. Unlike many countries where specialised police are handled by a federal agency, most SWAT are often handled at the state and city level, although FBI SWAT exists.[/QUOTE] In the UK most SFO's are part of their local police force, not a national one. You also missed the bit where I said it found odd the [b]Boston[/b] SWAT team used a very different colour uniform to the rest of the [b]Boston[/b] Police Department, and at that a colour that's more militaristic as well.

[QUOTE=Mr. Magoolachub;42459968]This thread seems to have turned in to a debate between 'civilians have access to higher power weaponry than cops, so cops should have access to it too' and the opposing viewpoint that they shouldn't because that's scary. The one and only mention of gun control was against it. Hello from Australia, this shit doesn't really happen here. Additionally, I'm not too scared that a cop is going to show up at my house and shoot me with an AK that he has and I don't either.[/QUOTE] Australian Police Tactical Groups [IMG]http://l.yimg.com/ea/img/-/110423/230411gentrg1_16r4ot3-16r4ot7.jpg[/IMG] [IMG]http://securityscholar.files.wordpress.com/2011/09/ct-police.jpg[/IMG] [IMG]http://www.nachohat.org/albums/police_tactical_response_group/police_trg_02.jpg[/IMG]

[QUOTE=a203xi;42460276]Nothing to be ignorant about either.[/QUOTE] You kidding me? Do you realize how strapped departments are for getting equipment to protect their assets (officers, property, citizens)? Newsflash: They're broke. These programs allow for departments to get equipment at a lower cost. Theres nothing bad here. We dont have "grenade launchers", or "tanks". We have tear-gas launchers and bearcats. We dont even have true "assault rifles". Before you even go about complaining about this think about if you worked for a city that you love till death, but they cant afford to buy you a vest, a long rifle, a taser. These are luxury items for departments, but are considered the "standard" look for police officers by the public.

[QUOTE=Camundongo;42460303]In the UK most SFO's are part of their local police force, not a national one. You also missed the bit where I said it found odd the [b]Boston[/b] SWAT team used a very different colour uniform to the rest of the [b]Boston[/b] Police Department, and at that a colour that's more militaristic as well.[/QUOTE] [IMG]http://darkroom.baltimoresun.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/REU-USA-EXPLOSIONS_BOSTON_002.jpg[/IMG]

[QUOTE=deadoon;42460209]Political suicide means an action that would destroy your political career and would alienate your voting base. You would unlikely be able to re-elected again. The reason I had pointed out your anecdote is because of it's irrelevance.[/QUOTE] Right, my political career which doesn't exist, and if it did would likely not be based in the Sensationalist Headlines section of Facepunch, as that in and of itself would be political suicide. Hence why I don't understand your usage of the term. Allow me to rephrase: I understand the term, and you used the term wrong. And it's really not irrelevant as your 'gun culture' would likely go away/change with gun control.

[QUOTE=Camundongo;42460303]In the UK most SFO's are part of their local police force, not a national one. You also missed the bit where I said it found odd the [b]Boston[/b] SWAT team used a very different colour uniform to the rest of the [b]Boston[/b] Police Department, and at that a colour that's more militaristic as well.[/QUOTE] A SWAT Team's uniform isn't based off that of the department they work for. We have SWAT Teams's rockin' the old blue and black, while others wear digital camouflage. It's all up to the department managing that particular team, there's no national standards for what a SWAT Team should wear or use or even what it should be called.

Comparing Australia to the USA, especially in terms of law enforcement standards, is not really something I would attempt to do. Regular law enforcement has done some pretty awful shit over here, and seems to continue on like that.