MILITARIZE Baby! MILITARIZE!

[protectionist]

Then, in that case, you simply didn't understand it. The suspect in the case you mentioned was also unarmed, meaning he was not a threat to the officers or others.

Try getting some help with that reading problem.

NO, YOU didn't understand it. The idea of the fleeing felon rule is it is permissible (and required) to shoot the suspect (unarmed, in the back) to prevent his escape, because as a felon (and a violent one), he poses a harm to the community if he were to escape. The "threat" has to do with what he at do AFTER the escape.

If later, Walter Scott were to fight with somebody else (like he fought with Slager), Scott might injure or even kill that person. Then, Slager would be at fault, and legally liable, for letting him escape, and the injured person could even sue Slager for not havng done his job properly, as cited by the fleeing felon rule.

A lot of people are being snookered into thinking justice was done by locking up Slager, when in fact it is a massive INjustice against a cop who did his job according to the book, and has been railroaded by politicians and a judge, who are responding to an irrational and racist black majority community, upon whose VOTES they need to preserve their careers.

You've got enough information now to see it clear, If you continue to disagree, you'll just be displaying stupidity.

 

[protectionist]

CNN wasn't there. I was.

Who cares where you were ? Cops of all races are overwhelmingly proper in their work, and it is political slime like Obama and Al Sharpton who malign them for their own political purposes, and you fall for it.

You may not even know what constitutes "proper" in police work. That ignorance which comes from inept educators, is something that has also caused a lot of misunderstanding and problems (including riots)

 

[sealybobo]

CNN wasn't there. I was.

Who cares where you were ? Cops of all races are overwhelmingly proper in their work, and it is political slime like Obama and Al Sharpton who malign them for their own political purposes, and you fall for it.

You may not even know what constitutes "proper" in police work. That ignorance which comes from inept educators, is something that has also caused a lot of misunderstanding and problems (including riots)

But you're such a smart guy.

How Did America’s Police Get So Militarized?

 

[protectionist]

CNN wasn't there. I was.

Who cares where you were ? Cops of all races are overwhelmingly proper in their work, and it is political slime like Obama and Al Sharpton who malign them for their own political purposes, and you fall for it.

You may not even know what constitutes "proper" in police work. That ignorance which comes from inept educators, is something that has also caused a lot of misunderstanding and problems (including riots)

But you're such a smart guy.

How Did America’s Police Get So Militarized?

Here's how they got so militarized (pictures worth thousand words) >>>

 

[Picaro]

Well...tick tock

Having trouble getting the papers forged? Any idiot can buy them from a La Raza lawyer or a street vendor in the barrios.

 

[jc456]

Then why don't they just call in the military?

You may be genuinely unaware of the fact that is illegal for the military to police the civilian populace in America except under the strict conditions of martial law.

Are you suggesting America be placed under martial law?

You're suggesting that we just outfit the police like the military, install the same tactics, the same firepower, the same doctrine, call them a "police force" and pretend that there is a difference.

Anything to protect a police officer or a serviceman...I'm all for it. I simply do not like the fine distinction being some sort of difference that placates the public. Call it what it is; para-military troops patrolling our cities.

Big f'ing deal...

I never quite understood why we didn't put the military on the border--new recruits and let them get their feet wet doing something for about 4-6 months. Having them in the cities is just a natural extension.

The public should stop shooting at the police. What’s different from an enemy shooting at the military?

 

[jc456]

I never quite understood why we didn't put the military on the border--new recruits and let them get their feet wet doing something for about 4-6 months. Having them in the cities is just a natural extension.

The mission of a soldier is to kill / incapacitate an enemy, not restrict movement. It wouldn't make sense to place the military on the border of a country with which we aren't at war.

The truth is, the US border has always been a sieve vs a dam. We want a certain amount of illegal immigration to fulfill economic needs for cheap labor. That became a problem when someone figured out you could use illegal immigrants as voters and not just labor.

The mission of a soldier is to do whatever her/his commanders tell them to do. As for the nonsense about illegals voting, it's just that; utter nonsense brought up by an insecure victor of the last GE.

Except it’s true! Obammy called for the illegals to vote! Why wouldn’t they? The leaders said to! Don’t they abide by orders?

 

[jc456]

The mission of a soldier is to do whatever her/his commanders tell them to do. As for the nonsense about illegals voting, it's just that; utter nonsense brought up by an insecure victor of the last GE.

Pretending that millions of illegal aliens don't vote, and haven't been for 70 years (except after Operation Wetback), won't help to keep them voting. We're getting rid of them at unprecedented rates now that catch & release is over, and deportations are soaring.

The govt still needs to stop mail voting, though. The deported ones could still vote by mail from Mexico​

Pretending they do is the stuff of morons like yourself.

Knowing they do is a person well informed

 

[jc456]

Nope... not a good answer.

HA HA. Yeah, the name of Michael Savage's book "Liberalism Is a Mental Disorder" gets confirmed here in USMB, every day. LOL

So you don't mind getting shot and killed, then. Well, the Army could put you on the trainfire line, and use you as a target for the recruits to practice their sharpshooting. You have no objection right ? Pheeeew! Is there a doctor in the house ?

If liberalism is a mental disorder; what is your excuse?

Dealing with you?

 

[jc456]

Didn't the US DOD develop GPS? Are you saying there's something wrong with using that because it's "military?"

Liberals don't speak from logic. They speak from hatred for the police, hatred for the USA military, hatred for the USA.

Then you must be a liberal.

Why? He cares for the military

 

[jc456]

Pretending they do is the stuff of morons like yourself.

Pretending that we pretend, is moronic. You should stop that, if you want to stop labeling yourself that way.

Feel free to offer proof of any sizable number of votes being done by illegal aliens in any state.

Sure at least five million in CA and Chicago

 

[fncceo]

What’s different from an enemy shooting at the military?

If an enemy shoots at a soldier, it’s the mission of the soldier to shoot back and eliminate him.

When someone shoots at a cop, the mission of the cop is two-fold...

... stop his actions
... bring him before a court for judgement

The cop is obligated by law to use only reasonable force to do so.

Completely different missions and rules of engagement.

 

[IM2]

Didn't the US DOD develop GPS? Are you saying there's something wrong with using that because it's "military?"

Liberals don't speak from logic. They speak from hatred for the police, hatred for the USA military, hatred for the USA.

Then you must be a liberal.

Why? He cares for the military

No he doesn't. And it's a lie to say liberals don't care about the military.

 

[jc456]

What’s different from an enemy shooting at the military?

If an enemy shoots at a soldier, it’s the mission of the soldier to shoot back and eliminate him.

When someone shoots at a cop, the mission of the cop is two-fold...

... stop his actions
... bring him before a court for judgement

The cop is obligated by law to use only reasonable force to do so.

Completely different missions and rules of engagement.

Ah, the misnomer, got it. Someone shoots at me I shoot back. Not sure why you wouldn't. Center mass take em down. there is no obligation by a cop not to defend him/herself. None at all. there is absolutely no difference. enemy fire is enemy fire, combat zone is combat zone.

 

[jc456]

Didn't the US DOD develop GPS? Are you saying there's something wrong with using that because it's "military?"

Liberals don't speak from logic. They speak from hatred for the police, hatred for the USA military, hatred for the USA.

Then you must be a liberal.

Why? He cares for the military

No he doesn't. And it's a lie to say liberals don't care about the military.

they don't sorry, defending our country is not a priority. shit defending one's self isn't a leftist priority. Kumbaya and the song 'Imagine' is all leftist utopia.

 

[toobfreak]

There has been some criticism of the use of military equipment and vehicles the , by police departments. Just one example is the

Lenco Bearcat, ​

multi-purpose, wheeled, armored personnel carrier. It is in use by numerous military forces and law enforcement agencies around the world. But some libertarians see the Bearcat as overdoing it, in the law enforcement area.
All in all, I'd say, the characterization of the use of military type vehicles like the Bearcat, and maybe even tanks, is the overkill, and these things are a good idea to quell riots, protect police, manage hostage situations, and rescue citizens in distress.

I prefer my police STAY police. And the military stay military. It's bad enough they now call SWAT out for just about everything. All these pretty little toys cost money, not only do we pay for all that shit but we don't need it at the community level---- it is just one more thing to invite theft and abuse---- most likely against the citizens they are there for to serve and protect.

 

[jc456]

There has been some criticism of the use of military equipment and vehicles the , by police departments. Just one example is the

Lenco Bearcat, ​

multi-purpose, wheeled, armored personnel carrier. It is in use by numerous military forces and law enforcement agencies around the world. But some libertarians see the Bearcat as overdoing it, in the law enforcement area.
All in all, I'd say, the characterization of the use of military type vehicles like the Bearcat, and maybe even tanks, is the overkill, and these things are a good idea to quell riots, protect police, manage hostage situations, and rescue citizens in distress.

I prefer my police STAY police. And the military stay military. It's bad enough they now call SWAT out for just about everything. All these pretty little toys cost money, not only do we pay for all that shit but we don't need it at the community level---- it is just one more thing to invite theft and abuse---- most likely against the citizens they are there for to serve and protect.

well for areas of the country that are combat zones, I'd want em. I dare you to just drive through south Chicago at night. Don't you watch the news? And it's baltimore, and it's Ferguson, Detroit, LA and on and on. yep, the cops in those zones need something more. sorry dude. combat is combat.

 

[fncceo]

Center mass take em down

You’d be surprised to learn just how often that is not the case. Eighty per cent of those shot be police survive.

Police are only legally authorized to shoot to stop aggression, not to kill. Once aggressive behavior ceases, we are legally obligated to stop shooting.


We are trained to shoot center mass not because it is the most lethal, we do so because it is, by far, the easiest to hit.

 

[jc456]

Center mass take em down

You’d be surprised to learn just how often that is not the case. Eighty per cent of those shot be police survive.

Police are only legally authorized to shoot to stop aggression, not to kill. Once aggressive behavior ceases, we are legally obligated to stop shooting.


We are trained to shoot center mass not because it is the most lethal, we do so because it is, by far, the easiest to hit.

police are trained to shoot to kill sorry. post up a link then.Sure are a lot of cops going to court for killing people.

 

[protectionist]

No he doesn't. And it's a lie to say liberals don't care about the military.

Of course I care about the military. Not just the active military, but the past military (veterans) too, of which I am one, and have received many surgeries and other medical benefits + a pension from the VA. And you are just an ignorant baboon who comes in here and spouts off ignorance.

And no, liberals do not care about the military. They hate it, as shown by the graph I posted showing all the low dips in military spending, when Democrats were president (Obama, Clinton, and Carter)