Trump prepares to lift limits on military gear for police

[busybee01]

You said you wanted fascist nazis but you're about to learn its the opposite of 2nd Amendment rights. He said he wants a police state and thanks to the dumb ass RWNJs, he'll get it.

When did Trump ever say he wanted a police state?

Sorry but the tides have turned. We went from and anti-police President to a pro-police President. Elections have consequences you know...........

The fact is that we are putting people's lives at risk. Police departments have abused the privilege by using this equipment in non-violent circumstances. You apparently don't care if innocent people die. There needs to be strict regulation on how this equipment is used.

Well I don't have to worry about it. Do you know why? Because I never get in a confrontational situation with police. I don't worry about my friends or family either. Do you know why? Because none of them ever get in a confrontational situation with police.

You don't have to get into a confrontation. SWAT teams were designed for hostage situations yet they are being used to do mundane things like serving warrants. When you have that equipment it has a effect of causing peaceful things to turn violent.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

You said you wanted fascist nazis but you're about to learn its the opposite of 2nd Amendment rights. He said he wants a police state and thanks to the dumb ass RWNJs, he'll get it.

When did Trump ever say he wanted a police state?

Sorry but the tides have turned. We went from and anti-police President to a pro-police President. Elections have consequences you know...........

The fact is that we are putting people's lives at risk. Police departments have abused the privilege by using this equipment in non-violent circumstances. You apparently don't care if innocent people die. There needs to be strict regulation on how this equipment is used.

Well I don't have to worry about it. Do you know why? Because I never get in a confrontational situation with police. I don't worry about my friends or family either. Do you know why? Because none of them ever get in a confrontational situation with police.

You don't have to get into a confrontation. SWAT teams were designed for hostage situations yet they are being used to do mundane things like serving warrants. When you have that equipment it has a effect of causing peaceful things to turn violent.

No, when you have that equipment it gives your suspect less reason to attack because he knows he can't do anything to you.

Our police deserve the best protection and equipment we can afford to give them.

 

[g5000]

Fascism is on the move when leaders encourage the police to start treating the populace like an enemy.

When they act like the enemy, that's the way you treat them.

Did I not say Trump would embrace the police state the pseudocons were whining about all during the Obama Administration?

Did I not say the pseudocons would embrace the police state with Trump?


TA-DAAAAAAAAA!


.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Demofarts take
What do we want? Dead cops. When do we want them? Now.
Very seriously.

Yes, you take that fake news very seriously.

Here's the thing. I don't want cops randomly shooting people and neither do you.

Nothing like a little fake news I always say:

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Fascism is on the move when leaders encourage the police to start treating the populace like an enemy.

When they act like the enemy, that's the way you treat them.

Did I not say Trump would embrace the police state the pseudocons were whining about all during the Obama Administration?

Did I not say the pseudocons would embrace the police state with Trump?


TA-DAAAAAAAAA!


.

I hardly call allowing our police to have proper protection and gear a police state.

 

[monkrules]

It's a waste of weaponry.

Every time BLM and it's thug supporters get a hair up their ass, they riot, loot, burn businesses and cars, attack innocent people, and whine. Meanwhile, the police just sit on their thumbs and do nothing.

As far as I'm concerned rioters and looters should be shot on site. Enough of the BLM bullshit, already.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Bad news for the ANIFTA scum

Yes, because footage of the government beating/killing protesters ALWAYS looks good.

45 years since Kent State, you guys haven't learned a thing.

I guess you haven't seen those Antifa "protesters" attacking and beating the hell out of their adversaries.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

When they act like the enemy, that's the way you treat them.

And they're the enemy because you've decided they are. Such speak, Ray, is dangerous, and you are dangerous.

No, they are the enemy because they attack citizens and police alike. When you attack one of our police officers, you attack all of us because we gave them authority to carry out the laws our legislatures passed. We gave them the authority to protect us instead of leaving us to protect ourselves.

But then again Ray, the enemy for you could be Democrats. It could be someone of the opposing view. The enemy as a term can be widespread, and what I saw when you wrote this is that anyone who is the enemy of your position is someone who deserves to treated in a bad way.

Nope, never wrote that.

Again, if you are attacking people, our police, destroying public or private property, you are the enemy of civilized people and deserve anything you get from authority.

Are you?

I mean, what if the police are doing bad things? What if the govt is doing bad things? What if you're attacking people who's views go against what the country is about?

There are lots of things here, there's no straight answer, especially labeling certain people you don't like as the enemy simply because they oppose what you think should be done.

No, I label them the enemy when they act outside of our laws.

 

[monkrules]

No, when you have that equipment it gives your suspect less reason to attack because he knows he can't do anything to you.

Our police deserve the best protection and equipment we can afford to give them.

I agree. But the riots and looting and burning of buildings and cars — and the attacks on innocent people will NEVER stop if the police are made to remain passive, and not allowed to use the weapons to quell the rioting.

Rioters and looters, and those attacking innocent people, should be shot. Period.

 

[bodecea]

Bad news for the ANIFTA scum

Yes....militarized police....the wet dream of trumpanzees everywhere......

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

No, when you have that equipment it gives your suspect less reason to attack because he knows he can't do anything to you.

Our police deserve the best protection and equipment we can afford to give them.

I agree. But the riots and looting and burning of buildings and cars — and the attacks on innocent people will NEVER stop if the police are made to remain passive, and not allowed to use the weapons to quell the rioting.

Rioters and looters, and those attacking innocent people, should be shot. Period.

Military gear is not mandatory, it's an option for police departments that want it. So don't look for any liberal cities to have that gear anyhow. It's the liberal leaders in those cities who tell their police department to stand down.

 

[OnePercenter]

Good!!! First good idea!!

 

[JoeB131]

Demofarts take
What do we want? Dead cops. When do we want them? Now.
Very seriously.

Yes, you take that fake news very seriously.

Here's the thing. I don't want cops randomly shooting people and neither do you.

What fake news? I watched the marches where they were chanting it.

Some poster in this thread replied that "45 years after Kent State nobody
has learned anything." That's incorrect, everybody learned, which is why
campus demonstrations were very much curtailed after Kent State and
Jackson State Univ a couple of weeks after Kent St. Protestors couldn't
get a good crowd. The onlookers and students that were bored weren't
going out on that street. Thus the mob of 5,000 got reduced down to
200 hard core, and the media wouldn't even bother with it.

The Police with improved vehicles and weaponry isn't the problem.
Mayors, that will not commit normal force at the outset is the problem.
They let it get out-of-hand before they act. That's what happened
in Ferguson and Baltimore and always happens in California.

Once someone strays from their allowed permit to protest, that's
when your Police should be ordered to act. Stop it, before it gets
out-of-control.

No one has the "right" to break the law.

Wow, I guess there are people who look forward to fascism in this country.

 

[Cellblock2429]

Bad news for the ANIFTA scum

Yes, because footage of the government beating/killing protesters ALWAYS looks good.

45 years since Kent State, you guys haven't learned a thing.

/----/ Stop rioting and obey the law. Problem solved.

 

[DJT for Life]

Demofarts take
What do we want? Dead cops. When do we want them? Now.
Very seriously.

Yes, you take that fake news very seriously.

Here's the thing. I don't want cops randomly shooting people and neither do you.

What fake news? I watched the marches where they were chanting it.

Some poster in this thread replied that "45 years after Kent State nobody
has learned anything." That's incorrect, everybody learned, which is why
campus demonstrations were very much curtailed after Kent State and
Jackson State Univ a couple of weeks after Kent St. Protestors couldn't
get a good crowd. The onlookers and students that were bored weren't
going out on that street. Thus the mob of 5,000 got reduced down to
200 hard core, and the media wouldn't even bother with it.

The Police with improved vehicles and weaponry isn't the problem.
Mayors, that will not commit normal force at the outset is the problem.
They let it get out-of-hand before they act. That's what happened
in Ferguson and Baltimore and always happens in California.

Once someone strays from their allowed permit to protest, that's
when your Police should be ordered to act. Stop it, before it gets
out-of-control.

No one has the "right" to break the law.

Wow, I guess there are people who look forward to fascism in this country.

Law and Order is not fascism. What part of..."No one has the 'right'
to break the law" are you struggling with

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Hmmmmm. Isn't it funny how police departments being allowed to use what they need to combat crime became a political issue? The left are against a stronger police force and the right are for it. Now gee, why in the world would that be? Could it be that most criminals are liberals?

 

[frigidweirdo]

And they're the enemy because you've decided they are. Such speak, Ray, is dangerous, and you are dangerous.

No, they are the enemy because they attack citizens and police alike. When you attack one of our police officers, you attack all of us because we gave them authority to carry out the laws our legislatures passed. We gave them the authority to protect us instead of leaving us to protect ourselves.

But then again Ray, the enemy for you could be Democrats. It could be someone of the opposing view. The enemy as a term can be widespread, and what I saw when you wrote this is that anyone who is the enemy of your position is someone who deserves to treated in a bad way.

Nope, never wrote that.

Again, if you are attacking people, our police, destroying public or private property, you are the enemy of civilized people and deserve anything you get from authority.

Are you?

I mean, what if the police are doing bad things? What if the govt is doing bad things? What if you're attacking people who's views go against what the country is about?

There are lots of things here, there's no straight answer, especially labeling certain people you don't like as the enemy simply because they oppose what you think should be done.

No, I label them the enemy when they act outside of our laws.

So what if those acting outside of the laws are the very people you support? Or what if the people who make the laws legitimize those things which shouldn't be legitimate?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

No, they are the enemy because they attack citizens and police alike. When you attack one of our police officers, you attack all of us because we gave them authority to carry out the laws our legislatures passed. We gave them the authority to protect us instead of leaving us to protect ourselves.

But then again Ray, the enemy for you could be Democrats. It could be someone of the opposing view. The enemy as a term can be widespread, and what I saw when you wrote this is that anyone who is the enemy of your position is someone who deserves to treated in a bad way.

Nope, never wrote that.

Again, if you are attacking people, our police, destroying public or private property, you are the enemy of civilized people and deserve anything you get from authority.

Are you?

I mean, what if the police are doing bad things? What if the govt is doing bad things? What if you're attacking people who's views go against what the country is about?

There are lots of things here, there's no straight answer, especially labeling certain people you don't like as the enemy simply because they oppose what you think should be done.

No, I label them the enemy when they act outside of our laws.

So what if those acting outside of the laws are the very people you support? Or what if the people who make the laws legitimize those things which shouldn't be legitimate?

Legitimize like what? Should we make it legal to attack our police officers? Should we make it legal to not obey the commands of a police officer? Make it legal to destroy public and private property? Make it legal to close down roads to protest?

If somebody on our side acts outside of our laws, they too deserve whatever our authority decides to do to them. But since 98% of the problems in these protests are from the left, it wouldn't bother me all that much.

 

[frigidweirdo]

But then again Ray, the enemy for you could be Democrats. It could be someone of the opposing view. The enemy as a term can be widespread, and what I saw when you wrote this is that anyone who is the enemy of your position is someone who deserves to treated in a bad way.

Nope, never wrote that.

Again, if you are attacking people, our police, destroying public or private property, you are the enemy of civilized people and deserve anything you get from authority.

Are you?

I mean, what if the police are doing bad things? What if the govt is doing bad things? What if you're attacking people who's views go against what the country is about?

There are lots of things here, there's no straight answer, especially labeling certain people you don't like as the enemy simply because they oppose what you think should be done.

No, I label them the enemy when they act outside of our laws.

So what if those acting outside of the laws are the very people you support? Or what if the people who make the laws legitimize those things which shouldn't be legitimate?

Legitimize like what? Should we make it legal to attack our police officers? Should we make it legal to not obey the commands of a police officer? Make it legal to destroy public and private property? Make it legal to close down roads to protest?

If somebody on our side acts outside of our laws, they too deserve whatever our authority decides to do to them. But since 98% of the problems in these protests are from the left, it wouldn't bother me all that much.

Legitimize like what?

Okay, campaign funding. When Africans do it, they shout that it's corruption, when Americans do it they say it's campaign financing or something like that.

No, it should not be legal to attack anyone. But it is legal in some circumstances.

What happens if a police officer tells you to kill yourself? Should it be illegal to not obey the commands of that officer?

Let's go back to the Civil Rights' movement. What happens when the people with power are white and they make it illegal for black people to do things. Is it okay to fight back? Is it okay to break those laws?

Were those who fought against discriminatory laws "the enemy"?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Nope, never wrote that.

Again, if you are attacking people, our police, destroying public or private property, you are the enemy of civilized people and deserve anything you get from authority.

Are you?

I mean, what if the police are doing bad things? What if the govt is doing bad things? What if you're attacking people who's views go against what the country is about?

There are lots of things here, there's no straight answer, especially labeling certain people you don't like as the enemy simply because they oppose what you think should be done.

No, I label them the enemy when they act outside of our laws.

So what if those acting outside of the laws are the very people you support? Or what if the people who make the laws legitimize those things which shouldn't be legitimate?

Legitimize like what? Should we make it legal to attack our police officers? Should we make it legal to not obey the commands of a police officer? Make it legal to destroy public and private property? Make it legal to close down roads to protest?

If somebody on our side acts outside of our laws, they too deserve whatever our authority decides to do to them. But since 98% of the problems in these protests are from the left, it wouldn't bother me all that much.

Legitimize like what?

Okay, campaign funding. When Africans do it, they shout that it's corruption, when Americans do it they say it's campaign financing or something like that.

No, it should not be legal to attack anyone. But it is legal in some circumstances.

What happens if a police officer tells you to kill yourself? Should it be illegal to not obey the commands of that officer?

Let's go back to the Civil Rights' movement. What happens when the people with power are white and they make it illegal for black people to do things. Is it okay to fight back? Is it okay to break those laws?

Were those who fought against discriminatory laws "the enemy"?

Wait a minute, when is attacking somebody justified? Self-defense is justified, but never attacking somebody. I'm a black belt and a CCW holder, and this is the first I ever heard about justified attacks on another human being.

And what do you mean by when blacks fund campaigns, it's corruption? I have no idea WTF you're even talking about. Who ever said that? Have any examples?

Why do you leftists always go back in time to make a point instead of talking about the present? There is no comparison to civil rights to lowlifes attacking our police and adversaries because all the good people want to stay within the law and they don't.