Why do Liberals and Progressives fear Militarized Police?

[Freewill]

A small group of people legally sold guns at gun shows.

The police could have arrested them at any time at the gun shows or at the local Walmart.

The government decided to have a paramilitary raid of the people's home even after their element of surprise was broken. This obviously was intended to make the confrontation all the more media worthy.

The people fought back instead of kneeing to the paramilitary force, after the paramilitary group open fire on the people's dog and the paramilitary force had shot one unarmed man and killed another.

Instead of retreat the paramilitary force went on the offensive shooting randomly and invading the people's home. Naturally people on both sides were killed.

The Paramilitary force executed one of the people as they tried to return home from work.

After a long siege the paramilitary group, either by intention or by action, cause the people's home to be destroyed by fire with the resulting death of many children.

What was the outcry of the liberal left? The people had it coming. Lying hypocrites.

 

[kaz]

Who among our resident conservatives knows that this is a troll thread?

It's certainly troll bait...

I am with you at least in that I don't really get it, liberals are the ones who want the cops to be the only ones who are armed, so I'm not clear why you would want them less armed.

Hardly. Liberals don't want the cops to be the only ones who are armed. You are relying on your dopey talking points again.

Um...yeah...a 214 page discussion says you're wrong. You really don't read and process information...

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...rom-criminals-liberals-what-is-your-plan.html

 

[Katzndogz]

The police are not militarized. If the police were militarized and truly using machine guns on the looters of Ferguson the looting would have stopped by now. The only real guns are the ones being used by the rioters. Rubber bullets and smoke bombs is not militarization.

 

[Freewill]

I think I will agree with the liberals on this issue. Seal off the area and let the rioters crap in their own nest. The problem that will create is that when the businesses are driven out the situation will just be that much worse for those remaining in the hell hole.

 

[Londoner]

I'm trying to figure this out, help me Progressives. Why do you fear the militarization of the police?

My libertarian friends are far more worried about police militarization than any liberals I know, who seem to have only a flaccid, 60s anti-establishment fear of "the system". Libertarians have voiced fears expressed by the Founders . . . RE standing armies.

You might do some research about where this current wave of militarization came from. It came from a desire of the federal government to use the War on Terrorism to link all state law enforcement into a quasi-federal agency. You might ask whether this kind of increase in federal control over the states could have unintended consequences. Like for instance, what would happen if a very Liberal president used this concentrated power to surveil gun owners. Do you really want the reach of one executive or collection of federal agents to extend so far?

Unlike my conservative friends I'd rather see diffuse power, more checks and balances, making it harder for government to act on incorrect information or corrupt whim.

Libertarians don't need to offer specific examples of how a given increase in state power can harm the population. Their problem with the State power goes much deeper. They believe humans are flawed (tactically and morally) such that if you give them more power you only increase the size of the potential mistake. The first step to shutting down a free society is by creating a KGB style apparatus that links all state law enforcement through a centralized agency. By doing this you give individual bureaucrats the power to target free citizens with alarming ease. Why make it easier for the state to destroy political protesters. Why make it easier for the state to take away the First Amendment?

(This is how it starts. When ordinary citizens can't even imagine the potential problems that might arise by increasing and concentrating state power)

Find me zah man und I vill find you za crime.

(Psst: this is why the Soviets created a police state: to make it easier for the state to watch, detain and incarcerate troublemakers.)

 

[LoneLaugher]

It's certainly troll bait...

I am with you at least in that I don't really get it, liberals are the ones who want the cops to be the only ones who are armed, so I'm not clear why you would want them less armed.

Hardly. Liberals don't want the cops to be the only ones who are armed. You are relying on your dopey talking points again.

Um...yeah...a 214 page discussion says you're wrong. You really don't read and process information...

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...rom-criminals-liberals-what-is-your-plan.html

Your discussion link is meaningless. Liberals do not want civilian police officers armed while the citizenry is unarmed.

 

[kaz]

Hardly. Liberals don't want the cops to be the only ones who are armed. You are relying on your dopey talking points again.

Um...yeah...a 214 page discussion says you're wrong. You really don't read and process information...

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...rom-criminals-liberals-what-is-your-plan.html

Your discussion link is meaningless. Liberals do not want civilian police officers armed while the citizenry is unarmed.

You obviously didn't read the discussion

 

[Kosh]

It is amazing how the far left mindset works as they do not want the people to be armed and have to rely on the police to protect them.

Then at the same time they want disarm and hand tie these union police forces.

So to the far left, they only want the criminals to be armed (based on the most recent postings).

 

[LeftofLeft]

The next time Democrats start scaring people with the threat of reduction in police jobs, remind the Liberals that less police jobs mean less militarization.

 

[LiberalMedia]

I'm trying to figure this out, help me Progressives. Why do you fear the militarization of the police?

I don't. I embrace it. The bigger our government, the more efficiently and effectively it will be able to serve and protect We the Pyyple.

Next bigoted question, please.

 

[Bfgrn]

I'm trying to figure this out, help me Progressives. Why do you fear the militarization of the police?

Why do you so embrace GOVERNMENT? When it comes to punishment, you right wing scum LOVE GOVERNMENT...

 

[Bfgrn]

I'm trying to figure this out, help me Progressives. Why do you fear the militarization of the police?

My libertarian friends are far more worried about police militarization than any liberals I know, who seem to have only a flaccid, 60s anti-establishment fear of "the system". Libertarians have voiced fears expressed by the Founders . . . RE standing armies.

You might do some research about where this current wave of militarization came from. It came from a desire of the federal government to use the War on Terrorism to link all state law enforcement into a quasi-federal agency. You might ask whether this kind of increase in federal control over the states could have unintended consequences. Like for instance, what would happen if a very Liberal president used this concentrated power to surveil gun owners. Do you really want the reach of one executive or collection of federal agents to extend so far?

Unlike my conservative friends I'd rather see diffuse power, more checks and balances, making it harder for government to act on incorrect information or corrupt whim.

Libertarians don't need to offer specific examples of how a given increase in state power can harm the population. Their problem with the State power goes much deeper. They believe humans are flawed (tactically and morally) such that if you give them more power you only increase the size of the potential mistake. The first step to shutting down a free society is by creating a KGB style apparatus that links all state law enforcement through a centralized agency. By doing this you give individual bureaucrats the power to target free citizens with alarming ease. Why make it easier for the state to destroy political protesters. Why make it easier for the state to take away the First Amendment?

(This is how it starts. When ordinary citizens can't even imagine the potential problems that might arise by increasing and concentrating state power)

Find me zah man und I vill find you za crime.

(Psst: this is why the Soviets created a police state: to make it easier for the state to watch, detain and incarcerate troublemakers.)

You are wrongfully dismissing liberals.

 

[2aguy]

The real answer...they don't like police when they are used to actually keep the peace...other wise why would cities like Chicago be short 2000 police officers...however...when it comes to enforcing their agenda...the I.R.S. the E.P.A., forcing bakers and photographers to violate their religious beliefs, harrassing law abiding citizens who own and carry guns...


Then...they love the militarized police...just the same way they love the First Amendment...for themselves and then shut it down when they are in a position of power...political correctness came from the lefties...and that is shutting down speech they don't like...

 

[2aguy]

When it comes to punishment, you right wing scum LOVE GOVERNMENT...

No, that is inaccurate...government has a very specific, limited role in the constitution and one of them is to protect citizens from the violence of other citizens...when you have a person who has repeatedly shown an unwillingness to leave other people alone...criminals...they need to be seperated from the rest of the people to keep those people safe...liberals on the other hand don't quite seem to get that concept...as they always favor releasing violent predators back into the population...

Of course...when they do that it works for them...then they can use those same violent predators as reasons to confiscate guns, limit speech, and scare minority communities into voting for them...

Chaos, poverty...the best tools of the democrat party...

 

[martybegan]

Hardly. Liberals don't want the cops to be the only ones who are armed. You are relying on your dopey talking points again.

Um...yeah...a 214 page discussion says you're wrong. You really don't read and process information...

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...rom-criminals-liberals-what-is-your-plan.html

Your discussion link is meaningless. Liberals do not want civilian police officers armed while the citizenry is unarmed.

Bullshit. There are posts aplenty by progressives saying non government civilians have no need for firearms.

 

[Bfgrn]

When it comes to punishment, you right wing scum LOVE GOVERNMENT...

No, that is inaccurate...government has a very specific, limited role in the constitution and one of them is to protect citizens from the violence of other citizens...when you have a person who has repeatedly shown an unwillingness to leave other people alone...criminals...they need to be seperated from the rest of the people to keep those people safe...liberals on the other hand don't quite seem to get that concept...as they always favor releasing violent predators back into the population...

Of course...when they do that it works for them...then they can use those same violent predators as reasons to confiscate guns, limit speech, and scare minority communities into voting for them...

Chaos, poverty...the best tools of the democrat party...

You are parroting right wing garbage. Liberals believe violent criminals belong behind bars, but not some kid who smokes weed...

You right wing turds claim you are "tough on crime". that truth is you are tough on freedom and liberty.

Your argument completely falls apart when you look at history...

I've been around since Harry Truman was President, so I lived through a good portion of the liberal era that started with the New Deal and ended with the Great Society. It was America's finest moment. It was an era with huge economic growth and shared wealth, fantastic successes in technology, vast expansion of citizen freedoms and liberties and the growth of a middle class that defined this country and made America the 'city on the hill', the envy of the world.

That era ended at the end of the 1960's and the conservative era began. It has continued ever since. It has been a negative mirror image of the liberal era. We now lead the world only in the dubious like incarcerating human beings, killing innocent people and launching Hirohito sneak attacks on sovereign nations.

Here is what a REAL nanny state looks like...

Who leads the world in 'gulags'? Cuba, USSR, China, North Korea, Burma, Venezuela, Iran, Russia???

NO...

We're is NUMBER ONE! We're is NUMBER ONE! America is NUMBER ONE!

Conservatives built the BIGGEST Nanny State in the history of the world...

"The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only legitimate object of good government."
Thomas Jefferson to the Republican Citizens of Washington County, Maryland" (March 31, 1809).

 

[rdean]

Only chickenshit NaziCons want gestapo cops.

Answer the question: Why do you fear militarized police?

Because it's a stupid question. It's what they did in Germany and Japan.

The question is, why do you support such a threat to freedom?

 

[rdean]

When it comes to punishment, you right wing scum LOVE GOVERNMENT...

No, that is inaccurate...government has a very specific, limited role in the constitution and one of them is to protect citizens from the violence of other citizens...when you have a person who has repeatedly shown an unwillingness to leave other people alone...criminals...they need to be seperated from the rest of the people to keep those people safe...liberals on the other hand don't quite seem to get that concept...as they always favor releasing violent predators back into the population...

Of course...when they do that it works for them...then they can use those same violent predators as reasons to confiscate guns, limit speech, and scare minority communities into voting for them...

Chaos, poverty...the best tools of the democrat party...

You are parroting right wing garbage. Liberals believe violent criminals belong behind bars, but not some kid who smokes weed...

You right wing turds claim you are "tough on crime". that truth is you are tough on freedom and liberty.

Your argument completely falls apart when you look at history...

I've been around since Harry Truman was President, so I lived through a good portion of the liberal era that started with the New Deal and ended with the Great Society. It was America's finest moment. It was an era with huge economic growth and shared wealth, fantastic successes in technology, vast expansion of citizen freedoms and liberties and the growth of a middle class that defined this country and made America the 'city on the hill', the envy of the world.

That era ended at the end of the 1960's and the conservative era began. It has continued ever since. It has been a negative mirror image of the liberal era. We now lead the world only in the dubious like incarcerating human beings, killing innocent people and launching Hirohito sneak attacks on sovereign nations.

Here is what a REAL nanny state looks like...

Who leads the world in 'gulags'? Cuba, USSR, China, North Korea, Burma, Venezuela, Iran, Russia???

NO...

We're is NUMBER ONE! We're is NUMBER ONE! America is NUMBER ONE!

Conservatives built the BIGGEST Nanny State in the history of the world...

"The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only legitimate object of good government."
Thomas Jefferson to the Republican Citizens of Washington County, Maryland" (March 31, 1809).

No wonder Republicans love Putin.

 

[Crystalclear]

I'm trying to figure this out, help me Progressives. Why do you fear the militarization of the police?

Why do you so embrace GOVERNMENT? When it comes to punishment, you right wing scum LOVE GOVERNMENT...

Punishing criminals is one of the main government tasks.

 

[Charles_Main]

It is one of the strangest things about Most Liberals. That they preach to us to trust Big government at every turn, but at the same time tell us to not trust Cops.