Actually, I think part of the problem is also that these local law enforcement bodies are getting TOO much from the federal government in terms of military firepower. Yet another horribly dysfunctional downstream result of the 'war on terror,' which is now being used an excuse to engage in wars of choice, violate civil rights, violate privacy rights, torture, circumvent habeus corpus, and now to militarize local law enforcement.
More broadly it reflects our nation's punishment and incarceration fetish, again abetted at the margin by our dark and increasingly irrational fear of terrorists that go bump in the night.
Trout, come fish with me in Redding CA. Bass fishing capital of the west tbh
£¥£
Dude, my wife learned quick that I'm not about to bait her hook or unhook her fish for her. That pretty much excludes me ever fishing with you I'm afraid.
Not really. If you actually read what I wrote, you'd see that. Ain't nobody got time fo' dat, I know, but come on.
'Murica: Don't like it? Leave. At this point it's not really worth responding to you, but I have this weird thing about blind stupidity; I can't stand it.
Because "policing" people is all that cops do, right? I mean, they certainly aren't responding to auto accidents, crimes in progress, security for public events, etc. -- they are all parked in shady spots, speed trapping people and profiling would-be criminals like fishonjazz. Let's just hope that some ******* doesn't rear end your car, and then drive away, because the chances are good that one of the other 499 people that that particular officer is dedicated to has already called him/her and the cop is too busy to chase the *******. Heaven forbid it's a serious crime, right?
Again, this isn't NCIS, you ****ing clod. Do you think they assign every crime over to "detectives"? Beat cops are the ground force of ALL detectives and usually do the majority of the case work. On the flip side, "detectives" write their fair share of citations and tickets. If you did anything other than piss and moan behind your computer, you'd know this.
When was the last time you witnessed some of this "militarized" law enforcement? Serious question. Have you ever seen a local cop pull out a military grade weapon or vehicle to enforce a law? "But, but, Trout, don't you watch teh newz!?"
STFU
There are 317,000,000 people in this country, and some of them are real bad people who do real bad things. I would prefer that my local cops have an armored vehicle, body armor, and a rifle that can shoot through a wall so that they can catch the real bad guys before they hurt anyone else. Of the millions of arrests that happen in this country, the media chooses to highlight the stories that morons like you soak up and talk about. In 2012 there were an estimated 12.2 million arrests made in the USA -- let's say that one super, over-reacted, military style arrest was made every day. (Which is a gross overestimation) That would mean that 0.00002% of all arrests were over the top military style. What if there were 10 per day? You're still under three one hundredths of a percent. Let's get crazy and say that 1,000 arrests are made every day that are over the top, where cops are using AK47's and riot gear. That would equal a whopping 0.02% of all arrests made for the year. Even if the media reported all of them, instead of the juicy ones that cause idiotic uproar, you're still talking about 0.02%. Forgive me for not getting my magic underwear in a twist over a perceived threat that isn't really there at all.
Gee, I wonder how people got all scared and worried about these so called threats? The same way you did regarding the militarization of our police forces.
Care to show me a police force in the USA that has tanks? Secondly, you can't have it both ways; imagine the uproar and heads that would roll if the US military just junked billions of dollars of surplus gear.
These bozos, huh? The same bozos that you trust to keep you and your family safe, and the first person you call in an emergency? You're pretty quick to judge these people; have you ever met one? Do you know who the chief or commander is in your city? Ever spent more than thirty seconds talking to a cop, other than when you're being pulled over?
But seriously, F THE POLICE! LOL. EYE.
I'd rather have the military ditch its surplus tanks, for example, than gifting them to local law enforcement. These bozos can't be trusted with guns, let alone weapons of mass destruction. The acquisition of power comes along (whether intended) with an imperative to use it.
[size/HUGE] fixed [/size];890470 said:LOL. Whatever, brauggh. You're starting to sound like Dalawag with your ridiculous (and false) dichotomies.
There are news stories and commentaries just a Google's click away if you care to slake your curiosity. I'm not going to do your work for you and feel no obligation to invest time in making your happy.
By the way, numbnuts, it is possible to understand and respect the need for the police, and be grateful for the work they do, and STILL, nonetheless, criticize them when they abuse their authority or cross the line. I realize that this is a difficult thing for small minds used to black and white thinking to grasp, but it really is possible. Give it a try, you may discover more brain power than you imagined you had.
Actually, I think part of the problem is also that these local law enforcement bodies are getting TOO much from the federal government in terms of military firepower. Yet another horribly dysfunctional downstream result of the 'war on terror,' which is now being used an excuse to engage in wars of choice, violate civil rights, violate privacy rights, torture, circumvent habeus corpus, and now to militarize local law enforcement.
More broadly it reflects our nation's punishment and incarceration fetish, again abetted at the margin by our dark and increasingly irrational fear of terrorists that go bump in the night.
I'd rather have the military ditch its surplus tanks, for example, than gifting them to local law enforcement. These bozos can't be trusted with guns, let alone weapons of mass destruction. The acquisition of power comes along (whether intended) with an imperative to use it.
Why ditch it at all? I'm sure places like Poland, Czech Repub, Columbia and Vietnam would like to buy some C130s, APCs, humvees and Abrams.
I remember how well it worked out when the US supplied Iraq with weapons and the like way back when we were kinda allies. I'd really rather not give other countries, especially countries that we have bad history with, our excess firepower.
previously unnoticed detail in a background conversion of a video taken minutes after the Ferguson shooting could change the course of the investigation into Mike Brown’s death.
The original video poster appears sympathetic to the narrative that Mike Brown was shot unarmed with his hands in the air. But he unknowingly picks up conversation between a man who saw the altercation and another neighbor.
An approximate transcription of the background conversation, as related by the “Conservative Treehouse” blog:
@6:28/6:29 of video
#1 How’d he get from there to there?
#2 Because he ran, the police was still in the truck – cause he was like over the truck
{crosstalk}
#2 But him and the police was both in the truck, then he ran – the police got out and ran after him
{crosstalk}
#2 Then the next thing I know he doubled back toward him cus - the police had his gun drawn already on him –
#1. Oh, the police got his gun
#2 The police kept dumpin on him, and I’m thinking the police kept missing – he like – be like – but he kept coming toward him
{crosstalk}
#2 Police fired shots – the next thing I know – the police was missing
#1 The Police?
#2 The Police shot him
#1 Police?
#2 The next thing I know … I’m thinking … the dude started running … (garbled something about “he took it from him”)
This is terribly important because if Mike Brown had been shot, and he advanced towards the cop instead of surrendering, it would substantiate the narrative that the policeman shot in self-defense due to the fact that he was being threatened with severe bodily harm.
This corroborates an account of the event given by a friend of Officer Darren Wilson:
Well, then Michael takes off and gets to be about 35 feet away. And, Darren’s first protocol is to pursue. So, he stands up and yells, “Freeze!” Michael and his friend turn around. And Michael taunts him… And then all the sudden he just started bumrushing him. He just started coming at him full speed. And, so he just started shooting. And, he just kept coming. And, so he really thinks he was on something.”
It’s far too unlikely that these two accounts are similar accidentally, having been from such disparate sources. The seeming witness in the background conversation is speaking with detail about the tragic shooting, and in a manner that runs contrary to the widespread version. Those who watch the video need to judge for themselves if the witness sounds reliable (but he would seemingly have nothing to gain by telling such a story.)
A third piece of the puzzle would be the toxicology report. If there happens to be anything found that might explain how Mike Brown might have been shot and kept advancing toward the officer, then the defense becomes even more believable. Unless someone is emotionally invested in an alternative narrative to the extent that one might ignore plain facts.
We shall see.