Cops or Soldiers?

[JCliff]

Link to interesting article in the Economist.
.
Paramilitary police: Cops or soldiers? | The Economist

 

[mappow]

Tough line to draw. If you have a "special court to over see" to allow SWAT intervention pursuant to a search warrant that only adds red tape and delay. I would say that if it's VIOLANT and in need of a possible VIOLANT response, fine. But as any intervention by Local, State or Federal Authorities their approach is only as good as the INTEL they have.
If you're on that team, I expect you want the best defense available. On the other hand, I will have to engage if some jack booted team kicks down my door. Do they have good INTEL or did someone F up on the research and warrant. Either way a warrant IS REQUIRED by the COTUS. Dressed as paramilitary, again, see both sides.

 

[JimTh]

If you have ever watched the movie "Major Payne" maybe fiction is a lot closer to reality. Major Payne of course is a Marine just released from the corps. In the first few weeks of civilian life he cannot shake the need to "kill". Perhaps we have some returning military dudes that are having the same problem. The adrenalin needs to be tempered with a mouth full of Constitution. We the people began surrendering our country many years ago and now we do not like the results of what we wanted. I remember taking the SS Lurline to Hawaii in the mid 60's. I was about 14 years old and decided I wanted frog legs for dinner. What I got was frog legs...however it was not what I wanted.

We surrendered to the 7 bedroom homes, the BMW and Benz in the garage, the vacation home on the shore, the retirement home in the Glades, the giant sized retirement plans, and so on. We became so consumed with consuming we forgot about our precious liberty. The lust for money is the root of all evil.

 

[gunnerbob]

Three kinds of people join the military:

~Those who are patriotic and feel it's a duty.

~Those with nothing better to do and need money.

And...

~Those that enjoy killing or violence and found a legal means of doing so by joining.

How many reasons do you think there are for people becoming police officers? Just replace a few select words in the sentences above and you'll have your answer. The worst kind of cop is the guy who joined the military for reason #3 and needs a new job.

 

[SR9]

When being sworn in to the US Military and most Police forces, youth have to take an "oath". That oath says you will defend the US Constitution, but then it also says you will obey the orders of the President and superior officers. Isn't there a conflict there? If I were going into the military and had to make that oath, I might have second thoughts. I would have no problem defending the US Constitution, but following the orders of a President so corrupt and anti-America as Obama would be a problem. He has all but trashed to Constitution and the US Congress. My question, is there any odds being given in Vegas as to just when he will declare himself Emperor of the United States, and have all copies of the constitution burned along with all Bibles and history books. Since he's in the process of giving away the Internet now, what will be our alternative to the truth?

 

[Firefighterchen]

Pretty much sums it up for me.

Sent from my HTCONE using USA Carry mobile app

 

[gunnerbob]

When being sworn in to the US Military and most Police forces, youth have to take an "oath". That oath says you will defend the US Constitution, but then it also says you will obey the orders of the President and superior officers. Isn't there a conflict there? If I were going into the military and had to make that oath, I might have second thoughts. I would have no problem defending the US Constitution, but following the orders of a President so corrupt and anti-America as Obama would be a problem. He has all but trashed to Constitution and the US Congress. My question, is there any odds being given in Vegas as to just when he will declare himself Emperor of the United States, and have all copies of the constitution burned along with all Bibles and history books. Since he's in the process of giving away the Internet now, what will be our alternative to the truth?

"I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God."

The way I see it, being as that I said the part in bold first... that takes precedence over the other part concerning the POTUS and officers appointed over me. I am legally obliged to disobey any order that is unlawful, any that contradicts the Constitution and/or that strips the People of their Natural Rights not explicitly listed in the texts of the Constitution (that's where the 9A comes in). There is only contradiction to the misinformed or immoral...

 

[Eidolon]

This is a very blurry topic, it’s not the gear that makes the cops paramilitary it the attitude.

I think the cops should have the gear and the training because it’s only a matter of time before the “War On Terror” comes here for real and when it does McCoy and Reed are not going to be equipped to handle it. I also believe that, like the military, they should have some strict guidelines on how and when they get to use it.

It’s only an opinion but I think it’s only a matter of time before some one unloads a major attack on this country, in this country and when that happens you’re really gonna see the poop hit the prop. What do you think is going to happen if Los Zetas start a fire fight in Brownsville? Do you think the County Sherrif is going to handle it with his .38?

 

[Firefighterchen]

This is a very blurry topic, it’s not the gear that makes the cops paramilitary it the attitude.

I think the cops should have the gear and the training because it’s only a matter of time before the “War On Terror” comes here for real and when it does McCoy and Reed are not going to be equipped to handle it. I also believe that, like the military, they should have some strict guidelines on how and when they get to use it.

It’s only an opinion but I think it’s only a matter of time before some one unloads a major attack on this country, in this country and when that happens you’re really gonna see the poop hit the prop. What do you think is going to happen if Los Zetas start a fire fight in Brownsville? Do you think the County Sherrif is going to handle it with his .38?

That's not what the police are for...abuse runs rampant, I do not trust police to have that equipment and training available, nor do I need them to.

Sent from my HTCONE using USA Carry mobile app

 

[Happypuppy]

So we give up all our freedoms to prevent one terrorist attack ? Personally I feel less safe than I did since we have a multitude of agencies under DHS . We have spying on citizens without warrants , the IRS being used a a political weapon etc.

"Of course the people don't want war. But after all, it's the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger."
-- Herman Goering at the Nuremberg trials



Just ' bout the action Boss...

 

[Eidolon]

That's not what the police are for

Doesn't matter if that's what they're there (God I wish I could throw in a possessive their in here some where) for or not. When someone does a Mumbai style attack on the Mall of America in Bloomington, (not a military base in a hundred miles) who do you think is going to respond?

If someone decided to try asymmetrical warfare in this country (and God only know why they haven’t yet )you are not going to be able to spread the Army thin enough to cover it. The police are going to have to get involved would you rather they prepared for that now or had to play catch up?

 

[JimTh]

Doesn't matter if that's what they're there (God I wish I could throw in a possessive their in here some where) for or not. When someone does a Mumbai style attack on the Mall of America in Bloomington, (not a military base in a hundred miles) who do you think is going to respond?

If someone decided to try asymmetrical warfare in this country (and God only know why they haven’t yet )you are not going to be able to spread the Army thin enough to cover it. The police are going to have to get involved would you rather they prepared for that now or had to play catch up?

You are missing the point...the cops are not preventing a Mumbai nor can they (a dedicated group of islamic terrorist would b itch slap them into next week)...they are killing citizens and stopping dogs from barking. We don't need them to fight terrorism when they are the source of the terrorism. Sorry if this may offend you and your buds but you guys really need to put a sock in it. Maybe we need Andy Griffith in charge of you Barneys and limit you to one bullet kept in your shirt pocket because what you guys are doing is extremely dangerous...even to yourselves.

 

[Firefighterchen]

Doesn't matter if that's what they're there (God I wish I could throw in a possessive their in here some where) for or not. When someone does a Mumbai style attack on the Mall of America in Bloomington, (not a military base in a hundred miles) who do you think is going to respond?

If someone decided to try asymmetrical warfare in this country (and God only know why they haven’t yet )you are not going to be able to spread the Army thin enough to cover it. The police are going to have to get involved would you rather they prepared for that now or had to play catch up?

We, the People, respond to stop the attack. Police don't respond to terrorist attacks, they mop up terrorist attacks. I'd rather they play catch up and the People left alone to prepare as they see fit, instead of we the People being target practice and bait.

So it does matter what they are here for.

Sent from my HTCONE using USA Carry mobile app

 

[Eidolon]

You are missing the point...the cops are not preventing a Mumbai nor can they

I’m sorry the word “prevent” hasn’t appeared in any of my posts on this topic. I said “respond” and when something like this happens the cops are going to be the first to respond.

Even if such an attack happened in a military town I would guess, based on my military experience that it would take hours if not days to get a military response. Unless some commander actually had a set and ignored the red tape and even then it would take hours to get all his people in and actually armed.

So, you prepare the cops and hold them accountable to their oaths.

I hate to bust your bubble peaches but it’s not the politician’s fault that America is where it is it’s ours

 

[JimTh]

I’m sorry the word “prevent” hasn’t appeared in any of my posts on this topic. I said “respond” and when something like this happens the cops are going to be the first to respond.

Even if such an attack happened in a military town I would guess, based on my military experience that it would take hours if not days to get a military response. Unless some commander actually had a set and ignored the red tape and even then it would take hours to get all his people in and actually armed.

So, you prepare the cops and hold them accountable to their oaths.

I hate to bust your bubble peaches but it’s not the politician’s fault that America is where it is it’s ours

You mean respond like they did at Sandy Hook or Columbine or Aurora. Kinda wait til the smoke clears. Or better yet maybe they will respond like they did to the California bank robbery where 2 heavily armed bank robbers shot them to ribbons along with civilians. Did it ever occur to you that cops are never around when they are needed. But maybe you should be the dear leaders pick for homeland security. Maybe you can train up a mess of morons to kill family dogs. It doesn't take a supreme act of courage to kill the spitz now does it. Hahahaha...go rushing in to the sound of barking but if it sounds like gun fire stay out...you mean respond like that. You mean strap on the Velcro and take aim at fido right.

Hate to bust your bubble barbie but with response like that we don't need cops just the morgue will do. I am convinced you will never get it because you are part of the problem not part of the solution.

 

[Oldgrunt]

I’m sorry the word “prevent” hasn’t appeared in any of my posts on this topic. I said “respond” and when something like this happens the cops are going to be the first to respond.

Even if such an attack happened in a military town I would guess, based on my military experience that it would take hours if not days to get a military response. Unless some commander actually had a set and ignored the red tape and even then it would take hours to get all his people in and actually armed.

So, you prepare the cops and hold them accountable to their oaths.

I hate to bust your bubble peaches but it’s not the politician’s fault that America is where it is it’s ours

Eidolon: I live near a military base. Several years ago, a man started on a rampage killing people on sight and in several towns nearby. The local police forces and State Police were in pursuit and asked for support from the military base. Several military policemen were dispatched to assist the civilian officers in catching the shooter. This was done in violation of many regulations and there were repercussions against the military officials who approved the use of the MPs in the chase. Contrary to your thought, the military is not available to enforce civilian laws (Posse Comitatus Act) and, "having a set" as you put it, is not the determining factor in rendering assistance to civilian authorities. I don't know what type military experience you have but you missed learning a thing or two.

 

[Eidolon]

Contrary to your thought, the military is not available to enforce civilian laws (Posse Comitatus Act)

Quite aware of that

and, "having a set" as you put it, is not the determining factor in rendering assistance to civilian authorities. I don't know what type military experience you have but you missed learning a thing or two.

You need to look at my post in context. I don't believe that in the face of an obvious act of war on US soil that the local commander would just sit by and do nothing

 

[Oldgrunt]

Quite aware of that
You need to look at my post in context. I don't believe that in the face of an obvious act of war on US soil that the local commander would just sit by and do nothing

Eidolon: Your comments make me wonder if your military experience is limited to High School ROTC. The military has contingency plans to cover nearly any event that might occur. The relationship the military might have with civilian authorities is pre-determined under existing plans and, orders for implementation of plans will come down the chain of command to local commanders. Commanders are prohibited from making arbitrary decisions about the use of troops. That is the purpose of having contingency plans! If, and when troops will be used, will be determined by the military scenario playing out and the military mission will be the first order of business, not performing law enforcement duties in the cities. You are right in stating that commanders will not sit idly by after an act of aggression has been made. They will be following their orders, not just what your opinion might be concerning the situation. I know you are retired from the service so you should know about contingency plans.

 

[Eidolon]

Eidolon: Your comments make me wonder if your military experience is limited to High School ROTC. The military has contingency plans to cover nearly any event that might occur. The relationship the military might have with civilian authorities is pre-determined under existing plans and, orders for implementation of plans will come down the chain of command to local commanders. Commanders are prohibited from making arbitrary decisions about the use of troops. That is the purpose of having contingency plans! If, and when troops will be used, will be determined by the military scenario playing out and the military mission will be the first order of business, not performing law enforcement duties in the cities. You are right in stating that commanders will not sit idly by after an act of aggression has been made. They will be following their orders, not just what your opinion might be concerning the situation. I know you are retired from the service so you should know about contingency plans.

I will say this, you guys are consistant if you can't rebutt the arguement you roll out the insults

 

[Oldgrunt]

Eidolon: No one is trying to insult you but I feel that your argument has been rebutted satisfactorily. You are trying to mix roles to be played by military and civilians in a SHTF scenario. Depending on what happens, the military's role will be just that, military. Civilian law enforcement authorities will have to handle their situation as best they can. Depending on the military situation and event, the military may well be able to assist civilian authorities AFTER assessment of the military situation and the availability of resources with which to help. Arming and equipping the civilian authorities (DHS, government agencies and civilian police forces) is a plan which was fostered by Obama from day one in order to have a covert army as well equipped as the active military, and at his command. Does the name Gestapo ring a bell for you? The more we arm and equip civilian agencies like the military, the closer we will be to being walked over with jack boots. As the old saying goes, "Watch what you wish for, you might get it!" Again, not trying to insult you, just disagree with your take on the subject.