Ron Paul: Ferguson Brings The War Home To America
MILITARIZATION OF LOCAL POLICE A TREND THAT MUST BE REVERSED By Ron Paul || America’s attentioYou must Subscribe or log in to read the rest of this content.
MILITARIZATION OF LOCAL POLICE A TREND THAT MUST BE REVERSED By Ron Paul || America’s attentioYou must Subscribe or log in to read the rest of this content.
33 comments
“tear gas (a substance banned in warfare),” and “No knock” raids save lives.
In a nation of 315 million, you can always find horror stories. The facts are that these tactics save lives.
Fact: I have Google searched; riots, civil unrest, and prison riots. Hundreds of people died in riots in the US during the period from the late sixties until 1992. Dozens died at the hands of law enforcement and Guardsmen. Since 1992,(twenty two years) I have only found five who have died in civil unrest and none of those have died at the hands of law enforcement or Guardsmen.
Ron Paul and his ilk want you to believe that the country is failing apart. You should read the history of the sixties and seventies. Is live bullets better than tear gas? Are dogs and fire hoses better than flash bangs?
“Here we go again with the dogs and fire hoses.” :-)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hHGjQcxSPfI
“Ron Paul and his ilk want you to believe that the country is becoming a police state. ”
Yeah! You tell em’ Bible Thumper!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_incarceration_rate#mediaviewer/File:Incarceration_rates_worldwide.gif
What? That’s can’t be right.
DO YOU SEE A PROBLEM HERE?
Incarceration rate per 100,000
Ethnicity———————— Male ——– Female ———– Total
———————————————————————————-
White non-Hispanic ——– 678 ———— 91—————- 385
Black non-Hispanic ——– 4,347 ——— 260 ————– 2304
Hispanic of any race —— 1,775 ——— 133 ————– 954
All inmates —————— 1,352 ——— 126 ————– 732
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incarceration_in_the_United_States
So you’re admitting now we do have a police state here?
Good.
Next, you can explain to me why Russia is number 2 on the list with an approximate black population of .12%(yes, you read that right) since your post suggests that blacks are the problem.
Many other countries have just as strict laws and even more severe penalties. Our crime problems are of a cultural nature, not a criminal justice problem. Not a police state but a criminal culture.
“Not a police state but a criminal culture.”
Nope. The old proverb holds that every time a law is created a criminal is made:
“Lead the people with administrative injunctions and put them in their
place with penal law, and they will avoid punishments but will be
without a sense of shame. Lead them with excellence and put them in
their place through roles and ritual practices, and in addition to
developing a sense of shame, they will order themselves harmoniously”-Confucius
You’re going to have a tough time finding another country with more than 45000 laws & regulations.
“45000 laws & regulations”
No problem. The average policeman can only remember half of those laws.
lol…that’s kinda funny even though you missed my point.
You start by getting rid of the victimless crimes, that should drop the number by 75% if not more.
I think more , not less, militarization is exactly what is needed by the police. How many black on black murders were there in Chicago this year? and last year? Horrifying. If we not show force, which has a deterrent effect, these hoods will take over. There are good blacks. There are bad blacks. It is up to the good blacks to stand up against the bad ones, and voice their disdain for crime. If you did not do the crime, you have nothing to worry about from the cops. Militarization should not bother the innocent.
There’s a reason you separate military and the police. One fights the enemies of the state. The other serves and protects the people. When the military becomes both, then the enemies of the state tend to become the people.
I have seriously mixed feelings on the “militarization” thing. For stuff like the LA bank robbery shootout, Ferguson, and the like, I have no real problem with it. These are acts of lawlessness where the “toys” can come in handy and their use may be legitimate.
What I have a problem with is the use of these things, seemingly just to be using them, same as some use their SWAT teams for every little thing that comes along, just to keep it running and broken in. The Boston area, following the bombing spree, I would have had no problem with these things being used against the bombers, but the way the police were going house-to-house, making forced, warrantless, searches of peoples’ homes with all of that crap and the attitude of “you wouldn’t DARE refuse us or resist us”, made me want to puke. This is the kind of stuff that would make one seriously want to resist them and with all available force they could lay hands on.
Need we even mention the abuses by Federal agencies armed with all of this SWAT and military crap and the way they have abused citizens for stuff like keeping, giving away, or selling raw milk. How about the Education SWAT Nazis who raided the man’s home in CA, terrorizing him, his kids, and holding him in a car for hours while they searched his house for his estranged wife (who was not there) over a defaulted loan or some such crap?
The military stuff could be useful for real crimes of a serious or widespread nature, but using it against people suspected of minor stuff or even not suspected of any crime at all (Boston, again), I won’t shed a lot of tears if these programs to distribute such equipment go away.
Thanks to the NRA and other 2d Amendment Absolutists, there is an arms race between the man in the street and the police. Citizens with money and connections can legally possess silenced, fully-automatic submachine guns and .50 cal Barrett sniper rifles, and post videos using them on Twitter.
The issue is not so much the increased firepower and military-style equipment that has been made available to the police, but the judicious and appropriate use of it.
So how is it that citizens being able to own these guns are a bad thing?
He is convinced that there is a middle road. He doesn’t yet realize that his protection is his job. Cops are wonderful investigators, but when seconds count, the cops are only minutes away. The people need the protection of guns. Cowards need the protection of the police.
What Good Can a Handgun Do Against An Army?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-backroom/2312894/posts
This was a (mostly) excellent essay!!!!! When I first saw your rhetorical question, I did the eye roll. Then I read your link and was quite pleased.
For those who haven’t read your link yet or who found it too lengthy or “complicated” to digest, please let me add an analogy they might more easily understand. The movie(s) “Red Dawn” (pick one) depicted teenagers and young adults who used smaller weapons to obtain more, bigger, and better, weapons from an invading enemy. While these were fictional movies, they could easily become our reality one day. Junior’s essay link goes into this much more deeply and is worth the time it takes to read.
I saw a magazine ad a few days ago for a Browning M2 .50 caliber machine gun made semi-automatic and thus legal. (Though I thought I once read LONG ago about “mounted” weapons being somehow illegal.”
When I had an M2 mounted on my jeep in Nha Trang, the local police didn’t bother me.
There’s a reason you separate military and the police. One fights the enemies of the state. The other serves and protects the people. When the military becomes both, then the enemies of the state tend to become the people.
A survey of 1,000 Americans interviewed on Aug 16-17, 2004, has found that a majority of Americans are opposed to police militarization (51% to 28%).
https://today.yougov.com/news/2014/08/19/poll-results-police/
Most Americans are against police militarization, except in cases where the police are dealing with terrorists like Al Qaeda. Ferguson, Missouri protesters are not Al Qaeda..
If Republicans/Libertarians/Independent Conservatives don’t come together on this, this will probably split the Republicans Party. Republicans need to unite against police militarization, except in cases where police have to deal with terrorists like Al Qaeda.
“If Republicans/Libertarians/Independent Conservatives don’t come together on this, this will probably split the Republicans Party.”
Duh…this already happened. Good riddance to the GOP, let the Commies/Socialists bury what’s left and then start over. Commie Lite vs. Commie is a choice no one wants to make any more.
Commie vs. Commie lite? Use hyperbole much? LOL. That is taking things too far, although one isn’t much better than the other. You make want to see if you have skipped taking meds…
Poll: Americans Opposed to Police Militarization
While most Americans either have a somewhat favorable opinion (38%) or a somewhat unfavorable opinion (17%) of police officers, as compared to totally favorable or totally unfavorable, most Americans 51% to 28% are opposed to police militarization (as reported by both the left and right media concerning military assault-grade firearms, bomb-proof armored transports/vehicles, silencers, etcetera). A survey (survey) of 1,000 adults interviewed on Aug16-17, 2014:
https://today.yougov.com/news/2014/08/19/poll-results-police/
Most of my fellow Libertarians (and many conservatives that I disagree with on matters of never-ending overseas interventionism, banker bailouts, boots-on-the-ground practically all over the globe, unending borrow-and-spend, etcetera) are united against police militarization being used unless it for acts of terrorism (like from Al Qaeda).
Rontards and Paulestinians unite! You have nothing to lose but your minds!
RINOs and police state-liking people unite! You have nothing to lose but… Well, you have nothing to lose!
The advent of Kevlar vests and other protective technologies enable police
officers to work with less fear for their lives than in the past.
As a result, the number of killings by police is down 70% in 36 years, says
Candace McCoy, a professor of criminal justice at John Jay College in New York.
Only a small percentage of the nation’s 500,000 police officers are involved in
shootings. Most retire without ever firing their gun in the line of duty.
http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-28861630
I wonder how long it will be before we have two years running WITHOUT some big bad outcome from Bush’s war-based-on-lies against Iraq hitting the headlines.
Oops. Posted in wrong place.
No. There can’t be a wrong place for blaming Bush.
If Bush had not of started two wars, we wouldn’t have had all that excess military equipment that was given to the Ferguson police that provoked the protesters to loot liquor and meat from stores.
The police and military don’t just look the same and carry the same weapons. The rules of engagement for the military and the police and any gun-toting fool are all the same. If you say you “felt” threatened, you can kill someone. When it was in Iraq and little kids were getting gunned down in their front yards by U.S. soldiers, it barely made the news. After all, those soldiers saw a shape running in the distance. Could have been an enemy soldier. Can’t take any chances.
Now the same rules of engagement stand in the homeland. If you “feel” threatened, don’t hesitate. Shoot to kill. Empty your clip for good measure. It’s the new American Way.
News is now 24/7 and around the world. Thank goodness. Without it, I would have never discovered people like Ron Paul. His logic is common sense and I could totally understand why the establishment fears guys like him. Unfortunately for him, his thinking is inspiring others and change will be made. Give it 15-20 years or so and just about every American will think like this man. We’ve pretty much had enough.
The Nation: Exclusive Video: This Is How Police Treated Residents of the Apartment Complex Where Michael Brown Was Killed
http://www.thenation.com/blog/181357/exclusive-video-how-police-treated-residents-apartment-complex-where-michael-brown-was-k