It's illegal to use the military against citizens

[texanjoker]

How in the world can you guys keep saying it was free?

Because it doesn't cost the dept anything. Sure the military spent a ton of money , the war was bad, blah blah blah. Right now tho they are sitting around not being used because we got out of iraq. So we have a police dept that can buy a bearcat that is designed for police at about $250,000 or can apply for a surplus MRAP that they get at no cost to them. The MRAP is, I'm sure, a bit much, but while it may have a ton of features the cops don't need and wouldn't pay for it still covers the criteria they do need.

And by the way why would anyone care except they look scary? They are not tanks. There are no machine guns or cannons on these vehicles. What will they do with them that you are so worried about? They are defensive vehicles and were never meant to be defensive weapons. The major "military" aspect of their design is the mine resistance and while unnecessary who is going to get worked up over that? How are the cops going to oppress us with a vehicle that resist mines? No real defensive capabilities but it's hard to blow up, those totalitarians!!!

Just some thoughts:

These unarmed vehicles "look scary" sounds like a statement from Diane Feinstein on assault weapons . If they look so scary why not waste more $$ and paint them black and white or pink? When you are hunkered down with gun fire I want the vehicle to scare the heck outta the guy shooting at us. Since the military is downsizing and unloading vehicles that sit around, why not use them? They will be staged where the rest of the command vehicles/swat vehicles are and deploy on swat missions.

Carrying spare shot gun barrels? Having proper keep it simple equipment is the correct thing to do. The same semi auto AR the public has have proven their value in patrol environments.

[mojo84]

You are missing the big picture.

Actually, I would like for Seal Team 6 be called in to do the extraction since they are the highly trained professionals in that type of operation. Am I going to get my wish?

Using my mom, wife or daughter to help justify this kind of thing is pretty elementary when many of the people requesting these equipment "gifts" are really wanting them for the same reason as this guy. http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/ ... ded-again/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Your lack of response to the question, deflection and attempt to belittle is likely more telling then anything your otherwise willing to post.

I had hoped for an honest response so we could discusses.
I'll leave this thread to you now.

It doesn't surprise me the two of you come down on the same side of this issue. I answered his question. I would want someone more adept and better trained to do the extraction of a loved one than a cop that may have never been in this particular situation before. Now, am I going to get my wish?

How about answering some of my questions? Do you know for a fact this equipment is formerly used and now decommissioned? Was it excess and surplus purchased equipment? Is it more or less costly to maintain and operate this equipment than it is civilian grade armored vehicles that are designed for law enforcement instead of war. Is it appropriate to have heavy military equipment rolling around our city streets such as the case in Irag, Afghanistan and other urban war zones? Is that where you guys want our country headed? Have you even read the rules to see that the armored

I keep saying it, look at the bigger picture.

If cops want to play army, that's up to them. I am against it and think they should join the military if that is what they want. You guys are using the same type of logic as the anti-gun crowd, "if it saves just one life" it's okay.

[mojo84]

How in the world can you guys keep saying it was free?

Because it doesn't cost the dept anything. Sure the military spent a ton of money , the war was bad, blah blah blah. Right now tho they are sitting around not being used because we got out of iraq. So we have a police dept that can buy a bearcat that is designed for police at about $250,000 or can apply for a surplus MRAP that they get at no cost to them. The MRAP is, I'm sure, a bit much, but while it may have a ton of features the cops don't need and wouldn't pay for it still covers the criteria they do need.

And by the way why would anyone care except they look scary? They are not tanks. There are no machine guns or cannons on these vehicles. What will they do with them that you are so worried about? They are defensive vehicles and were never meant to be defensive weapons. The major "military" aspect of their design is the mine resistance and while unnecessary who is going to get worked up over that? How are the cops going to oppress us with a vehicle that resist mines? No real defensive capabilities but it's hard to blow up, those totalitarians!!!

Just some thoughts:

These unarmed vehicles "look scary" sounds like a statement from Diane Feinstein on assault weapons . If they look so scary why not waste more $$ and paint them black and white or pink?

That's a phrase your compadre came up with. I said nothing about them looking scary. I think the desert tan looks less intimidating than the black most police swat teams use.


Today it is armored personnel carriers, tomorrow it will be "surplus" tanks and then "surplus" drones and then.... Oh wait, on the drones, we may be there already.

http://oathkeepers.org/oath/2013/07/09/ ... ican-soil/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.judgenap.com/index.php?post= ... -americans" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


It's obvious we disagree and it appears we aren't going to change the others' minds. I put the information out there and expect others will make their own decisions about what they believe it right.

[mojo84]

This conversation has prompted me to do further research on the subject. I had my opinion beforehand but have only confirmed what I thought to be true with my additional research. Here is an interesting read, from Oath Keepers nonetheless.

http://oathkeepers.org/oath/2013/08/25/ ... tlefields/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


This is discussing the exact "big picture" I have been trying to get across. Whether you agree or disagree, that is up to you.

[JP171]

yep this thread is right up there with the Fema Concentration death camps, yep sure is

[Dragonfighter]

<SNIP>

I think it would be great if the PD could sell this truck and use the money to put bullet resistant glass in all patrol vehicles, along with steel panels in the doors and whatever else would be needed to protect the occupants to at least a 30.06.

<SNIP>

Oh well, I am just a tax payer. My function is to give them my money, their job is to waste it.

Years ago, I was selected (I still had my clearance) to edit and compose a video presentation for a military contractor who built armored vehicles for strike teams and VIP security; I had to work after hours so other personnel would not see it. What I learned was, when outfitting a "normal" looking car there were tradeoffs. To add armor and bullet resistant glass involved frame and suspension overhauls and often (depending on the package) larger engines. The tradeoff was often in loss of interior space. So the question is, would retrofitting a cruiser not cost almost as much, cost more to keep it fueled and then no handle like a regular cruiser?

The MRAP is just an armored car. Though I feel the police are militarizing and while I believe that is a means to an end run around the constitution, a selectively used armored car does not bother me. I am more worried about the tac teams becoming more heavily equipped and their increasing use in "ordinary" warrants.

[texanjoker]

<SNIP>

I think it would be great if the PD could sell this truck and use the money to put bullet resistant glass in all patrol vehicles, along with steel panels in the doors and whatever else would be needed to protect the occupants to at least a 30.06.

<SNIP>

Oh well, I am just a tax payer. My function is to give them my money, their job is to waste it.

Years ago, I was selected (I still had my clearance) to edit and compose a video presentation for a military contractor who built armored vehicles for strike teams and VIP security; I had to work after hours so other personnel would not see it. What I learned was, when outfitting a "normal" looking car there were tradeoffs. To add armor and bullet resistant glass involved frame and suspension overhauls and often (depending on the package) larger engines. The tradeoff was often in loss of interior space. So the question is, would retrofitting a cruiser not cost almost as much, cost more to keep it fueled and then no handle like a regular cruiser?

The MRAP is just an armored car. Though I feel the police are militarizing and while I believe that is a means to an end run around the constitution, a selectively used armored car does not bother me.

I am more worried about the tac teams becoming more heavily equipped and their increasing use in "ordinary" warrants.

Now that I agree with. In incidents were we would just go get the guy, many places are going swat when IMO it is not needed.

[texanjoker]

You are missing the big picture.

Actually, I would like for Seal Team 6 be called in to do the extraction since they are the highly trained professionals in that type of operation. Am I going to get my wish?

Using my mom, wife or daughter to help justify this kind of thing is pretty elementary when many of the people requesting these equipment "gifts" are really wanting them for the same reason as this guy. http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/ ... ded-again/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Your lack of response to the question, deflection and attempt to belittle is likely more telling then anything your otherwise willing to post.

I had hoped for an honest response so we could discusses.
I'll leave this thread to you now.

It doesn't surprise me the two of you come down on the same side of this issue. I answered his question. I would want someone more adept and better trained to do the extraction of a loved one than a cop that may have never been in this particular situation before. Now, am I going to get my wish?

How about answering some of my questions? Do you know for a fact this equipment is formerly used and now decommissioned? Was it excess and surplus purchased equipment? Is it more or less costly to maintain and operate this equipment than it is civilian grade armored vehicles that are designed for law enforcement instead of war. Is it appropriate to have heavy military equipment rolling around our city streets such as the case in Irag, Afghanistan and other urban war zones? Is that where you guys want our country headed? Have you even read the rules to see that the armored

I keep saying it, look at the bigger picture.

If cops want to play army, that's up to them. I am against it and think they should join the military if that is what they want. You guys are using the same type of logic as the anti-gun crowd, "if it saves just one life" it's okay.

You wish for somebody "better trained" to extract a loved one? That is where swat teams came from. Although now days it has gone back to the 1st responder to take these wackos down because in waiting we have learned people die. Most street leo's have now received the training in responding to these types of threats. I know I have personally worked more then one active shooter in my career.

Not sure where your cop wants to "play army" comment comes from. The street cops are the ones responding to the active shootings and other situations of that nature on American soil. There is nothing about playing army in that, just a fact of life for a first responder. If you think having a armored rescue vehicle is "playing army" have at it. I have no idea what their rules are. Where I come from the armored rescue vehicle deploys with SWAT. It is very useful.

I don't know the cost nor do I know all your questions but show me where these heavy military items are just rolling around our streets. They are not used for patrol, just certain missions like I elaborated on above.

I have posted before that an M1 would be overboard and I would have issues with that.

Side note I see a lot of citizens playing army running around with their ar15's at wally world. If one is that scared to go to wally world they need to stay home.

[bizarrenormality]

How in the world can you guys keep saying it was free?

Believe it or not, there are people in this country who think OPM = FREE.

[mojo84]

<SNIP>

I think icountry be great if the PD could sell this truck and use the money to put bullet resistant glass in all patrol vehicles, along with steel panels in the doors and whatever else would be needed to protect the occupants to at least a 30.06.

<SNIP>

Oh well, I am just a tax payer. My function is to give them my money, their job is to waste it.

Years ago, I was selected (I still had my clearance) to edit and compose a video presentation for a military contractor who built armored vehicles for strike teams and VIP security; I had to work after hours so other personnel would not see it. What I learned was, when outfitting a "normal" looking car there were tradeoffs. To add armor and bullet resistant glass involved frame and suspension overhauls and often (depending on the package) larger engines. The tradeoff was often in loss of interior space. So the question is, would retrofitting a cruiser not cost almost as much, cost more to keep it fueled and then no handle like a regular cruiser?

The MRAP is just an armored car. Though I feel the police are militarizing and while I believe that is a means to an end run around the constitution, a selectively used armored car does not bother me. I am more worried about the tac teams becoming more heavily equipped and their increasing use in "ordinary" warrants.

I agree with what you are saying. Especially the idea of your last paragraph. Unfortunately, human nature kicks in and the leos start acting more and more like soldiers and less like law enforcement officers. I also believe this is a method to get military grade equipment staged around the country in order to be ready for "emerging threats".

[mojo84]

How in the world can you keep saying it was free?

Believe it or not, there are people in this country who think OPM = FREE.

yep. It wouldn't surprise me if there aren't orders being filled for these exact type of vehicles as these are being doled out.

[EEllis]

How in the world can you keep saying it was free?

Believe it or not, there are people in this country who think OPM = FREE.

yep. It wouldn't surprise me if there aren't orders being filled for these exact type of vehicles as these are being doled out.

It would me. MRAPs are about $800,000 new and a bearcat is about $300,000 with the biggest difference being slightly smaller and not mine resistant. Most depts would prefer the Bearcat but at $300,000 it does effect the budget when you get to cities and counties under 500.000 people. The only orders for the MRAP would be military and foreign sales

[mojo84]

How in the world can you keep saying it was free?

Believe it or not, there are people in this country who think OPM = FREE.

yep. It wouldn't surprise me if there aren't orders being filled for these exact type of vehicles as these are being doled out.

It would me. MRAPs are about $800,000 new and a bearcat is about $300,000 with the biggest difference being slightly smaller and not mine resistant. Most depts would prefer the Bearcat but at $300,000 it does effect the budget when you get to cities and counties under 500.000 people. The only orders for the MRAP would be military and foreign sales

I'm saying it wouldn't surprise me if the federal government, DOD, doesn't have some of these on order while at the same time giving some "surplus and excess" units away.

[EEllis]

How in the world can you keep saying it was free?

Believe it or not, there are people in this country who think OPM = FREE.

yep. It wouldn't surprise me if there aren't orders being filled for these exact type of vehicles as these are being doled out.

It would me. MRAPs are about $800,000 new and a bearcat is about $300,000 with the biggest difference being slightly smaller and not mine resistant. Most depts would prefer the Bearcat but at $300,000 it does effect the budget when you get to cities and counties under 500.000 people. The only orders for the MRAP would be military and foreign sales

I'm saying it wouldn't surprise me if the federal government, DOD, doesn't have some of these on order while at the same time giving some "surplus and excess" units away.

Homeland is still buying Bearcats because they are specifically set up for the uses while MRAPS or more "good enough" than exactly what they want. Heck big cities still buy bearcats when they can get MRAPs for free. There are thousands of these things and if they don't get used they will most likely end up as soft targets on ranges. God forbid they get some use out of them.

[VoiceofReason]

How in the world can you guys keep saying it was free?

Because it doesn't cost the dept anything. Sure the military spent a ton of money , the war was bad, blah blah blah. Right now tho they are sitting around not being used because we got out of iraq. So we have a police dept that can buy a bearcat that is designed for police at about $250,000 or can apply for a surplus MRAP that they get at no cost to them. The MRAP is, I'm sure, a bit much, but while it may have a ton of features the cops don't need and wouldn't pay for it still covers the criteria they do need.

And by the way why would anyone care except they look scary? They are not tanks. There are no machine guns or cannons on these vehicles. What will they do with them that you are so worried about? They are defensive vehicles and were never meant to be defensive weapons. The major "military" aspect of their design is the mine resistance and while unnecessary who is going to get worked up over that? How are the cops going to oppress us with a vehicle that resist mines? No real defensive capabilities but it's hard to blow up, those totalitarians!!!

Just some thoughts:

These unarmed vehicles "look scary" sounds like a statement from Diane Feinstein on assault weapons . If they look so scary why not waste more $$ and paint them black and white or pink? When you are hunkered down with gun fire I want the vehicle to scare the heck outta the guy shooting at us. Since the military is downsizing and unloading vehicles that sit around, why not use them? They will be staged where the rest of the command vehicles/swat vehicles are and deploy on swat missions.

Carrying spare shot gun barrels? Having proper keep it simple equipment is the correct thing to do. The same semi auto AR the public has have proven their value in patrol environments.

Do you know why they had to go looking for rifles?

Policy prevented them from having rifles in the patrol cars. It was only after that battle policy was changed and rifles were issued to patrol officers.

Lacking a rifle, only having a pistol and shotgun, a long barrel and slugs might have saved a few lives while officers were shopping at Academy or the nearest pawn shop.

This thing does not belong on the streets with “POLICE” on the door, even if is “free”. This is not a war zone and any officer that is convinced it is, should take off the badge. It would be better for him/her and the citizens.

It seems every government department has a SWAT team or equivalent now, even the USDA. It is happening slowly, one small step at a time. The scary part is that a lot of people don’t see these changes and when they do, they write it off as ”what is everyone worried about?”, This is no threat.

I agree with mojo84 “If cops want to play army, that's up to them. I am against it and think they should join the military if that is what they want.”

Here is where it gets complicated. It’s not so much the vehicle people oppose, it is the mentality of a lot of agents, the “us against them” mindset.

The big question is how we can stop and reverse the trend