Disagree with the tone of this on many fronts. First. The police as military?
Come on. The police all over America are essentially the local military. Their
training, weapons, ect. are all military oriented. Just about every department
has a swat team. To read this article, one would think that the writer has
been watching to much Andy Griffith Show, where the Andy does not even wear a
gun, and his deputy Barny Fife carries one bullet. Next, to say the video of
the robbery had nothing to do with the incident is not yet a fact in evidence,
and logic would say that even if the officer did not know Mr. Brown was a
suspect in a robbery, Mr. Brown knew he was, and likely could have been reacting
to the police because he figured the police officer knew too. And finally, talk
about a rush to judgement going on here. From all experts I've heard from,
a grand jury is not convened until all evidence if in. This is clearly jury by
mob rule. Many have already convicted the officer even though there is a lot of
The truth is, the police are prepared for a violent encounter. So HOW can they
get protesters to stop when it just keeps escalating. This is the disadvantage
of our police, who are trained to kill, none of them seem to know how to
This article is also germane to the situation on the border in Texas where
pseudo militia members are dressing up in camo's and working on the
border."How do they identify themselves? Do they have badges?
How do we know who they are?" asked J.P. Rodriguez, a spokesman for the
Hidalgo County Sheriff's Office. "If they're all just dressed in
camos, it's kind of hard to distinguish whether they're law
enforcement or not. ... There's a lot of potential for stuff to go
This isn't just local police, it seems like every Federal agency also has a
militarized police force.
Instead of telling Police to avoid blurring the line between police and
military... How about we encourage criminals to avoid blurring the line between
individuals doing individual crimes, and mobs???Mobs of people doing
blind-rage crime blitzes require a near military response to protect innocent
people in the neighborhood from being victims to these crimes.What
do you want the Police to do... just sit back and let mobs burn down the
town???===================When a mob is going down the
street breaking out windows and steeling everything from each building as they
go... at that point you kinda need a semi-military response. Or at least more
than an officer with a note pad asking questions and taking notes. The response needs to fit the threat.If mobs stop roaming the
streets at night, looting, attacking people, etc... then the police can probably
tone-down their response.As long as mobs are roaming the streets
committing mass crimes... there kinda needs to be a mass-response (which some
are calling "military" response).This small town calling in
the National Guard and the State Police was the right thing to do (IMO).
Given what the NRA and gun rights advocates have done to this country we have
little choice but to militarize our police.
Local police don't drive around in armored vehicles in full body armor
carrying automatic rifles. Police officers on the street wear normal police
uniforms and carry a pistol. However, it's important for police to have
"military grade" weapons and equipment available if needed. Police
responding to a shooting or hostage situation, conducting arrests of violent
criminals and drug dealers should be using full body armor, sniper rifles, and
automatic weapons because this "militarized" equipment protects the
lives of the officers when they are undertaking a dangerous job. Body armor is
important when dealing with violent rioters as well, because the police need
protection from rocks, firebombs, and even bullets. Trying to blame the
lawless, violent acts of the rioters in Ferguson on the "militarization of
the police" is specious. The protesters in Ferguson could have chosen a
non-violent path. They chose looting and violence. To suggest that they became
violent because the police were wearing helmets and body armor assumes that the
rioters are not capable of making rational decisions. Let's put the blame
for the rioting and looting where it belongs; with the people who choose to riot
The militarization of police is a serious problem. I've seen it and been
concerned about this for quite some time. It is having a negative effect,
including with some conservative, well education friends with military
backgrounds. This is an issue with day-to-day police work, in their reaction to
problems that come up. I know of situations where they have no problem shooting
someone rather than try to deal with a problem in other ways, which was done
more in the past. It's easier this way. My fear is that our society is
like the proverbial frog in the heating pot of water.
Let it be forever remembered: George Bush put troops on the streets of Iraq,
Barack Obama put troops on the streets of America.
perhaps police should just roll up the window in their crusier - turn on the AC
and their IPOD and ignore the robbing and killing going on around them. If I am
a police officer and I look at what I am paid and I get zero respect or support
from politians or the media I quickly conclude that putting my life on the line
for a public that seems to care more about the rights of criminals and killers
is ...well ...maybe its time for a job change. Now when business owners and home
owners see violent crime sky rocket in their neighborhoods and start crying
"where are the police" I think the answer is "why do you care"?
What is happening in Fergeson is disgusting as the police are being thrown under
the bus without any care of what the real truth is. The "lynch mob"
mentality in Fergeson is frightening and feels more like a bananna republic than
America where you are 'supposed to be 'presummed innocent until PROVEN
guilty. What has happened to this country???
The militarization of police in the US is very disturbing and may be part of a
larger problem reflected in America's bizarre fixation against reasonable
gun control. We live in a violent culture devoid of commonsense. Sad.
"....There are indications, as well, that police in Ferguson inflamed the
situation by donning riot gear, imposing curfews and releasing video of the
suspect committing an unrelated robbery. Burbank said the use of helmets and
riot gear seems like an invitation for people to throw bottles and other
objects...."______________________________It would be
gratifying to see the Deseret News acknowledge that the news media also could
share some of the blame on the score of inflaming the situation.
I for one have no problem with the police having whatever weapons, armor, and
vehicles they want to get. At the same time, in accordance with both the letter
and spirit of the Constitutional Bill of Rights, private citizens should be able
to acquire and carry whatever weapons, armor, and vehicles the police are using.
From watching the news... It looks like the more violent aspects of the
"protests" in Furguson are winding down now, and I'm sure the
police response will also wind down as the protests become less violent.
Re: ". . . police departments are becoming increasingly militarized,
blurring the lines between local law enforcement and the military."The only blurring is in the eye of pro-crime liberals, cynically using
appearance to overwhelm actual substance. Their goal is disarming local police,
transferring ever more power to the national government. And, they're
gaining unfortunate traction with the callow and uninformed, to whom symbolism
and appearance mean more than substance.It's not weapons or
tactics that make a force military. It's the mission and operational
control.The military's nationally-controlled mission is to
protect us from foreign threats. Locally controlled police protect us from an
internal criminal element. Since real America has no greater influence over the
decisions of criminals than of foreign enemies, police agencies need to be as
prepared to meet the criminal threat as is the military to meet foreign
threats.Real America's fear is not that locally-controlled
police agencies will infringe our rights, but that a Constitution-hostile
President may be enabled to call in military assets to enforce his will on us,
because callow liberals allowed criminal capabilities to overwhelm local assets.
What a bunch of Martial Law Sympathizers we have on the boards here. Freedom
means absolutely nothing to them and they won't hold the police accountable
for anything. They are the true slaves.
2bitsThe mainstream media lies. Last night there was video of police
beating up members of the press. One member of the press found a whole stash of
moltov cocktails in a trash bin outside of a gas station. Fox, MSNBC, and CNN
are just fountains of misinformation. Pay attention to the alternative media who
are actually filming the protests and not the mainstream media who are 10 miles
Nearly 40 years ago, I did a ride-along in Oakland, CA. There was a call for
assistance in an area referred to as "The Projects." Being nearby I
asked if we would respond. He said no. I thought everyone had the right to
police protection. Realizing my angst, he said let me show you why we don't
go down there. As we entered the neighborhood a group of possibly eight young
males under the age of 10 were standing on a corner. Drawing near, they began
throwing rocks, bottles, etc. at the patrol car. Apparently, these youth had
been taught the police are bad. The police are constantly exposed to
such behavior. Yes, the police do seem overly militant but they often have good
reason. I would not put my life on the line, day in and day out, to babysit
dysfunctional behavior. Our nation was founded upon principles of personal
responsibility and accountability. If we weren't such a self-serving
society and learned to get along with each other the need for law enforcement
would be minimal. Reruns of "Andy of Mayberry" run through my head.
Interesting...Pro-gun nuts insist the answer is MORE guns on
the streets and in the hands of people, and with NO back ground
checks what-so-ever...And when situations like this happen, they slither quietly under a rug, and hope the storm blows over without
anyone calling them on it.Well?...what say you?...BTW --
I made this comment the other day -- The Nazi SS was NOT a
military unit, but a militarized POLICE unit.What we are
witnessing is a slow creeping repeat of disaster.
There is a reason Soldiers aren't cops.Why are we trying to
make cops Soldiers? If a situation requires military grade equipment, mobilize
the National Guard, allow them to have a QRF like the Army does so that they can
readily respond.This will allow a second set of eyes to determine of
the force being used is excessive.
@Anti Bush-Obama,#1. Martial Law has not been declared in Furguson.
There's a difference between a curfew and Martial Law.Google
"Martial Law"..."Martial law is usually imposed on a
temporary basis when the civilian government or civilian authorities fail to
function (e.g., maintain order and security, or provide essential services). In
martial law, the highest-ranking military officer would take over, or be
installed, as the military governor or as head of the government, thus removing
all power from the previous executive, legislative, and judicial branches of
government...That's more than a curfew or police responding to
a riot. It's replacing the elected government leaders with a military
leader. Hasn't happened (yet).A curfew is NOT "Martial
Law". It's done by the local police and the elected leaders (not the
Military)==============#2. As long as we are committed
to only using Martial Law when it is actually needed... I don't think that
make one a "Martial Law Sympathizer".So far America has only
used it when it's needed (not just to oppress the local population). Which
is what I'm wary of.===============Bottom line... a
curfew is NOT "Martial Law".
I completely disagree with this article. Obama finally did something right by
arming our police. They need the weapons and vehicles to deal with the riots. We
need more arms and more military protecting the innocent people here! We need to
bring our troops home and have them deal with problems on the home front not in
Anti Bush-Obama Fox News is right on the streets with the
protestors. Their guy is frequently interrupted by protesters trying to get in
the picture, say something, even grabbing at the microphone. So your assertion
of the mainstream media being 10 miles away does not apply to Fox News. They
have had excellent coverage.PatriotI myself was
wondering what members of this Fergerson police department will do if it looks
like one of their own were being strung up by Governor Nixon and AG Holder just
to appease the rioting minority crowd. Wouldn't surprise me is that
happens. As it is, since we don't seem to have much photographic evidence
as to what really happened, and the stories are so conflicting, reasonable doubt
should be the order of the day. You think reasonable doubt will be afforded
this police officer in this climate? First thing I'd do if I was his
defense team is to request a change of venue to somewhere in Alaska. Try
finding a fair jury amoung this crowd. This will be OJ in reverse. High
profile cases and public juries don't work.
Of the many ways people may effect their government three are:1.
Money. Money to buy elections, preference and employees to lobby for private
goals. 2. Citizen Votes. Highly touted but ineffective due to the
roadblocks created by existing government representatives. 3.
Public Demonstrations. Only effective when known beyond the local. Often
blunted by big money media. Local police seem to be more attached to
local business rather than law or even the Constitution of the United States.
They refuse to effectively enforce the laws that are contrary to the local
government or that would protect the people from unscrupulous politicians and
business operators. The system that the individual sees is
increasingly stacked against him and denied the proper way to control government
is left with the option to fight that government.
@Open minded Mormon:Did you not happen to notice the stores in Ferguson
that were not vandalized were the ones guarded by ARMED private citizens?
Perhaps if ALL the shop owners were as well armed, there would have been NO
looting. What say you now?
illuminatedSt George, UTLet it be forever remembered: George Bush
put troops on the streets of Iraq, Barack Obama put troops on the streets of
America.9:17 a.m. Aug. 20, 2014========== Excuse me?Pres. Obama has done nothing of the sorts...Name
ONE Federal troop order by the President on the Streets of America?ONE!FYI -- The National Guard is under orders from the GOVERNOR.[State Militia -- you know, 2nd amendment -- well regulated militia -- ]
I noticed the article didn't give us the critical detail of the race of the
police officer or the victim shot in SLC. I just learned the officer was black
and the victim was white. No riots were reported and no national coverage. I
guess that situation doesn't occur so infrequently it merits any attention.
The situation in Ferguson gets coverage because it is rare? Or is it just
because one race is more apt to riot? If you look at the conditions in our
prisons, you will find as much animosity between blacks and Hispanics as between
whites and blacks.It's just too bad people can't wait for the
justice system to run its course before they react, report, or riot.
@ illuminated, that's ridiculous. The program started with Bush. Simple
@OMM,The problem is... nobody wants what you PRETEND the
'Pro-gun nuts' want (more guns in the hands of mobs involved in race
riots). What the 'Pro-gun nuts' actually want is not your
strawman... they want more peaceful people in the community (who would never us
a gun except to protect their family) to have the "RIGHT" to be armed.
We don't care if they take advantage of that right or not, but we want the
right preserved.Is that TOO MUCH to ask without suffering your
wrath, stereotypes, and slander??==================Who
wants "NO back ground checks what-so-ever"? I know that's not the
NRA's position, or any "ProGunNut" I know's position... Who actually said they want "NO back ground checks what-so-ever? Or is that just your imagination and all-or-nothing thinking coming out
again?=============What we ACTUALLY want is... the RIGHT
for peaceful sane people to bear arms.How about we discuss what
"Gun Nuts" ACTUALLY want? Instead of your strawman that they want more
guns in the hands of criminals and mobs whipped into a lynch-mob frenzy by Al
To "Open Minded Mormon" it is interesting that the liberals all jump on
the anti-gun bandwagon any time there is violence going on. Right now the shop
owners in Ferguson that still have their shops and inventory are the ones that
brought out guns and are protecting themselves. The ones that followed the
liberal advice and waited for police to show up have lost their businesses.Plus, the mobs are not armed with guns, they are armed with bottles
filled with gasoline, or anything else that will burn. Should we ban gasoline
purchases without a background check? The SS was successful because they were
able to get the people to turn in their weapons and disarm themselves.To "SCfan" this officer will not have to suffer too much. There is
now a report out showing how Brown punched the officer and fractured his eye
socket. If Brown hadn't been shot, he could have killed the police
"Who actually said they want "NO back ground checks what-so-ever?
"What say you Mr Richards? Are background checks allowed per
your interpretation of the Constitution?Are you for background
Militarization of police tactics and culture is a problem. But it is not
relevant to the troubles in Ferguson. What happened there was
plain-jane -- a patrol cop, in a patrol car, shot someone. It may or may not
have been justified. That does not stop the race hustlers and assorted other
terrible people from doing what they do. The standard drill.You
could not pay me enough to be a police officer in an area populated
predominantly by aggrieved minorities. If an incident happens, your guilt or
innocence will be beside the point. The narrative is too important to be
cluttered up with mere facts. The Sharptons and worse will be after your head
Re: "What a bunch of Martial Law Sympathizers . . . they won't hold the
police accountable for anything. They are the true slaves."Actually, we'll all be true slaves when the liberals meet their goal of
concentrating, not just military, but all effective police resources in federal
hands.Liberals intend to reduce local police agencies to something
less than "Barney Fife" status as part of a plan [that also includes
agitating criminal elements to lawless action] to make it impossible to control
crime locally. This will make it easier to convince real people to join liberal
bleating for Presidential intervention [as is occurring today in Ferguson], by
the only forces left with the wherewithal to control venal, large-scale
lawlessness.It would be truly foolish to fall into this cynical
liberal trap, particularly if we do so, thinking we're preserving liberty
thereby. Locally-controlled police agencies should be the primary agents, and
the repository of knowledge, training, and equipment necessary to confront crime
and insurrection.Federal police agencies are the ones that should be
disarmed. They must be prohibited from acquiring weapons and materiel to wage
war on us.
One thing I do not like: Police officers referring to non-police officers as
"civilians."Look, officers: YOU are civilians. You are one
of us. You are not a tribe apart. When a police officer is killed in the line
of duty, you are not to pull out all the stops (like happened in the aftermath
of the Dorner murders in southern California last year, shooting a couple of
innocent people in their zeal) because it's "one of your own." ALL
of us are "your own." Do not use foul language in the
presence of citizens. Be knightly. Prefer to die yourself than to
wrongfully kill a fellow citizen. Earn those bagpipe funerals.
If it's really true that American police officers run around shooting
aggrieved minorities without cause......why is it they never seem to
shoot someone without a lengthy rap sheet? You'd think if
it's just open season on minorities, as the race hustlers have it, the law
of averages would have a non-thug getting popped from time to time.That that's not the case, says something about what's really going
on: The occupational hazards of being a thug include getting shot by cops.
Our country recognizes that employees from every profession deserve a "safe
place to work." Because police officers trying to quell a riot are so
vulnerable, they need to have protection against rocks, Molotov Cocktails, guns,
knives etc. Furthermore, one of the purposes of the Second
Amendment were to protect the citizens from tyranny. True, local police could
become a tyrannical unit. However, the fact that local police may have to come
to the defense of the local populace in the event of tyrannical action by the
federal government makes it comforting for me that our officers are receiving
equipment on par with that possessed by federal troops.
I'm surprised that so many normally pro-gun people aren't advocating
for more guns in the hands of the people to defend against a tyrannical
government, or whatever it is the NRA says we should fear. I mean, I'm glad
you all seem to agree with gun-control people like me on this but i can't
help but wonder why that is. @Klarson"The protesters in
Ferguson could have chosen a non-violent path. "The vast
majority of them have. Ever notice how the protests during the day are
completely peaceful? It's only at night where some are taking advantage of
everything that's going on and are causing trouble, you'll even see
the peaceful protestors helping protect many of the buildings from possible
looting at night. Likewise the vast majority of police officers are behaving
I think all officers should have to work in a prison or jail before working the
street. When you have no weapons besides pepper spray, like correction officers,
you learn how to talk down situations better. it is a necessity.
Brilliant idea. Let's take the guns away from the good guys who are trained
and leave the guns only the bad guys.My how we've forgotten the
north Hollywood bank robbery. Once again, conservatives fail to
learn from history.
I spoke this morning with someone I know from the St. Louis area who indicated
that what we are seeing on television is the culmination of long standing
problems in Ferguson. Force, regardless of what weapons are used, simply
isn't the solution.
@ Chief Burbank, it obvious that you haven't been in those situations where
you had to use helmets, shields and batons. Why don't you "saddle
up", stand in the line without them and then tell me it's an
invitation. I've been there and done that, and I prefer the protective
gear against the rocks and bottles. We didn't invite that treatment just
by being where we were supposed to be doing our duty.@Airnaut - The
National Guard has been an Organized Reserve since 1986. They may have started
as the militia, but they aren't anymore. You will find that there are in
fact organized state militias in most every state, but they are not part of the
armed forces......and the "well-regulated militia" (meaning well
trained) are the male citizens of certain age not in the organized military
forces. Of course, you have been told that many times and you still pull out
the strawman argument.
To "Schnee" did you see that the only businesses that haven't been
looted are the ones where the owners stood armed with gun in front of their
stores? Did you know that tyranny can come from sources other than government?
Would you sit back and allow businesses to be looted and people's jobs to
be destroyed because a mob decided it would be fun to go and loot?The only gun control needed is holding your gun steady as you pull the
trigger.If you think we need more extensive background checks, ask
yourself this: How many criminals buy their guns legally?To
"The Real Maverick" yes look at the North Hollywood robbery. The guy
had a full suit of body armor. The armor is what made things so deadly. If
individuals can buy body armor freely, shouldn't we give the police weapons
that can penetrate the armor?Why do you hate the police so much?
Red ShirtI hope you are correct. As of now, from what evidence
I've heard, and assuming it is true, it looks like the officer had good
reason to use deadly force. But to have Governor Nixon of Missouri all but
saying in his speech that "we will give the police officer a fair trial then
hang him" and to have Eric Holder coming to town, this police officer will
be a target for PERsecution, not PROsecution. And, as I said before, where on
Earth can a fair jury be found for this if it goes to trial. Change of venue,
as OJ got, would be in order. You think the rioters of Fergerson will take that
without more burning? You think there won't be a huge fuss over how many
white vs. black jurors? And I can't imagine what will happen if it turns
out there is not enough evidence to indict. All of St. Louis may go up in
flames. This has the potential to end up as one of the uglier incidents in
John Wayne is dead. His movie caracter shot Liberty Valance. Liberty Valance
is dead. This is modern-day America where "community organizers"
infiltrate groups of angry citizens and incite rioting. This is modern-day
America where the media has stopped reporting facts and has started being part
of the "story". This is modern-day America where truth is hidden and
lies are broadcast.Citizens have the right to expect the local
police to protect them. If it takes tanks to quel violence, then use tanks;
but, first, lock up the "community organizers" and prosecute them for
inciting violence. Expose their funding. Expose their leaders. Expose their
purposes. When the media stops telling us the obvious and starts
doing its job to dig deeply enough to find the "deep throat" of the
"community organizers", we will be able to stop the mindless violence.
Until then, we will need bigger tanks and better equipped police departments.
To "SCFan" read the article "Ferguson, Missouri, police officer
suffered "serious facial injury" just before shooting and killing
Michael Brown, according to sources" at Cleveland dot com.
@JackAurora, CO@Airnaut - The National Guard has been an
Organized Reserve since 1986. They may have started as the militia, but they
aren't anymore. You will find that there are in fact organized state
militias in most every state, but they are not part of the armed forces......and
the "well-regulated militia" (meaning well trained) are the male
citizens of certain age not in the organized military forces. Of course, you
have been told that many times and you still pull out the strawman
argument.====== 10:03 p.m. Aug. 20, 2014Then you better
explain that to the Pentagon, Because I was in that "strawman
argument" for over 8 years, and 3 deployments getting shot at, and no one
ever bothered to let the 3 million of us know that.Males in trucks
with hunting rifles [ala, Cliven Bundy's posse] are NOT militias, they are
domestic terrorists.They operate with NO Chain or Line of
Authority.As a Mormon or Service member -- you should understand how
that works better than most.
should be NO fine line, should be a clearly marked demarcation line. these are
the military. these are the civilian police forces, when you merge civilian
police forces and convince them they are at WAR, who becomes the enemy. the very
public they were originally sworn to protect.