Avoid blurring the line between police and military

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • goodnight-goodluck S.L.C., UT
    Sept. 14, 2014 10:30 p.m.

    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.

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    Aug. 23, 2014 4:39 p.m.

    Aurora, 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, 2014

    Then 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.

  • Redshirt1701 Deep Space 9, Ut
    Aug. 21, 2014 3:29 p.m.

    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.

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    Aug. 21, 2014 11:44 a.m.

    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.

  • SCfan clearfield, UT
    Aug. 21, 2014 11:05 a.m.

    Red Shirt

    I 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 American history.

  • Redshirt1701 Deep Space 9, Ut
    Aug. 21, 2014 8:27 a.m.

    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?

  • Jack Aurora, CO
    Aug. 20, 2014 10:03 p.m.

    @ 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.

  • Henry Drummond San Jose, CA
    Aug. 20, 2014 9:48 p.m.

    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.

  • The Real Maverick Orem, UT
    Aug. 20, 2014 9:37 p.m.

    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.

  • Bowl murray, UT
    Aug. 20, 2014 3:57 p.m.

    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.

  • Schnee Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 20, 2014 3:41 p.m.

    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.

    "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 responsibly.

  • Tumbleweed Centerville, UT
    Aug. 20, 2014 1:49 p.m.

    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.

  • TheProudDuck Newport Beach, CA
    Aug. 20, 2014 1:29 p.m.

    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.

  • TheProudDuck Newport Beach, CA
    Aug. 20, 2014 1:26 p.m.

    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.

  • procuradorfiscal Tooele, UT
    Aug. 20, 2014 1:16 p.m.

    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.

  • TheProudDuck Newport Beach, CA
    Aug. 20, 2014 1:13 p.m.

    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 regardless.

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    Aug. 20, 2014 12:29 p.m.

    "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 checks?

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    Aug. 20, 2014 12:17 p.m.

    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 officer.

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Aug. 20, 2014 12:06 p.m.


    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 Sharpton....

  • Esquire Springville, UT
    Aug. 20, 2014 12:05 p.m.

    @ illuminated, that's ridiculous. The program started with Bush. Simple as that.

  • kiddsport Fairview, UT
    Aug. 20, 2014 12:01 p.m.

    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.

  • airnaut Everett, 00
    Aug. 20, 2014 11:55 a.m.

    St George, UT
    Let 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?

    FYI --
    The National Guard is under orders from the GOVERNOR.
    [State Militia -- you know, 2nd amendment -- well regulated militia -- ]

  • kiddsport Fairview, UT
    Aug. 20, 2014 11:50 a.m.

    @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?

  • Ultra Bob Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Aug. 20, 2014 11:41 a.m.

    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.

  • SCfan clearfield, UT
    Aug. 20, 2014 11:37 a.m.

    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.


    I 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.

  • truth in all its forms henderson, NV
    Aug. 20, 2014 11:28 a.m.

    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 Iraq!

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Aug. 20, 2014 11:21 a.m.

    @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".

  • Darrel Eagle Mountain, UT
    Aug. 20, 2014 11:21 a.m.

    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.

  • Open Minded Mormon Everett, 00
    Aug. 20, 2014 11:18 a.m.


    Pro-gun nuts insist the answer is
    MORE guns on the streets and in the hands of people,
    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.

  • funny_guy Vacaville, CA
    Aug. 20, 2014 11:16 a.m.

    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.

  • Anti Bush-Obama Chihuahua, 00
    Aug. 20, 2014 11:01 a.m.


    The 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 away.

  • Anti Bush-Obama Chihuahua, 00
    Aug. 20, 2014 10:45 a.m.

    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.

  • procuradorfiscal Tooele, UT
    Aug. 20, 2014 10:18 a.m.

    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.

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Aug. 20, 2014 9:52 a.m.

    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.

  • Shane333 Cedar Hills, UT
    Aug. 20, 2014 9:48 a.m.

    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.

  • Craig Clark Boulder, CO
    Aug. 20, 2014 9:26 a.m.

    "....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.

  • TMR Los Angeles, CA
    Aug. 20, 2014 9:21 a.m.

    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.

  • patriot Cedar Hills, UT
    Aug. 20, 2014 9:17 a.m.

    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???

  • illuminated St George, UT
    Aug. 20, 2014 9:17 a.m.

    Let it be forever remembered: George Bush put troops on the streets of Iraq, Barack Obama put troops on the streets of America.

  • Esquire Springville, UT
    Aug. 20, 2014 9:14 a.m.

    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.

  • Klarson Sandy, UT
    Aug. 20, 2014 8:49 a.m.

    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 and loot.

  • FT salt lake city, UT
    Aug. 20, 2014 8:47 a.m.

    Given what the NRA and gun rights advocates have done to this country we have little choice but to militarize our police.

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Aug. 20, 2014 8:46 a.m.

    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).

    Aug. 20, 2014 8:17 a.m.

    This isn't just local police, it seems like every Federal agency also has a militarized police force.

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    Aug. 20, 2014 7:36 a.m.

    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 wrong."

  • Midvaliean MIDVALE, UT
    Aug. 20, 2014 7:34 a.m.

    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 De-escalate anything.

  • SCfan clearfield, UT
    Aug. 20, 2014 6:52 a.m.

    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 conflicting evidence.