No one said every county was armed to the hilt. It doesn't have to be every county to set a dangerous precedent. If I believed everything I read in the paper I'd believe that these military weapons were needed to keep us safe. I don't. I think you're a level headed guy that wouldn't abuse the power you've been entrusted with. I believe most other officers are, too. But, that still doesn't mean I believe there aren't plenty out there that would abuse it. Not that that is even really the point. The point is you don't arm police to do jobs the military was meant to do unless you want to further the divide between law enforcement and the public and unless you are willing to see an ever increasing transfer of power and a decline in liberty.

Bill, you're blinded by the trees. What "Military Jobs" are the police doing?

I didn't say they were already doing it. If you aren't planning a picnic what's with the basket and fried chicken? If they aren't planning military style policing then why the need for military style weapons? What I will say some Police departments are already doing is using their swat teams in freedom infringement ways. I don't want those types having even greater power to trample citizens constitutional rights and I don't want them to have the ability to gear up for war against the general population. It wouldn't be done in a fashion that alarmed most people. It would be done under the guise of keeping the peace and for the safety of the citizens. Do you remember when the police put the citizens on lock down and did illegal searches while looking for the Boston bomber? You might think it's ok because it was for safety reasons but you can't imprison the citizens just because the police want to. There is a constitution that needs to be adhered to.

Well I guess I took it wrong but the way I took it was like everyone thought a lot of counties had all this stuff. If our county has anything at all surplus I don't know about it. Actually almost everything I have I bought with my own money because our county can't afford to spend extra money. I was issued a taser and some other basic tools (alco sensor, finger print kit, spike strips, etc). Everything else came out of my own pocket, sidearm, backup, rifle, shotgun, ammo, duty gear, flashlight, all kind of stuff. I spent a fortune on my gear.

And that's the problem. 95% of the population doesn't care if their rights are trampled on if it's "for the greater good".

Kind of how socialism takes hold , right? China, Brazil and several other countries all have militarized police forces that grew under the guise of being for the public safety. But that can't happen here because we have responsible government that only wants to keep us safe.

Bill, you left out one important fact. They have a nationalized police force. Big difference between that and the model here.

I'll say this though...that is the ultimate goal of all the anti police rhetoric lately in msm.

You don't think our country is headed toward socialism then on to communism? It all starts with the small things that eventually erode the rights of the citizenry. I'm not anti police, I'm pro constitution.

This week, it was announced that President Obama will be forming a task force to investigate police practices and the relationship that the general population has with police.

Members of the task force will include prior police officers, lawyers, teachers, social workers and other government employees. This in itself shows that the findings of this report will be heavily biased, but some predict that the final outcome of the investigation could be a nationwide centralized police force.

Read more at http://thefreethoughtproject.com/obamas-...W1Ifqi4VXRip.99[color:#FF0000][/color]

I hope you aren't holding your breath waiting on an answer.

apc are great until the rioters start throwing armor piercing rocks.

Because after hurricane Rita passed thru here our APC and hummer was the the vehicles used to go back into Cameron to check for anyone who may ave stayed for the storm and check on many other things. 2 yrs later hurricane Ike came thru with another large storm surge and it was very useful again. Of course this is the only times this equipment is used. Emergency use only.

And it's great that you are pro constitution. Having cool military style uniforms, AR15's, MRAP's etc...isn't against the constitution. In fact, they are just material items that even YOU can purchase Bill. It's how they are used that could potentially violate your constitutional rights. You also can't talk constitution and in the same breath say they "Could" start using like this or they "Could" do this. Turnabout is fair play..that semi-auto shotgun, pistol, AR15 you may or may not own "Could" someday be used for a terrorist act by you.

Let's play this game together. I'll start with a reason for and you tell me why they shouldn't have it.

-Mobile command center

you lose..cause you didnt put the reason for

: mobile command center. Isn't that what they used to use old school buses for? Good thing they can have a mobile command center that will withstand armor piercing ammunition.

I'm not saying it's economical...but they could use it for that

They didn't have alternatives before getting the military vehicles? They need a military assault vehicle to use as a mobile command center? See, the whole point of limited government is to have the bare necessities in order to perform the job. That doesn't mean they shouldn't have enough to do the job but they shouldn't have more than is required. I believe in smaller government so it is going to shape my views on every part of government. I can't give a pass to certain parts just because I might be sympathetic to them . I just don't think safety is more important than freedom.

I'm kinda new to some of this so would someone mind explaining to me exactly what is meant by militarization of the local police and why it is perceived as a growing, concerning fact?

No reason for anyone to be nasty or condescending, I'm just curious if its simply an appearance thing? Uniforms look different, appear to be more heavily armed and occasionally show up in vehicles that are more resistant to small arms fire?

I see people bringing up armored vehicles a lot. They aren't "tanks" they are armored personnel carriers. If it helps, think of them as "hard to shoot in or out ofs". They come in handy for extracting wounded officers (without having to, you know, shoot recklessly into wherever the hostile fire might come from to rescue a bleeding cop), transporting rescued hostages and similarly NON-OFFENSIVE actions. An APC adds exactly zero offensive capability. They mount no guns. At all.

I see people bring up tactics, and SWAT teams in particular. SWAT tactics aren't traditional military tactics. A team enters a structure rapidly using distraction and speed to help minimize any violent types inside chance to kill them. They consider a successful mission one where no-one gets shot. Think of this as "search and arrests" because that's the goal.

Traditional military tactics are: fire and maneuver, artillery strikes, bombardment, strafing runs rocket attacks and similar.If it helps, think of these as "shooty-explodey" tactics. Two opposing, uniformed armies would use shooty-expolody tactics almost exclusively and spend VERY LITTLE time entering structures and not shooting the people within. The war on terrorism, thanks to the guerrilla nature of terrorist assholes, has resulted in a shift of military tactics to tactics that are, at times, similar to law enforcement tactics because they have to search out the unmarked enemy from an "innocent" population. Bear in mind they still prefer "shooty-explodey" tactics (much safer) when they can identify the enemy. So, in fact, rather than police tactics being militarized, military tactics are being policizied.

I would be open to the idea that perhaps some anti-drug raids can be heavy handed but I would argue that that would be something to bring up with law makers, probably to the effect that you don't care for anti-drug laws anymore. Can't blame the poor fools trying to enforce the laws for finding ways to make it home that night.

What about other guns and gear? What, pray tell has changed? Look back on history and you'll find that cops of that era, be it the old west, the 40's or the 70's are armed with, roughly, the most advanced and current gear they can get their hands on, because they don't want to die.

Police tactics are written in the blood of these men: ODMP.org
I encourage debate, but if your reason to hate whatever it is you hate is "it makes cops harder to kill" then maybe you should think about what it is about yourself that makes you study on killing cops quite so much.

Also, Bill, no state or local law enforcement agency has RPGs. Rocket Propelled Grenades are strictly in the "shooty-explodey" category and thus are totally off the table. Some do have 37mm and 40mm launchers which they use to propel irritating gasses into places and have probably saved more lives than seatbelts. Flashbangs, or NFDDs, are arguably way less dangerous than the crown vic the cops drove to work that morning and if used properly save lives while hurting no one or no thing.