User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 1/8/2014 6:39:00 AM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Nope. But biker gangs and communist groups have used them in the USA for over 50-years. The idea that the mere presence of an armorerd vehicle in the police lot will cause bombers to become more active or create more bombers is silly. Well actually, any sensible criminal organization will come up with solutions to likely problems. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/8/2014 6:39:34 AM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
following your logic, why hasent the military given up its armor? we get rid of all out tanks, NK, Russia, IRAN will all do the same because hell, why build them is the US doesnt have any! right? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
no, I just have moron tinted glasses 
badguys didnt start carrying bigger guns because cops started wearing vests. the only people who will be making IED's are sovereign wannabes to secure their "compounds" but then those type prolly already have tannerite buried in the driveway. also, this may surprise you, but LE has had armor for many any years. LE has had armor for years, but now there's a new trend in showing it off like they're warfighters because they got an MRAP. That's a shift in thinking with leadership. That leads to a shift in operations against criminals, that leads to criminals changing tactics. I can't imagine that determined criminals would begin to give up their trade just because the police began acquiring a vehicle that CAN be defeated with a liberal application of explosives, if defeating that vehicle was a necessary ingredient for their escape. And when that happens, remember that the whole thing started because someone needed a toy to go with their flat top haircut. following your logic, why hasent the military given up its armor? we get rid of all out tanks, NK, Russia, IRAN will all do the same because hell, why build them is the US doesnt have any! right? Because the purpose of these vehicles is fighting actual wars. It makes sense for the real military to use them. It makes a lot less sense for the taxpayers to pay to maintain these things so PDs who have no use for them can live out their adolescent warrior fantasies on the streets of cities and towns across the USA. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/8/2014 6:39:58 AM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Durr. Sorry about you're stroke, hope you get better.  Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
no, I just have moron tinted glasses
badguys didnt start carrying bigger guns because cops started wearing vests. the only people who will be making IED's are sovereign wannabes to secure their "compounds" but then those type prolly already have tannerite buried in the driveway. also, this may surprise you, but LE has had armor for many any years. LE has had armor for years, but now there's a new trend in showing it off like they're warfighters because they got an MRAP. That's a shift in thinking with leadership. That leads to a shift in operations against criminals, that leads to criminals changing tactics. I can't imagine that determined criminals would begin to give up their trade just because the police began acquiring a vehicle that CAN be defeated with a liberal application of explosives, if defeating that vehicle was a necessary ingredient for their escape. And when that happens, remember that the whole thing started because someone needed a toy to go with their flat top haircut. following your logic, why hasent the military given up its armor? we get rid of all out tanks, NK, Russia, IRAN will all do the same because hell, why build them is the US doesnt have any! right? Durr. Sorry about you're stroke, hope you get better. its your durp buddy, not mine
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/8/2014 6:40:45 AM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
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 police become militarized, then the enemies of the state tend to become the people. Sir Robert Peel's principles of policing: To prevent crime and disorder, as an alternative to their repression by military force and severity of legal punishment. To recognise always that the power of the police to fulfil their functions and duties is dependent on public approval of their existence, actions and behaviour and on their ability to secure and maintain public respect. To recognise always that to secure and maintain the respect and approval of the public means also the securing of the willing co-operation of the public in the task of securing observance of laws. To recognise always that the extent to which the co-operation of the public can be secured diminishes proportionately the necessity of the use of physical force and compulsion for achieving police objectives. To seek and preserve public favour, not by pandering to public opinion; but by constantly demonstrating absolutely impartial service to law, in complete independence of policy, and without regard to the justice or injustice of the substance of individual laws, by ready offering of individual service and friendship to all members of the public without regard to their wealth or social standing, by ready exercise of courtesy and friendly good humour; and by ready offering of individual sacrifice in protecting and preserving life. To use physical force only when the exercise of persuasion, advice and warning is found to be insufficient to obtain public co-operation to an extent necessary to secure observance of law or to restore order, and to use only the minimum degree of physical force which is necessary on any particular occasion for achieving a police objective. To maintain at all times a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and that the public are the police, the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence. To recognise always the need for strict adherence to police-executive functions, and to refrain from even seeming to usurp the powers of the judiciary of avenging individuals or the State, and of authoritatively judging guilt and punishing the guilty. To recognise always that the test of police efficiency is the absence of crime and disorder, and not the visible evidence of police action in dealing with them. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/8/2014 6:43:03 AM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Because the purpose of these vehicles is fighting actual wars. It makes sense for the real military to use them. It makes a lot less sense for the taxpayers to pay to maintain these things so PDs who have no use for them can live out their adolescent warrior fantasies on the streets of cities and towns across the USA. the purpose of armor in LE is protecting officers and civilians from gun fire. they work very well for that and get used quite often. IF the statement that if LE give up armor BG's will give up and go home has any merit, then it would apply to the military too. ETA: and the purpose of an APC is not to fight a war. its to transport personal while protecting them from small arms fire. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/8/2014 6:43:09 AM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It's my understanding the basic running gear and chassis is standard dump truck. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Wait till it breaks down. It's my understanding the basic running gear and chassis is standard dump truck. Yes, but no. FedDC brought that up and it's true, except that you need to remove armor and use a crane to do shit that a dump truck mechanic would just walk up with a tool box for. That's why the Army is letting contracts for MRAP maintenance and repair and has contractors all over AFG fixing them - because any Army wheeled vehicle mechanic can fix one just like fixing a dump truck (not). FedDC also poo-pooed the need for specific MRAP driver training after the NM town cop drove theirs into a pickup at 75 MPH on the interstate and called these specific military MRAP driver training "a joke". These are heavy vehicles and very top heavy - designed to protect the occupants from IEDs / mines going off underneath the vehicle (though the vehicle itself may not survive). They have to be driven with attentive respect to size, weight and stability, even when people aren't trying to blow them up. Vehicles like the V100 posted earlier actually make more sense for domestic police use - lower CG and drive more like a truck. MRAPs are purpose built for IED survivability, not racing down interstates at 75 MPH. These are big liability machines. First rollover with a cab full of LEO who aren't properly harnessed in and there's going to be major disability pay outs and lawsuits. This isn't a vehicle you just swan around in without the associated training. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/8/2014 6:43:47 AM EDT
[#7]
They have to come out of the MRAP sometime.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/8/2014 6:46:50 AM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Nope. But biker gangs and communist groups have used them in the USA for over 50-years. IIRC, the Hells Angels still hold the #3 spot on the list of largest bomb explosions in North America. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/8/2014 6:47:10 AM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Sir Robert Peel's principles of policing: What the hell did he know? He's probably not even POST certified.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/8/2014 6:47:41 AM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
LE has had armor for years, but now there's a new trend in showing it off like they're warfighters because they got an MRAP. New trend? My department was doing that 30 years ago with their stupid armored vehicle. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/8/2014 6:47:58 AM EDT
[#11]
Next up, SWAT painted main battle tanks. You know, for raids on raw milk dairies.
And if you disagree with that, you must hate cops and want them to die. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/8/2014 6:48:06 AM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
They have to come out of the MRAP sometime. another wannabe SC
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/8/2014 6:50:23 AM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
the purpose of armor in LE is protecting officers and civilians from gun fire. they work very well for that and get used quite often. IF the statement that if LE give up armor BG's will give up and go home has any merit, then it would apply to the military too. ETA: and the purpose of an APC is not to fight a war. its to transport personal while protecting them from small arms fire. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Because the purpose of these vehicles is fighting actual wars. It makes sense for the real military to use them. It makes a lot less sense for the taxpayers to pay to maintain these things so PDs who have no use for them can live out their adolescent warrior fantasies on the streets of cities and towns across the USA. the purpose of armor in LE is protecting officers and civilians from gun fire. they work very well for that and get used quite often. IF the statement that if LE give up armor BG's will give up and go home has any merit, then it would apply to the military too. ETA: and the purpose of an APC is not to fight a war. its to transport personal while protecting them from small arms fire. Nobody is suggesting that criminals will just give up and go home if the police lay down their arms, and I think you know that and are just using it to distract from the real point. Taxpayers don't need to be funding toys for manchildren who want to live out their fantasies, and they certainly don't need to be the enablers who help cement this idea of "otherness" that's becoming prevalent in LE. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/8/2014 6:51:39 AM EDT
[#14]
These threads are all the same. A waste of perfectly good electrons.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/8/2014 6:52:26 AM EDT
[#15]
Quoted:“If you see my SWAT team roll up in this, it’s over, so just give up,” said Police Chief Sam Baldwin. They still have to exit the thing and walk into a persons house. Unless their faces are now bulletproof, I don't see how they are any better off than they were before the purchase. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/8/2014 6:54:01 AM EDT
[#16]
Damn! I would have bought it for $2000!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/8/2014 6:54:28 AM EDT
[#17]
IEDs are nothing new.
http://elpais.com/elpais/2013/12/18/inenglish/1387374599_382537.html  This threw Spanish Prime Minister Luis Carrero Blanco's moving Dodge Dart 4 stories (115 feet) into the air and over the roof and into the open court yard of the building (four story convent building with the typical Spanish open to the sky central court yard) across the street. 75 kilos (165 lbs) of commercial mining explosive in a tunnel the ETA dug under the street. In Fort Pierce, FL - it could just be a sink hole that does it... |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/8/2014 6:55:07 AM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
And still later it's "oops wrong house..............very sorry about the dog.  "
This Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
First it's all: “If you see my SWAT team roll up in this, it’s over, so just give up,” said Police Chief Sam Baldwin. Later it's like: “I saw my SWAT team roll up in this, then it tipped over, so fuck it. I give up,” said Police Chief Sam Baldwin. And still later it's "oops wrong house..............very sorry about the dog. "
This |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/8/2014 6:55:54 AM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Sir Robert Peel's principles of policing: To prevent crime and disorder, as an alternative to their repression by military force and severity of legal punishment. To recognise always that the power of the police to fulfil their functions and duties is dependent on public approval of their existence, actions and behaviour and on their ability to secure and maintain public respect. To recognise always that to secure and maintain the respect and approval of the public means also the securing of the willing co-operation of the public in the task of securing observance of laws. To recognise always that the extent to which the co-operation of the public can be secured diminishes proportionately the necessity of the use of physical force and compulsion for achieving police objectives. To seek and preserve public favour, not by pandering to public opinion; but by constantly demonstrating absolutely impartial service to law, in complete independence of policy, and without regard to the justice or injustice of the substance of individual laws, by ready offering of individual service and friendship to all members of the public without regard to their wealth or social standing, by ready exercise of courtesy and friendly good humour; and by ready offering of individual sacrifice in protecting and preserving life. To use physical force only when the exercise of persuasion, advice and warning is found to be insufficient to obtain public co-operation to an extent necessary to secure observance of law or to restore order, and to use only the minimum degree of physical force which is necessary on any particular occasion for achieving a police objective. To maintain at all times a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and that the public are the police, the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence. To recognise always the need for strict adherence to police-executive functions, and to refrain from even seeming to usurp the powers of the judiciary of avenging individuals or the State, and of authoritatively judging guilt and punishing the guilty. To recognise always that the test of police efficiency is the absence of crime and disorder, and not the visible evidence of police action in dealing with them. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
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 police become militarized, then the enemies of the state tend to become the people. Sir Robert Peel's principles of policing: To prevent crime and disorder, as an alternative to their repression by military force and severity of legal punishment. To recognise always that the power of the police to fulfil their functions and duties is dependent on public approval of their existence, actions and behaviour and on their ability to secure and maintain public respect. To recognise always that to secure and maintain the respect and approval of the public means also the securing of the willing co-operation of the public in the task of securing observance of laws. To recognise always that the extent to which the co-operation of the public can be secured diminishes proportionately the necessity of the use of physical force and compulsion for achieving police objectives. To seek and preserve public favour, not by pandering to public opinion; but by constantly demonstrating absolutely impartial service to law, in complete independence of policy, and without regard to the justice or injustice of the substance of individual laws, by ready offering of individual service and friendship to all members of the public without regard to their wealth or social standing, by ready exercise of courtesy and friendly good humour; and by ready offering of individual sacrifice in protecting and preserving life. To use physical force only when the exercise of persuasion, advice and warning is found to be insufficient to obtain public co-operation to an extent necessary to secure observance of law or to restore order, and to use only the minimum degree of physical force which is necessary on any particular occasion for achieving a police objective. To maintain at all times a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and that the public are the police, the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence. To recognise always the need for strict adherence to police-executive functions, and to refrain from even seeming to usurp the powers of the judiciary of avenging individuals or the State, and of authoritatively judging guilt and punishing the guilty. To recognise always that the test of police efficiency is the absence of crime and disorder, and not the visible evidence of police action in dealing with them. +1 Thanks for posting! |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/8/2014 6:56:07 AM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Nobody is suggesting that criminals will just give up and go home if the police lay down their arms, and I think you know that and are just using it to distract from the real point. Taxpayers don't need to be funding toys for manchildren who want to live out their fantasies, and they certainly don't need to be the enablers who help cement this idea of "otherness" that's becoming prevalent in LE. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Because the purpose of these vehicles is fighting actual wars. It makes sense for the real military to use them. It makes a lot less sense for the taxpayers to pay to maintain these things so PDs who have no use for them can live out their adolescent warrior fantasies on the streets of cities and towns across the USA. the purpose of armor in LE is protecting officers and civilians from gun fire. they work very well for that and get used quite often. IF the statement that if LE give up armor BG's will give up and go home has any merit, then it would apply to the military too. ETA: and the purpose of an APC is not to fight a war. its to transport personal while protecting them from small arms fire. Nobody is suggesting that criminals will just give up and go home if the police lay down their arms, and I think you know that and are just using it to distract from the real point. Taxpayers don't need to be funding toys for manchildren who want to live out their fantasies, and they certainly don't need to be the enablers who help cement this idea of "otherness" that's becoming prevalent in LE. I have no idea what you are trying to say there.... yes, I am aware that it is a moronic argument, thats why I said it was moronic. armor is a NEED for many departments. even in middle of no where rural MN LE armor has taken rounds in the last few months. its a protection, it gets cops safely up to a door of a barricaded suspect. allows LE to get close enough to talk to a nut job in a deerstand with a gun to try to talk him down. allows LE to put a shield between a gunman and injured people to evacuate them from harm. this isnt fantasy. it happens, and alot more often then you are aware. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/8/2014 6:57:33 AM EDT
[#21]
Militarization of "Law Enforcement" - a sure sign of a police state.
Next they will install a few 50 calibers on it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/8/2014 6:57:54 AM EDT
[#22]
Meh, if the tax payers want to foot the bill in that location then it is is up to them. It isn't like civilians can't purchase armored cars.
I do wonder when police will first encounter their first countermeasure to these. A well supplied cartel group or organized crime group could probably procure some effective methods. It makes me wonder how far along down the road the criminal element will adapt to the new equipment. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/8/2014 6:58:13 AM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
+1 Thanks for posting! Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
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 police become militarized, then the enemies of the state tend to become the people. Sir Robert Peel's principles of policing: To prevent crime and disorder, as an alternative to their repression by military force and severity of legal punishment. To recognise always that the power of the police to fulfil their functions and duties is dependent on public approval of their existence, actions and behaviour and on their ability to secure and maintain public respect. To recognise always that to secure and maintain the respect and approval of the public means also the securing of the willing co-operation of the public in the task of securing observance of laws. To recognise always that the extent to which the co-operation of the public can be secured diminishes proportionately the necessity of the use of physical force and compulsion for achieving police objectives. To seek and preserve public favour, not by pandering to public opinion; but by constantly demonstrating absolutely impartial service to law, in complete independence of policy, and without regard to the justice or injustice of the substance of individual laws, by ready offering of individual service and friendship to all members of the public without regard to their wealth or social standing, by ready exercise of courtesy and friendly good humour; and by ready offering of individual sacrifice in protecting and preserving life. To use physical force only when the exercise of persuasion, advice and warning is found to be insufficient to obtain public co-operation to an extent necessary to secure observance of law or to restore order, and to use only the minimum degree of physical force which is necessary on any particular occasion for achieving a police objective. To maintain at all times a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and that the public are the police, the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence. To recognise always the need for strict adherence to police-executive functions, and to refrain from even seeming to usurp the powers of the judiciary of avenging individuals or the State, and of authoritatively judging guilt and punishing the guilty. To recognise always that the test of police efficiency is the absence of crime and disorder, and not the visible evidence of police action in dealing with them. +1 Thanks for posting! |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/8/2014 6:58:28 AM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
They still have to exit the thing and walk into a persons house. Unless their faces are now bulletproof, I don't see how they are any better off than they were before the purchase. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:“If you see my SWAT team roll up in this, it’s over, so just give up,” said Police Chief Sam Baldwin. They still have to exit the thing and walk into a persons house. Unless their faces are now bulletproof, I don't see how they are any better off than they were before the purchase. Well now they can approach the target house in a glaringly obvious manner without worrying about taking fire.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/8/2014 6:59:46 AM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I have no idea what you are trying to say there.... yes, I am aware that it is a moronic argument, thats why I said it was moronic. armor is a NEED for many departments. even in middle of no where rural MN LE armor has taken rounds in the last few months. its a protection, it gets cops safely up to a door of a barricaded suspect. allows LE to get close enough to talk to a nut job in a deerstand with a gun to try to talk him down. allows LE to put a shield between a gunman and injured people to evacuate them from harm. this isnt fantasy. it happens, and alot more often then you are aware. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Because the purpose of these vehicles is fighting actual wars. It makes sense for the real military to use them. It makes a lot less sense for the taxpayers to pay to maintain these things so PDs who have no use for them can live out their adolescent warrior fantasies on the streets of cities and towns across the USA. the purpose of armor in LE is protecting officers and civilians from gun fire. they work very well for that and get used quite often. IF the statement that if LE give up armor BG's will give up and go home has any merit, then it would apply to the military too. ETA: and the purpose of an APC is not to fight a war. its to transport personal while protecting them from small arms fire. Nobody is suggesting that criminals will just give up and go home if the police lay down their arms, and I think you know that and are just using it to distract from the real point. Taxpayers don't need to be funding toys for manchildren who want to live out their fantasies, and they certainly don't need to be the enablers who help cement this idea of "otherness" that's becoming prevalent in LE. I have no idea what you are trying to say there.... yes, I am aware that it is a moronic argument, thats why I said it was moronic. armor is a NEED for many departments. even in middle of no where rural MN LE armor has taken rounds in the last few months. its a protection, it gets cops safely up to a door of a barricaded suspect. allows LE to get close enough to talk to a nut job in a deerstand with a gun to try to talk him down. allows LE to put a shield between a gunman and injured people to evacuate them from harm. this isnt fantasy. it happens, and alot more often then you are aware. And here's a perfect example of someone who is entirely invested in this new line of thinking...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/8/2014 7:01:10 AM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
And here's a perfect example of someone who is entirely invested in this new line of thinking... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Because the purpose of these vehicles is fighting actual wars. It makes sense for the real military to use them. It makes a lot less sense for the taxpayers to pay to maintain these things so PDs who have no use for them can live out their adolescent warrior fantasies on the streets of cities and towns across the USA. the purpose of armor in LE is protecting officers and civilians from gun fire. they work very well for that and get used quite often. IF the statement that if LE give up armor BG's will give up and go home has any merit, then it would apply to the military too. ETA: and the purpose of an APC is not to fight a war. its to transport personal while protecting them from small arms fire. Nobody is suggesting that criminals will just give up and go home if the police lay down their arms, and I think you know that and are just using it to distract from the real point. Taxpayers don't need to be funding toys for manchildren who want to live out their fantasies, and they certainly don't need to be the enablers who help cement this idea of "otherness" that's becoming prevalent in LE. I have no idea what you are trying to say there.... yes, I am aware that it is a moronic argument, thats why I said it was moronic. armor is a NEED for many departments. even in middle of no where rural MN LE armor has taken rounds in the last few months. its a protection, it gets cops safely up to a door of a barricaded suspect. allows LE to get close enough to talk to a nut job in a deerstand with a gun to try to talk him down. allows LE to put a shield between a gunman and injured people to evacuate them from harm. this isnt fantasy. it happens, and alot more often then you are aware. And here's a perfect example of someone who is entirely invested in this new line of thinking... please enlighten me. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/8/2014 7:02:04 AM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
New trend? My department was doing that 30 years ago with their stupid armored vehicle. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
LE has had armor for years, but now there's a new trend in showing it off like they're warfighters because they got an MRAP. New trend? My department was doing that 30 years ago with their stupid armored vehicle. LOL. We both know that relating NYPD to the rest of the country is a stretch in nearly every category. 
Seriously, everyone of these articles the LEA/CLEO makes it sound like, "we have an MRAP now, we're going to crush crime with it". And a determined criminal who needs to get that vehicle out of the equation will need to use a serious IED to do it. Shit that hasn't been dealt with in this country except on the rarest of occasions. With MRAPs in every county and municipality, bad guys will come up with ways to deal with them. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/8/2014 7:02:17 AM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Based on his statements the Chief is a moron. He aquired this vehicle for exactly the wrong purpose. Someone needs to have a talk with him. The guy obviously knows his stuff if he is wearing cargo pants. Especially 5.11s |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/8/2014 7:02:49 AM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
please enlighten me. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
the purpose of armor in LE is protecting officers and civilians from gun fire. they work very well for that and get used quite often. IF the statement that if LE give up armor BG's will give up and go home has any merit, then it would apply to the military too. ETA: and the purpose of an APC is not to fight a war. its to transport personal while protecting them from small arms fire. Nobody is suggesting that criminals will just give up and go home if the police lay down their arms, and I think you know that and are just using it to distract from the real point. Taxpayers don't need to be funding toys for manchildren who want to live out their fantasies, and they certainly don't need to be the enablers who help cement this idea of "otherness" that's becoming prevalent in LE. I have no idea what you are trying to say there.... yes, I am aware that it is a moronic argument, thats why I said it was moronic. armor is a NEED for many departments. even in middle of no where rural MN LE armor has taken rounds in the last few months. its a protection, it gets cops safely up to a door of a barricaded suspect. allows LE to get close enough to talk to a nut job in a deerstand with a gun to try to talk him down. allows LE to put a shield between a gunman and injured people to evacuate them from harm. this isnt fantasy. it happens, and alot more often then you are aware. And here's a perfect example of someone who is entirely invested in this new line of thinking... please enlighten me. I do not believe that is possible. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/8/2014 7:04:10 AM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I do not believe that is possible. then I guess that makes you part of the problem
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/8/2014 7:04:43 AM EDT
[#31]
Where can I get one for $2000?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/8/2014 7:04:49 AM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Militarization of "Law Enforcement" - a sure sign of a police state. Next they will install a few 50 calibers on it. lol 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/8/2014 7:07:26 AM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Militarization of "Law Enforcement" - a sure sign of a police state. Next they will install a few 50 calibers on it. lol http://i.imgur.com/4d7nnBA.jpg http://i.imgur.com/ZWsgzn8.jpg slippery slope! anther 50-60 years and their armor will be equipped with 4X4!! |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/8/2014 7:07:51 AM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
then I guess that makes you part of the problem Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I do not believe that is possible. then I guess that makes you part of the problem Says the perfectly sane poster that sees Sovereign Citizens everywhere. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/8/2014 7:08:19 AM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
then I guess that makes you part of the problem Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I do not believe that is possible. then I guess that makes you part of the problem Yeah, because I can't help someone firmly entrenched in the "us vs. them" mindset understand reason it's clear that I'm part of the problem. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/8/2014 7:08:54 AM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I can only hope there is someone who has already pulled him aside and explained to his dumb ass that they day they have to use their new armorered vehicle means its already the worst day their department ever had. That they need it means citizens or officers are bleeding out under fire and they cant get to them on foot or with a crown victoria without more getting killed or injured. One of the purposes of SWAT is intimidation of a suspect, during a standoff so that they will just give up. A suspect should feel that there is no way they can win and should give up peacefully. That was what the chief was getting at I think. So on a simple barricaded gunman you can park that armored car on the front lawn....and you have a bullet proof mobile gun platform which is also a great psychological tool. Downed officer/citizen rescue is only one mission of a bullet resistant vehicle. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/8/2014 7:10:03 AM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Says the perfectly sane poster that sees Sovereign Citizens everywhere. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I do not believe that is possible. then I guess that makes you part of the problem Says the perfectly sane poster that sees Sovereign Citizens everywhere. not everywhere. just in those with perpetual fantasies about "engaging" police armor
and then says the cops are the wanna be operators
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/8/2014 7:11:08 AM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
LOL. We both know that relating NYPD to the rest of the country is a stretch in nearly every category. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
LE has had armor for years, but now there's a new trend in showing it off like they're warfighters because they got an MRAP. New trend? My department was doing that 30 years ago with their stupid armored vehicle. LOL. We both know that relating NYPD to the rest of the country is a stretch in nearly every category. PDs have always done these stupid "look what we got" photo shoots. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/8/2014 7:11:55 AM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
PDs have always done these stupid "look what we got" photo shoots. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
LE has had armor for years, but now there's a new trend in showing it off like they're warfighters because they got an MRAP. New trend? My department was doing that 30 years ago with their stupid armored vehicle. LOL. We both know that relating NYPD to the rest of the country is a stretch in nearly every category. PDs have always done these stupid "look what we got" photo shoots. So have Arfcommers - check out the tactical gear forum.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/8/2014 7:12:40 AM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
My daughter and her husband and new child live in Ft Pierce. I am sure they feel much safer knowing such a vehicle is there to protect them from the inevitable Al Qaeda attack as Ft Pierce is certainly where they are coming as soon as they lock down Fallujah it is for the children 
Wulfmann If they live in Ft Pierce, they are doing it wrong. They are smack in the middle of FSA Central Command. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/8/2014 7:12:43 AM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Where can I get one for $2000? Nowhere. US armored vehicles may not be surplused out to the peasants. By Clinton's EO, which was never rescinded. You can import a Chieftain MBT but you can't buy an MRAP. Not a real one, anyways. There were a handful of fake ones (mild steel body on a 939 chassis) that sold at government auction not too long ago for 50 and 60 grand each. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/8/2014 7:12:50 AM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yeah, because I can't help someone firmly entrenched in the "us vs. them" mindset understand reason it's clear that I'm part of the problem. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I do not believe that is possible. then I guess that makes you part of the problem Yeah, because I can't help someone firmly entrenched in the "us vs. them" mindset understand reason it's clear that I'm part of the problem. oh theres alot of "us vs. them" here....but I'm not the one exhibiting it
post after post of "IED" and "they have to come out sometime" |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/8/2014 7:13:25 AM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Tinfoil post, militarization of police ain't happening. Lol |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/8/2014 7:14:50 AM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
oh theres alot of "us vs. them" here....but I'm not the one exhibiting it
post after post of "IED" and "they have to come out sometime" Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I do not believe that is possible. then I guess that makes you part of the problem Yeah, because I can't help someone firmly entrenched in the "us vs. them" mindset understand reason it's clear that I'm part of the problem. oh theres alot of "us vs. them" here....but I'm not the one exhibiting it
post after post of "IED" and "they have to come out sometime" Because poking holes in the flimsy logic of people desperate to justify their taxpayer-funded fantasies is the same thing as advocating actually using those tactics? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/8/2014 7:16:50 AM EDT
[#45]
FORT PIERCE, Fla. - Police in Fort Pierce are now armed with a U.S. military surplus battle wagon: a six wheel, 30-ton armored vehicle worth $700,000 — that the agency got for $2,000. “If you see my SWAT team roll up in this, it’s over, so just give up,” said Police Chief Sam Baldwin. I'm tossing my hat in the ring- "A chicken in every pot, a killdozer in every driveway!" 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/8/2014 7:18:41 AM EDT
[#46]
WE have two of the Navistars at my agency, neat but nothing crazy. Nothing a privately owned .50 Cal Barrett and some AP ammo wont fix up right quick, followed by a .50 SLAP round to burn it down
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/8/2014 7:19:18 AM EDT
[#47]
They still need to leave that thing to do the job. Personally I'd be much more worried if they started mounting M2's on those. That would dramatically up the "you're screwed so you had better surrender" factor.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/8/2014 7:21:56 AM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
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 police become militarized, then the enemies of the state tend to become the people. Sir Robert Peel's principles of policing: To prevent crime and disorder, as an alternative to their repression by military force and severity of legal punishment. To recognise always that the power of the police to fulfil their functions and duties is dependent on public approval of their existence, actions and behaviour and on their ability to secure and maintain public respect. To recognise always that to secure and maintain the respect and approval of the public means also the securing of the willing co-operation of the public in the task of securing observance of laws. To recognise always that the extent to which the co-operation of the public can be secured diminishes proportionately the necessity of the use of physical force and compulsion for achieving police objectives. To seek and preserve public favour, not by pandering to public opinion; but by constantly demonstrating absolutely impartial service to law, in complete independence of policy, and without regard to the justice or injustice of the substance of individual laws, by ready offering of individual service and friendship to all members of the public without regard to their wealth or social standing, by ready exercise of courtesy and friendly good humour; and by ready offering of individual sacrifice in protecting and preserving life. To use physical force only when the exercise of persuasion, advice and warning is found to be insufficient to obtain public co-operation to an extent necessary to secure observance of law or to restore order, and to use only the minimum degree of physical force which is necessary on any particular occasion for achieving a police objective. To maintain at all times a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and that the public are the police, the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence. To recognise always the need for strict adherence to police-executive functions, and to refrain from even seeming to usurp the powers of the judiciary of avenging individuals or the State, and of authoritatively judging guilt and punishing the guilty. To recognise always that the test of police efficiency is the absence of crime and disorder, and not the visible evidence of police action in dealing with them. +1 Thanks for posting! Cant argue with the above. But 100s of Police and Firemen arrested for bilking the taxpayers both locally and federally out of $40,000.000.00 with bogus disability claims on top of their retirement pension. this is prevalent throughout the country and not a fucking word being said or done about it. They do face up to 25years in prison but can still keep their guns. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/8/2014 7:22:05 AM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
WE have two of the Navistars at my agency, neat but nothing crazy. Nothing a privately owned .50 Cal Barrett and some AP ammo wont fix up right quick, followed by a .50 SLAP round to burn it down .50 can penetrate these? That's news to me. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/8/2014 7:22:14 AM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
These threads are all the same. A waste of perfectly good electrons. I disagree. Some of the comments serve as a god source of entertainment. I wonder if internet chest thumping registers on the Richter Scale? |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
