Thanks to all those who’ve been voices of reason in the cop-bashing fest that appeared in the commentary section of the last couple of blog entries here. Thanks also to those who had concerns, and took up the challenge to apply critical thinking to them. Too bad everyone couldn’t manage that.
Let me answer some of the questions that have been repeatedly asked here:
“When did the police start becoming paramilitary?” Police have been paramilitary in structure for as long as anyone posting here has been alive. That’s why the uniforms are similar. That’s where the Sam Browne belts came from. That’s why we are organized into “squads” or sometimes “platoons,” why the rank structure includes titles like “lieutenant” and “sergeant,” and why the ones on state police agencies are called “troopers” and work out of “posts” or even “barracks.” If the question is about the proliferation of patrol rifles, the rifle has been part of the police armory since the old West. Lawmen of the last quarter of the 19th Century routinely used lever action Winchesters, the “assault rifles” of their day, when the Army still had single-shot Springfields. If the question is about SWAT teams, it’s because several armored and heavily armed men are less likely to be murdered serving a warrant than two detectives in suits with snub-nose .38s.
“When did it change from ‘peace officers’ to ‘law enforcement officers’?” It’s been both for as long as I’ve been around.
“When are the good cops going to weed out the bad ones?” Who the hell does anyone think has been doing it all along? Who the hell do the critics think have been investigating and charging the bad cops whose convictions they like to link to here?
“Are you going to join Oathkeepers?” The oath I took to uphold the Constitution that I took when they pinned the badge on me is enough, thanks. It don’t need it refreshed. That’s why it’s called an “oath,” not “a short-term, revocable-at-will verbal contract.”
For those who don’t like the drug laws: work to change them, don’t focus your anger on the cops whose job is to enforce them. If working within the system isn’t your thing, move to California and have a sympathetic doc write you a scrip for medical pot, or move to Amsterdam. Dumping on the cops won’t help your situation.
And, for the punk who thanks God when policemen are killed (yeah, it’s good that no one is expressing hate here)…fella, you’re one sick puppy. You need to talk it over with a qualified therapist…or maybe with your parole officer.
Thanks for the follow up Mas, was painful to read your comments during those posts. Enjoy your blog.
Mas,
As always, you never fail to impress.
You have proven that you don’t need me to fight your battles, but nevertheless, know that there are plenty of us who have your back.
The comments that were left were straight out of an anarchist’s playbook. They all took different paths, but all targeted the same conclusion…stop the police at any cost and by all means necessary. Of course, never once was there an alternate plan or policy given. The reason for this is obvious…all of these losers have no plan other than their own deluded fantasies of life “without rule of law”. It is the same argument that is used by the anti-gunners, the socialist/communist/progressives, the pro-drug movement and of course, the anarchists.
These “deep thinkers” seem to believe that everything will just be peachy and fine if it wasn’t for all these darn authority figures getting in the way. I’ve been to areas overseas that are devoid of police and law and I’ll never forget the fear and the havoc I personally witnessed. But trying to tell that to these types is an effort in futility. They will never be over the anger of having to deal with someone who has authority, their bitterness of previous arrests and their failure to accept that they contribute and provide nothing to society.
Stand with the police and help them to do a better job. They are always outnumbered, always a target and doing a job that, by definition, never ends. Be their eyes, be their ears and help to point them in the right direction. Gather others in your community to meet with and understand the efforts being done to keep your community safe. You then gain an ally and a potent tool to help keep the barbarians on the other side of the gate. You also gain the privilege of knowing who are out there doing the job. I can tell you from personal experience that if you have contact with the police when you are doing nothing wrong (say, a DUI checkpoint), things are a lot easier and pleasant when the conversation goes something like:
“Hey Bob”
“Oh, hey John. We’re just doing a checkpoint here tonight. You have the vehicle papers and haven’t been drinking, right?”
“Nope, no drinking at all. You want me to grab the papers for you?”
“Nah, not necessary. Be careful going home…we already grabbed 5 people tonight that blew over a .08.”
“No problem. You guys stay safe. I’ll catch up with you at the next meeting.”
Yeah, that’s how easy contact can be if you aren’t doing anything wrong, breaking any laws and you actually take the time and effort to get involved.
Amen.
Bravo, Mr. Ayoob. I have been reading your column (and your books) for quite some time, and I have always been glad to know that men and women like you constitute the bulk of our law-enforcement community. The anti-cop mentality reflects a too-prevalent and tedious strain of bitterness, usually vague and almost always disconnected from reason. To folks so affected, my best wishes for a speedy recovery; and to you, Mr. Ayoob, my deep thanks for your service and your thoughtful insights into the life you and your colleagues have chosen.
It appears that things are getting misinterpreted in this heated discussion. You are answering peoples concerns on the basis of your interpretation and perhaps with a strong protective edge for all police. The issues that are causing people anxiety were not addressed.
“When did the police start becoming paramilitary?”
Police have been paramilitary in STRUCTURE for as long as anyone posting here has been alive.
True, so are the Boy and Girl Scouts. That is not what people are pointing out…
You obviously misunderstood what people meant by paramilitary.
The problem people are having is the black masks so officers can’t be identified, BDU uniforms, riot gear at DUI road blocks, APCs and other military weaponry (do you need to send a tank to a domestic dispute call?), Military mindset (Citizens are the enemy).
Intimidation and force/pain compliance is the prominent tactic (the Tazer is the favorite tool for this) that over shadows other less menacing approaches when dealing with the public. That is where the problem arises and it makes police LOOK like an occupying force or something from a third world dictatorship. Even if you defend this and can explain it away, it erodes confidence and trust in the police. Once again the public trust is broken.
“The question is about the proliferation of patrol rifles”.
Once again you misunderstood what people are objecting too. Rifles are not the problem (AR-15s should be standard issue), nor are shot guns. It’s the fully automatic assault weapons that are pointed at us. You can justify this also but it adds to a bad perception of the police (Why do you need a fully automatic assault weapon for me? I’m not a criminal) and breaks the public trust further.
“The question is about SWAT teams, it’s because several armored and heavily armed men are less likely to be murdered serving a warrant than two detectives in suits with snub-nose .38s”
That is true and no one has a problem when the SWAT team is used to apprehend a violent felon. They do have a problem when SWAT teams are used for the serving of misdemeanor warrants to nonviolent individuals at 3am. That they are getting addresses wrong using such tactics does absolutely nothing to grow confidence or trust in the police. The policy of shooting EVERY dog at such operations is not very popular either.
“Are you going to join Oathkeepers?” The oath I took to uphold the Constitution that I took when they pinned the badge on me is enough, thanks. I don’t need it refreshed. That’s why it’s called an “oath,” not “a short-term, revocable-at-will verbal contract.”
I’m glad you take your oath seriously. That doesn’t mean every one does and how are ordinary people supposed to tell the ones who do from the ones who don’t? Is it such a bad thing to reaffirm that oath to gain some good will, confidence and trust from a wary public?
In the end it is about trust. It’s very hard to trust some one that can ruin your life or even end it. Is it necessary to dress in black BDU uniforms or to engage other recent practices that make people afraid of those who are supposed to be there to protect and serve? You can be doing your job by the book but if the book allows things that erode the public trust, it might be time to re-evaluate the rule book. The ends don’t justify the means…
I can’t understand why people bash public servants for public policy when in fact those same public servants have very little, if any input in the formulation of that policy. As a former EMT, I can assure you that critisizing public policy can get you in a world of hurt. Log on to the LEAP website if you need more proof.As for the cop-bashing, I can attest that I personally witnessed bad cops held accountable for their actions.It may not have made the front page, but they were held accountable nonetheless.Course, I’m kinda biased, since they saved my ass more than once when I was on the job.
Oh, and if anyone has a problem with this nation’s drug policy, the LEAP website is a good place to start.You change public policy in this country by spreading the word and working within the system,not by bashing the people who are tasked with carrying it out.Americans have a VERY low tolerance for those who seek political change through violent means,which many on both sides of the fringe have learned to their sorrow.Given some of the comments posted on the last thread, I just thought I’d mention that.
No, Mr. Ayoob, once again, you don’t get a “by” for enforcing unjust statutes because you’re “just following orders.” Let me give you a critical thinking example not of degree, but of quality: you’re told to arrest a black lady who refused to sit in the back of the bus. It is morally wrong to arrest her, whether or not a statute says you can arrest her. Do you recognize that? Do you comprehend that? It is morally wrong. The same goes for statutes that say you must arrest people who are carrying firearms without a state permission slip. Or arrest someone for having a certain unapproved type of vegetation. Or for not wearing a seat belt.
Mr. Ayoob, let me tell you. I have a permit. I don’t use weed. I wear my seat belt. But I have no right whatsoever to stop other people and threaten them with violence (and those lights, and your weapons, and your radio, mean that if the non-aggressor does not comply, he will have violence used against him.) I don’t have that right. My neighbor doesn’t have that right. If we do not have those rights, tell me, Mr. Ayoob, how can “we” bestow those rights on a third party? It is impossible. “Society” does not have a right to give you a moral right to use certain types of violence, while it would be wrong for any other individual to use the same type of violence. Collectives do not have rights. Only individuals do. And our rights come from God Himself. They are not bestowed upon us by men, or by any dessicated sheepskin.
Police have only as much of a right, only as much authority to use violence as anyone else. That means they only have the right to use violence to stop an actual aggressor from using force, fraud or coercion against non-aggressors. You may not use physical violence against someone because he’s done something “immoral.” You, like everyone else, may only use physical violence to stop a physical threat to life, liberty and property.
Cops don’t think that way. The majority of the individuals who comprise society don’t even think that way. But even though they cannot articulate it, they intuit it. And that is why they fear police. That is why they do not respect them. No matter how good their intentions, a majority act as though they live in some alternate moral universe, where a shiny piece of metal on their chests makes it moral to threaten violence and to use violence against non-violent, non-aggressive people. And that is dishonorable.
AMEN, says the old Grumpy One, whilst chuckling to himself.
So….what do you think about this bin Laden business???
Regarding the use of SWAT teams for serving warrants, I think that Radley Balko has said it far better than I can. His paper, “Overkill: The Rise of Parmilitary Police Raids in America,” is available here:
http://www.cato.org/pubs/wtpapers/balko_whitepaper_2006.pdf
He writes: ” The most common use of SWAT teams today is to serve narcotics warrants, usually with forced, unannounced entry into the
home. These increasingly frequent raids, 40,000 per year by one estimate, are needlessly subjecting nonviolent drug offenders, bystanders, and wrongly targeted civilians to the terror of having
their homes invaded while they’re sleeping, usually by teams of heavily armed paramilitary units dressed not as police officers but as soldiers. These raids bring unnecessary violence and provocation to nonviolent drug offenders, many of whom were guilty of only misdemeanors. The raids terrorize innocents when police mistakenly
target the wrong residence. And they have resulted in dozens of needless deaths and injuries, not only of drug offenders, but also of police officers, children, bystanders, and innocent suspects.”
You write: “For those who don’t like the drug laws: work to change them, don’t focus your anger on the cops whose job is to enforce them.”
I don’t buy this argument. For one thing, we all know that police have wide liberty in how they enforce the law. For example, on one of the recent posts here, an officer wrote of not enforcing laws against carrying firearms because he believed in the literal interpretation of the 2nd Amendment. If police officers consistently enforced the law as it was written without letting their personal beliefs influence them, then they might be able to make an argument that “we just enforce the law, don’t take it out on us.” But that’s not the case. Individual officers make exceptions when they think it’s the right thing to do, and so in my opinion, they lose the shield of, “just enforcing the law.” You’re not just enforcing the law. You’re selectively enforcing the law, and so you are, to some degree, personally responsible for that enforcement.
The bottom line is that drug crime is one of the prime targets of all police departments and most individual officers. Officers like those who join LEAP (Law Enforcement Against Prohibition) are in the extreme minority. What’s happening is even less than a neutral “just enforcing the law.” Police prosecute drug crime with zeal!
Good post Massad!
I have blogged about this very issue myself. They fact is there are just some people out there that are idiots.
http://3rdman-peacekeeper.blogspot.com/2011/03/american-law-enforcement-militarization.html
Thanks for your lucidity, Massad!
CL
Wow! It’s amazing the kind of animales that crawl out from beneath the rocks when you thump the ground. I’m with you Mas’. I’m not a former LEO. I actually never wore a uniform of any kind, not that I didn’t want to it was just a matter of time and circumstance. I was, however, a Probation Officer long ago in a galaxy far away and I met an awful lot of our finest, city, county and state. I had many opportunities to have a beer or two with them and for the most part they were good men who believed in what they were doing.
Let’s face it, there’s bad doctors, priests, parents, neighbors, ad nauseum. There’s bad PO’s too. This fact of human nature does not warrant condemning the whole lot. I’ve never understood the mentality that paints with such a broad brush. Must be a lack of critical thinking?
Well said ,Mas. still can’t see what started this.
Re drug laws, Officers I respect on the issue are the folks at
Law Enforcement Against Prohibition
http://www.leap.cc/cms/index.php
Well said Mas. Thanks again.
Yeah baby! You’ve said it all Mas, there’s nothing I can add other than a heart felt thanks for your service as a police officer and your life mission to educate, not only cops, but civilians as well in the ways of the gun. Stay safe.
I agree with all your replies. But! I am a 58 year old, served in the Marines and now I teach middle school. Over the last 10 years, there has been a definite tendency for police officers I’ve dealt with to be aggressive and quick to threaten. I should add that none of my encounters have been where I was committing a crime (even traffic) or under suspicion of one. Once reporting and twice as a witness. I know most are fine people doing a difficult and dangerous job, but there is a clear trend in the wrong direction in either the training or the how the police see the public.
Amen! I may at times not agree with the laws, but I fervently support good, honest cops. I use the same given to the military, and thank each one of them for their service every time I get a chance. Thanks, Mas!
Amen brother.
Most Police officers are Heroes….Period. If you can’t see that then you can’t see much at all.
I believe many people are concerned with the INCREASED militarism of the police (and other agencys) I hear police making the statement “civilians” in reference to non police citizens. The police are “civilians” and should keep that in mind at all times. You know the people are the police and the police are the people quote is true.
I consider myself to be a law abiding citizen for 66 years and hold great respect and regard for most police, and the few interactions I have had with policemen were not negative.
It does concern me when SWAT tactics are used for warrant service or search warrants based on sworn testamony. Particularly when based on one detained suspects word.
There is a “code of silence” when officers commit an offence and other officers refuse to “snitch” to avoid being ostracized, and this needs more attention.
The police are in the unique position of investigating themselves and the abuse of this position should be avoided at all costs.
I noted your surprise and shock at the attitude of a large percentage of your blog followers, but keep in mind it only takes one incident every month being broadcast or posted on the internet to shape attitudes.
Remember the Police Chief in Madison, Wisconsin telling his officers and advising the media that all legal open carry civilians in his city will be “Taken Down” by his officers. Would you obey that order?
You are in the unique position of being one of the most highly respected police (or ex-police) officers in the country, respected by both the police and average citizens alike.
Maybe you can help heal this rift.
Paul in Texas
As a former L.E.O. with over nine years on the job, all street duty except for a few months working the duty office, I can say that some of the best people I’ve known were cops and some of the worst scumbags I’ve met were also police officers, sergeants, lieutenants, captains, a major, and a chief.
Police serve a necessary role in our society. Anyone who is willing to put themselves in harms way to help out the rest of us has my support, be it police, fire fighters, paramedics, soldiers or other. God bless them all.
I have only had the opportunity to interact with a hand full of police officers, but have taken the time to thank them every time.
i support and respect the majority of police officers. i do what i can for my community and them.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/42928442#42928442
if this officer was in my community was allowed to return to work the next day then the system has failed as far as i am concerned. yes this 15 year old is not behaving as anyone could say is respectable – but a 200+ pound officer shoving her and bashing her head into a brick wall is assault pure and simple.
this next video too is far above and beyond what the law abiding officers should support. tear gassing 90lb girls who are standing on their lawns? what 3rd world country is this?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ufKv-5t0t4E
this is the stuff i am talking about – not the large majority of officers who don’t react like these examples. i want to see mas and others speak up and publicly stand against this type of action. have some classes and start educating the public and officers that this is not acceptable behavior and far from constitutional actions.
it is glaringly obvious that mas has made no comment on either.
silence is consent. if the good officers consent to this type of unwarranted action then they are not really good officers then are they?
Mas, you said it right. I can’t help but imagine (I think correctly) that 99% of the ones who don’t like the police have a chip on their shoulder for some reason. Most mature men know a chip on the shoulder doesn’t last long when you are out taking on the battles of the world. I don’t think those armchair warriors have ever feared for their lives or their buddies’s lives. If they had, it might have instilled a little calmness to their minds.
Nicely said, Mas.
“Most Police officers are Heroes….Period. If you can’t see that then you can’t see much at all.”
I’ll second that.
And I’m with Grumpy Weasel, would be interested to see your take on the departure of bin Laden. If I recall correctly, didn’t we also get a few of his top officers?
In response to Mike that most police officers are Heroes. This is a paraphrase from the “Soldiers Manual” circa 1965: There are no heroes. There are only ordinary people doing that which is necessary under extraordinary circumstances. Police are no different, they are ordinary people often working under extraordinary circumstances. Some of them bad but most really good people.
If you don’t like the law work with your congress critters to make changes. Laws don’t always make sense but they are the laws.
I must have missed the comment by the Fred Phelps of the anti-cop crowd. Glad I did.
Thanks for answering the questions, Mas. Conceptually I understand the lever-action winchester to be the assault rifle of its day, but that’s still a little hard to sink in. But seeing it from a historical perspective, it makes perfect sense.
I’ll say this one thing as a bit of a devil’s advocate (I fear I don’t make a very good one, though): back in the day in the old west when Lawmen had these latest rifles, so did a good number of the law-abiding citizens (or maybe hollywood has infected my recollection of history lessons more than I thought) who those men protected as well.
These days, Law Enforcement is able to be armed with weapons that are otherwise forbidden by law (without jumping through a good deal of annoying and expensive paperwork, not to mention extremely limited supply… ie, fully automatic weapons here in the US before… what was it…. 1980?) from the common man. Granted, the civilian is more than able to be as well armed as the police since both are more likely to use semi-auto ANYWAY in an engagement. Still, the image is there for some people that the cops are able to be armed and protected far better than the average non-LEO citizen.
Perhaps this is more about projected image than reality. Though certain agencies have been trying to do better in that arena as well. Just read this article today, Mas, and I figured you’d be interested (the link was tweeted from Sheriff Joe’s twitter account of all places :P): http://connectedcops.net/?p=4408
Brogan, Golem, and Joshua are correct. I think you are missing the point here, Mas. The public’s perception, and i think, accurately so, is that the police have become increasingly militarized in their approach, mindset, and weaponry. You folks are peacekeepers, not a military occupying force. Soldiers and LEO are trained differently and have different jobs;let’s keep that distinction.
Mas, I’ve covered my thoughts regarding my own experience, so on another note: I had the gall to ask Eric Holder’s office, as well as the offices of my congresscritters, what the plans are when it comes to th “Fast and Furious” or “Project Gunwalker” topics. I was polite, to the point, but hope they don’t shoot my wife during the 0300 no-knock “Patriot Act” search. She didn’t ask any questions at all. Did I mention I live in Illinois, home of the rabidly anti-gun Senators, one from each party? Pray for my wife.
My son is a Sheriff’s Deputy, and I have met a great number of his fellow LEO’s. The great majority of them are solid, respectful and professional. I don’t think the average citizen has any idea what LEO’s are faced with on a daily basis. My son has been kicked, hit and burned with a cigar in the course of performing his duties. It is a very dangerous job, and it is not getting any easier. Away from the job, when we go out to sporting events, my son and his friends are basically fun-loving men and women. On the job, they have to always maintain an edge, for their safety and the safety of others. It is hard to shut that off. There are always going to be a few bad apples, like in any job, but my experience with LEOs has been overwhelmingly positive.
I was a Deputy Sheriff in KY . I served under two administrations.
I was proud to serve the people of my county. I didn’t pick and choose who I served. I served them all. I didn’t choose which laws I enforced. I enforced them all justly and equally. The oath I swore to required it. When the police take the authority away from your elected legislature and judicial branch of government because they disagree with the law of the land, you will find you are no longer living in a free state. It isn’t the responsibility of the police to change the law. If the law doesn’t suit you or you feel it is unjust, petition your legislature and change it.
To Mick above: Watch your hindquarters, have a video camera handy, and send your wife somewhere else. I’ll pray for you and your family.
Thanks, Mas, for writing interesting and informative articles. Thanks too for your service to the communities you’ve served.
I can’t count the times I’ve been in a restaurant and heard a parent say to a child, “Eat your beans, or that man over there will arrest you.” This does nothing but breed fear of and disrespect for police officers. I’d venture to bet that most of the rabid anti-police remarks here come from some of those children. They’ve never been abused by a police officer, but other people have told them horror stories from “a friend of a friend”.
Well said Mas.
“Let’s face it, there’s bad doctors, priests, parents, neighbors, ad nauseum. There’s bad PO’s too. This fact of human nature does not warrant condemning the whole lot. I’ve never understood the mentality that paints with such a broad brush. Must be a lack of critical thinking?”
The problem with this line of reasoning is that doctors, priests, parents, and neighbors do not have the full force of the state behind them when they misbehave. An LEO can detain me, arrest me, cause me to spend the night (or longer, if I can’t post bail) in jail, compel me to appear in court, compel me to hire a lawyer at great expense (yeah, I could use a public defender, if I’m interested in pleading guilty instead of defending my case), search and potentially damage my property, and even kill me.
When a non-LEO misbehaves, the force of the state comes to the aid of the victim. When an LEO misbehaves, he or she IS the state, and so the victim’s odds of getting justice seem much slimmer.
This stems at least in part from the “us vs. them” mentality that Radley Balko and others like him say has increased in recent years, and that’s part of why the paramilitary attitude is harmful. Police are citizens. They “protect and serve.” The military are not citizens. They “kill people and break stuff.”
“My son has been kicked, hit and burned with a cigar in the course of performing his duties.”
Charlie,
This argument boils down to, “A cop’s job is so hard that he or she has to behave ‘that way’ all the time, even with citizens who don’t deserve it.” I don’t buy it. If I took a job as a receptionist, I couldn’t say to my boss, “I’m sorry I’m such a jerk, but answering the phone really sets me on edge!” Threats to one’s safety are part of a cop’s job, and a person who can’t handle that without behaving ‘that way’ to citizens who aren’t a threat shouldn’t be a cop.
I cannot speak for the rest of the nation, but in CA……the laws are written at the 23rd grade level. Television and Newspapers content is produced at the 5th grade reading level to reach the majority of Californians.
Ignorance of the law is no excuse.
A system has been created where anyone can be thrown in jail at any time….simply because its IMPOSSIBLE NOT to break a law.
Who does the arresting for this again?
Your just following orders?
If the greatest evil is when good men stand by and do nothing then the majority of all cops are standing by doing nothing.
Mr. Ayoob, what I do not like about law enforcement types is [1] their disregard of minor laws like speeding and parking. They flash their badges to a “brother-in-arms” and they get a “free walk.” I know this from first-hand reports from them or their wives, and they were bragging about it! They thought they were cute because they were above the law we mere mortals have to observe. [2] I also have observed that whether on or off the job, they they are patronizing and condescending if not outright arrogant. By my personal experiences, they are self-proclaimed experts on every subject from philosophy to psychology to sociology to religion. [3] Thinking themselves little gods, for no rational reason, they abuse people they arrest.
Law enforcement types just do not understand why so many respectable law-abiding citizens do not respect them. They never will, for they are not going to give up their perks and their arrogance. I quote Lord Acton: “Power corrupts; Absolute power tends to corrupt absolutely.” Law enforcement types have power that can reach almost absolute power in day-to-day situations. Thank God for those who “watch the watchers!”
Mick, you have drawn the Eye of Sauron. The equivalent would be asking the RSHA (Reich Sicherheits Hauptamt) and the Gauleiter what they plan to do about gassing the Jews.
Certainly I understand Mas’s viewpoint and also that of the dissenters, and if possible, I agree with both. I have a lot of mixed feelings and opinions regarding these last couple columns and replies. When I was a child I learned how the “good-old-boy network” operated. 50 years of adulthood has shown me that 80% of the LEOs are out to show their macho and 80% of those are a complete disgrace to all LEOs. Mine is a semi-rural area and many people fear the LEOs as much as the rampant criminals. Ethics, integrity, self-respect, and honor are terms long lost in the new culture of America, in every job of life from students to LEOs to CEOs. When the inevitable socio-economic collapse happens, each person will have to rely on himself. Stuck in the 50s?
What everybody should understand is that when potential criminals are facing off with police it is not about a fair fight. This door swings both ways. Both the Miami shootout in 1986, the north Hollywood shootout in 1997, and the killing of officer kyle Dinkheller in 1998 all demonstrate this. These situations can potentially happen at any traffic stop or robbery etc. If I was a Police officer I would want to have whatever firepower necessary to come out alive in such situations. Hesitation can get you killed in a hurry like in the case of Deputy Dinkheller. He not only hesitated he was also out gunned. I would have no problem approaching a vehicle with an AR15 if allowed to. When things goes bad it will be to late to rectify it if your under prepared. I know this would not be warranted at most traffic stops, and it would be bad for public image. If I had to chose between this and being dead I would chose what I had to in order to return home to my family at night. Deputy Dinkheller left behind a wife and young children.
Mas ~ Your comments about California are sad but true. California has become a place to be ridiculed and mocked. I was born here and have loved being a Californian for nearly 68 years. I fear that we will never see freedom here again but I will stay and do my part to stop the idealogues from destroying what’s left.
I am a senior-senior citizen, with a clean record, good retirement, pretty good health, lots to do, good cars, good wife, good home. Brought up to respect police (we had some good neihborhood ones growing up). Have a number of friends who are or were MP’s, state police, university police, city police and sheriff deputies. I don’t have any problems with DUI checkpoints, BUT…..
Wife and I both have concealed carry licenses (not permits) and have been life members of several gun organization. We have gotten to the point that we practically fear contact with officers because if you have an emergency and you call 911, this nearly always leads to investigation, searches, intense questioning, with the usual result that the outcome is seldom positive. When you see on the local big city news in the evening that a squad of black ops guys with helmets, laser pointer rifles, night goggles, vests, all kinds of commo equipment, etc., you get to thinking “wHY IS IT NECESSARY TO DEPLOY ALL THIS FORCE AGAINST SOME POOR SLOB WHO WANTS TO COMMIT SUICIDE?” Usually the guy with the gun wanting to commit ends up getting plugged by the polce anyway. Does this “protect and serve”? I think not. These missions are seen as “training” or “practice” missions, as far as I am concerned.
One can hardly blame those in the country illegaly for wanting to stay “in the shadows” as they say. I want to also. I don’t have any reason to stick my neck out, risk my life and my small nest egg and my home and my wife just to prove a point. This is why most of us have become a nation of SHEEP. I may not have long left on this earth, and I want to live it OUT OF PRISON and ALIVE. After I am gone you guys can do what you want with the country and the whole earth because I won’t be around to suffer the consequences.
I think if you polled a lot of senior citizens, those with guns and those without guns, you might find attitudes very similar.
Still thanks for all the good the police, EMT’s, and fire fighters do, as well as the military guys.
I suggest that the bigger problem is the fact that americans like to refer to America as a “land of laws”; and with pompous pride ofttimes too!
I submit that had we stuck to the original plan, America would be a “land of liberties” that the government’s primary responsibility is to protect, we wouldn’t be having nearly so many problems nor need near so many “law enforcers.”
We need to take a skill saw to our so-called “laws” most of which were bought into being via corrupt special interests and congress criminals.
But, that’s just me I’m guessing.
To the folks who keep posting that “most cops are honest”: That’s swell. So are most politicians, and yet we have carefully-worded and hard-fought constitutions to limit and control them, and if necessary, dispose of them. If police power were in only the hands of “most cops” maybe we would have no need to complaint — unfortunately, it is in the hands of ALL cops, including the troubled, incompetent, and dirty ones. And the more we raise the average level of militarization that is “acceptable” in “civilian” actions, the more power every cop, including these cops have at their disposal. And, as we have learned in our experiment with constitutions, if a power can be abused, it will be abused.
Mas, while I agree with a number of your responses, I must bring up that I think the issue of SWAT/modern-day militarization of our police has been way, way simplified in some peoples’ minds.
I guess I had to truncate my comment since it wouldn’t take the first time around- anyway, I submit for all parties concerned…
Police being more militarized than the military:
http://reason.com/blog/2010/05/14/more-militarized-than-the-mili
A 7-year-old killed in a SWAT raid:
http://www.freep.com/comments/article/20100517/NEWS05/5170350/Police-family-look-answers-girl-s-death-Detroit
Police get medals for raiding the wrong house:
http://www.startribune.com/local/minneapolis/26083024.html
I think the iconic picture from the Elian Gonzalez affair sums it up for me- an armed, armored man with his MP-5 trained on an unarmed man holding a child. Worth a thousand words, not many of them good.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eli%C3%A1n_Gonz%C3%A1lez_affair
And oh yeah- here’s what’s happening as a result of us “working to change the drug laws,” by the way:
http://stopthedrugwar.org/chronicle/2011/may/05/feds_new_medical_marijuana_offen
Any comments?
Thank you Massood for providing this much needed perspective, particularly in the calm, reasonable and matter of fact way you’ve done so here. And thanks to the many men and women in Law Enforcement who daily put their lives on the line and put up with the attacks of ignorant fools who’s lives LE personnel protect without question as well.
Hi Mas, just piping in on this thread, I just don’t like SWAT being used to serve warrents for potentially non violent crimes. However, I also understand that you never know what you are walking into. I also don’t like the rise in the use of the tazer as opposed to old fashion restrains, joint manipulatin etc. I don’t like the idea that I could get into a loud argument with my wife and have some officer show up and zap me because I disagree with the officer’s presence at my home. It’s a fine line the police walk and it’s a thankless job sometimes. The world’s not perfect right?