Article: Rise of the Warrior Cop

[jrfly3006 42]

Its the syndrome of different tactics for different places that causes complacency and gets people killed.. Do a little reading about mass shooting and the areas they take place in..gangs, terrorists, well armed psycho's and the like are present in EVERY sect of this life, in ALL neighborhoods..Often these people will take refuge in more well off areas thinking they wont attract attention.. If a dept chooses to be prepared for any scenario they may find then thats good planning..wont get caught with their pants down and be eviscerated for not being ready.. And Vlad.. Drop holsters make a cop look military?... Really?... My dept issues them because you can more readily wear an Scott Air Pak in confined space / hazmat environments..and also for the fact its transfers weight off the hip .. Better for the back my friend..has NOTHING to do looking military.. Lets stop getting crazy here

[Combat Auto 174]

First off I am going to say that I have several family members that are state troopers, and I am going to try to not be a cop basher.  I do find it disturbing tha the police forces have become militarized, and thus the growing distancing of the local community and police officers. 

Here are some T-shirts that were sold and worn by police, the first is one that was worn by the NYPD's Street Crimes Unit, the quote alone is disturbing.....

Then this one was printed and sold for a fundraiser in California

As a citizen i see this as a disturbing trend, and showing the decreasing mentality of serve and protect and migrating towards a controlling mentallity when it comes to the public.  Now I fully understand it comes down to budgeting and how fugged up the govt works.  Police forces get money budgeted yearly for SWAT and other special groups.  If the SWAT isn't used enough to justify the money in the budget, next year they dont get it or the money is decreased.  So, SWAT is utilized more often than needed so they can show that it was utilized and is a "nessecity for the community", and they get their money next year.   Just like in the military, go into "country" for a day or so to get your hazardous duty pay for the month, I dont blame them but I dont see the need.  I believe that local swat forces should be disbanded and it should be on a state level.  Anywhere in the state there is a State Police Barracks withing an accecptable response time.  Local PD's are stressing their budgets having these SWAT teams, the ammo cost for training alone has to be a huge economic burden.  And dont even get me started in cops calling the local populace "civilians"  that is a joke, friggin big joke.  If you want to call someone a civilian go join the military, then you will really know what it is like to put your life on the line, not be able to see your family for months at a time and not just miss Christmas.  And then I keep hearing from my family and friends that are LEO's that all this SWAT and "militarization" is being done for officer safety, my response is "I've got one of the most dangerous jobs in the world, you dont see me bitchin'?"

 

and on a final note, a good song that talks about this subject.

The frame of mind reflected by these slogans are appauling....It is a reflection of the notion of a "police-class'...Luckuly, I believe most Police are good people.

[vladtepes 1,060]

Its the syndrome of different tactics for different places that causes complacency and gets people killed.. Do a little reading about mass shooting and the areas they take place in..gangs, terrorists, well armed psycho's and the like are present in EVERY sect of this life, in ALL neighborhoods..Often these people will take refuge in more well off areas thinking they wont attract attention.. If a dept chooses to be prepared for any scenario they may find then thats good planning..wont get caught with their pants down and be eviscerated for not being ready.. And Vlad.. Drop holsters make a cop look military?... Really?... My dept issues them because you can more readily wear an Scott Air Pak in confined space / hazmat environments..and also for the fact its transfers weight off the hip .. Better for the back my friend..has NOTHING to do looking military.. Lets stop getting crazy here

 

 

you can be properly trained without looking like a swat team member pulling someone over for speeding.. further it is the mindset... there are TONS of good cops out there.. thousands... but there are also many "tough guys" and I feel that persona is further reinforced by their militarized look, it is off putting to most of the community that you serve...

 

drop holsters are just an example.. they are awful and I feel for you.. but I guess it makes sense if you are wearing an air pack frequently when responding to hazmat situations in confined spaces... which sounds like something that happens on the daily.. 

 

as for your back? I carry a gun just about every day for hours on end.. and my back is doing ok.. I would think that the 8 million things on your belt are probably just as much of an issue if not more of one than your handgun.. 

 

and sure.. we could train EVERY cop to be a sharpshooter.. or to respond to a chemical attack... but there comes a point where it is not reasonable to train every officer on every conceivable threat.. there NEEDS to be trained individuals to respond to unusual violent situations.... but it is not reasonable to have a SWAT team in every small town USA

[jrfly3006 42]

I still dont know what the eff a drop holster and bdu's have to do with a militarized cop., if the uniform fits better..allows him/her to carry items more conveniently and comfortably and is more durable than I dont know what to say to you but move on.. Ive never had someone approach me and say "o gosh i feel like im in occupied territory"... Never..Sometimes the uniform and rhe tact that goes with it deters someone from doing something dumb because they say to themselves"maybe I shouldnt screw with this particular guy at this juncture"..

You know what would make police militarized.. Riding in armored up Hummv's with a .50 cal followed by a few Bradley BFV's with a couple fast movers overhead just in case.. Barbed wire checkpoints with 40mm MK19s at the ready..If youve been in on intel meetings regarding gang locations then you can make comments about what size team and equipment is needed to take down a location.. If you think they send out overwhelming teams just to "spend some money" then youre delusional.. Depts are operating with the bare minimum now and the diffetence between making budget and not may mean the junior guys get laid off.. So you think a chief would blow a few sheckles on uneccesary force if it meant guys would get cut?

Since everyone here is well versed on tactics and use of force lets propose the following scenario.. Youre the tactical commander and youre tasked with hitting a suspected drug den.. warrant in hand.. You gonna tell 3 patrol guys to meet u there and knock on the door and ask for compliance .or are you getting your best guys together who train for this...you gonna tell them to leave the bdu's , drop holsters, level 3 vests, kevlar helmet and ar-15s home?.. Or would you tell them to take everything the could possibly need and are issued..

So the question here is what is an acceptable officers kit to you.. Shirt/tie/8 pt cap/ traffic whistle?.. Do BDU's /holsters and the colors of their cars really freak people out..?I gotta say they wouldnt make a rabbits rump difference to me... If you pick up the phone and the police respond then they are doing their duty to serve the public.. You call they go.. Thats how it works..

 

I mean what did you guys think when cops switched from revolvers to semi's with 15 rd mags?...imminent martial law?

With that I bail out of this thread.. Getting way to food grade mettalic sheet -like in here...

[bhunted 887]

Wow!

[BlueLineFish 615]

I wear bdu's and a drop holster. Guess i am more militant that the rest of the dept or am ahead of the curve. I cant believe this has turned into a uniform means militarization discussion. It sounds like the ignorant antis who say the rifle is black so its scarier. I have more pockets to hold more military stuff in my bdu pants i am so militant. Maybe i need a pocket capacity limit. So ridiculous

[jrfly3006 42]

Its exactly the anti's tactic..demonize its appearance...exploit a few bad instances and make people believe its the norm..generalize the living hell out of it and go full speed ahead with the slander machine..

[vladtepes 1,060]

I still dont know what the eff a drop holster and bdu's have to do with a militarized cop., if the uniform fits better..allows him/her to carry items more conveniently and comfortably and is more durable than I dont know what to say to you but move on.. Ive never had someone approach me and say "o gosh i feel like im in occupied territory"... Never..Sometimes the uniform and rhe tact that goes with it deters someone from doing something dumb because they say to themselves"maybe I shouldnt screw with this particular guy at this juncture"..

You know what would make police militarized.. Riding in armored up Hummv's with a .50 cal followed by a few Bradley BFV's with a couple fast movers overhead just in case.. Barbed wire checkpoints with 40mm MK19s at the ready..If youve been in on intel meetings regarding gang locations then you can make comments about what size team and equipment is needed to take down a location.. If you think they send out overwhelming teams just to "spend some money" then youre delusional.. Depts are operating with the bare minimum now and the diffetence between making budget and not may mean the junior guys get laid off.. So you think a chief would blow a few sheckles on uneccesary force if it meant guys would get cut?

Since everyone here is well versed on tactics and use of force lets propose the following scenario.. Youre the tactical commander and youre tasked with hitting a suspected drug den.. warrant in hand.. You gonna tell 3 patrol guys to meet u there and knock on the door and ask for compliance .or are you getting your best guys together who train for this...you gonna tell them to leave the bdu's , drop holsters, level 3 vests, kevlar helmet and ar-15s home?.. Or would you tell them to take everything the could possibly need and are issued..

So the question here is what is an acceptable officers kit to you.. Shirt/tie/8 pt cap/ traffic whistle?.. Do BDU's /holsters and the colors of their cars really freak people out..?I gotta say they wouldnt make a rabbits rump difference to me... If you pick up the phone and the police respond then they are doing their duty to serve the public.. You call they go.. Thats how it works..

 

I mean what did you guys think when cops switched from revolvers to semi's with 15 rd mags?...imminent martial law?

With that I bail out of this thread.. Getting way to food grade mettalic sheet -like in here...

 

 

I know of small middle of nowhere departments in NJ with brand new cop cars... full auto AR variants.. and all the tactical goodness to go with them... this same department crying the blues that they had to lay off people when all those cuts were made....

 

just because I dont sit in on your super secret special ops meeting does not mean I am not entitled to an opinion? or wait is this no longer America?

 

let me try to break it down for you.. I will go a lot slower this time to see if you can get it...

 

larger urban areas.... areas with high level of crime and violence...definitely have the need for a more militarized built up police force.. it is completely reasonable to deal with the level of crime that is existent in that area.... 

 

but the 80 million other departments where there is rarely ever significant violent crime.. that immediately jump in and decide they want the and NEED the same... are just wasting financial resources...

 

like I said it would be perfect if every department could be properly equipped for everything that could ever happen.. but its just not reasonable.. 

look at Somers Point NJ.. their police rides around with some type of submachine gun in their squad cars... for what? in case they have to shoot up a drunk driver? I do NOT want you under armed.. under prepared.. but there has to be reason.. someone might shoot a rifle at you once.. it might happen.. do you roll around with rifle plates in? wearing a helmet? my guess is you don't.. because it is not reasonable.. 

 

my point is not about any one article of clothing... training.. or equipment..

 

it is instead about the me too attitude that our society is filled with.. just because New York police has a bomb squad.. it does not mean that Smithville NJ needs one.. 

 

I fully support the police.. and appreciate the job they do.. but I still do not agree with every decision made.. 

[vladtepes 1,060]

Its exactly the anti's tactic..demonize its appearance...exploit a few bad instances and make people believe its the norm..generalize the living hell out of it and go full speed ahead with the slander machine.

 

 

the issue is not that ALL police are bad... the issue is not that some highly trained individuals within a department with specialized equipment is bad.. 

 

the issue is when the police force that is intended to serve the public is slowly eroded away and replaced with military style units.. 

[vladtepes 1,060]

You know what would make police militarized.. Riding in armored up Hummv's with a .50 cal followed by a few Bradley BFV's with a couple fast movers overhead just in case.. Barbed wire checkpoints with 40mm MK19s at the ready

 

 

orly?

 

 

 

 

to be clear I have no problems with the police response to Boston... it was warranted.. but don't pretend like there are not police departments out there that are armed to the teeth... if you can't see the military overtone to some departments and the entire culture (on varying scales) then you are blind.. maybe no armored cars at your department... but what I am saying is I fully support force where it is NEEDED.. what I have an issue with is the NEED so many departments have to mimic that model when it is not needed... 

[Drnflood 0]

I think it comes down to this

 

A police officer should have to jump through hoops to perform his job.

 

It is an occupation that has a very real effect on the average US citizen, they can ruin you, or let you go on your way. They can make a mistake and end your life. The opposite of the negative things a police officer can do are true as well, they can be great assets to a community.

 

Public oversight and accountability should be the norm. They are anything but.

 

If departments want to arm up to fight a losing war on drugs/terrorism/whatever, so be it. If the department or its officers make a huge mistake, they should be held accountable. Suspended with pay does not count.

[High Exposure 5,664]

So only urban areas have violent crime? So whats that 20k residents a squre mile before rifles aren't an aspect of militarization? Good to know, I will turn in my armor and gun because I apparantly don't need it in my little town. I will let the scumbags that come through town from the neighboring City that they can't do anything that would require any tactical response so we don't have residents think we are militarized Only PDs with more than 100 cops have the need to respond to a gun call with a long gun? So, when the bad guy has a long gun I should handle it with a pistol and soft armor, even though rifles and plates are indicated an available, because I work in a small town and don't want to scare you? Only City Cops need to respond to violent crime? Not Cops in small towns like Sandy Hook, CT, Aurora CO, Old Bridge NJ, Nickle Mines PA, Oak Creek WI (there are dozens more but I think you get the idea? It's OK if NYPD has the gear but if Spottswood does is militarization?

 

I keep a PC in my cruiser (personal purchase) Along with an SBR 870 and a Colt R0933 (Dept. issued). If something happens I will be prepared to handle it. If not it stays in the cruiser. That is the threat assessment for my area. If I worked someplace where rifle threats were a priority, I would damn well wear a PC all the time. Construction workers wear hard hats, Doctors wear rubber gloves, you have life jackets on a boat - it is all safety equipment to address the rarely occurring but all too real real dangers of A job you do. Why shouldn't Cops have the tools to address the dangers they are expected to face? Because it is scary to you? Because you think it looks inappropriate?

 

As far as the Boston Photo? How should they have responded to a terrorist attack with IEDs in a well populated area of the NE (I am assuming you don't believe it was a stabed event to train Police to invade rwsidential neighborhoods )If you "Don't have a problem with their response" in this instance then your photo is nothing more than a Red Herring. Are Cops using that gear on daily car stops? Are they responding to a family dispute or shoplifter in APCs? Did you make a report to an Officer in a PC and MICH that yoir car got broken into? C'mon, give me a break.

 

Cops live in your neighborhoods. Their kids to go to school with yours. They go to the same churches, shop at the same grocery store and use the S&W banks. They are not an invading army and are not hearing up for the NWO. They are getting equipment to do their jobs better, to keep them safe while trying to help you on the worst day of your life.

 

One other thing that is bothering me. I keep reading about how "Cops can Ruin you life". Is everyone that is arrested simply an innocent man that is just misunderstood by the Cops? Oh, the Cops MADE you rob that liquior store. The Police told you it was OK to beat your wife? Is there no personal responsibility?

[vladtepes 1,060]

So only urban areas have violent crime? So whats that 20k residents a squae mile before rifles aren't an aspect of militarization? Good ro know, I will turn in my armor and gun because I apparantly don't need it in my little town. Only PDs with more than 100 cops have the need to respond to a gun call with a long gun? So, when the bad guy has a long gun I should handle it with a pistol and soft armor, even though rifles and plates are indicated an available, because I work in a small town and don't want to scare you? Only City Cops need to respond to violent crime? Not cops in Sandy Hook, CT, Aurora CO, Old Bridge NJ, Nickle Mines PA, Oak Creek WI? It's OK if NYPD has the gear but if Spottswood does is militarization?

 

I keep a PC in my cruiser (personal purchase) Along with an SBR 870 and a Colt R0933 (Dept. issued). If something happens I will be prepared to handle it. If not it stays in the cruiser. That is the threat assessment for my area. If I worked someplace where rifle threats were a priority, I would damn well wear a PC all the time. Construction workers wear hard hats, Doctors wear rubber gloves, you have life jackets on a boat - it is all safety equipment to address the rarely occurring but all too real real dangers of A job you do. Why shouldn't Cops have the tools to address the dangers they are expected to face? Because it is scary to you? Because you think it looks inappropriate?

 

As far as the Boston Photo? How should they have responded to a terrorist attack with IEDs in a well populated area of the NE (I am assuming you don't believe it was a stabed event to train Police to invade rwsidential neighborhoods )If you "Don't have a problem with their response" in this instance then your photo is nothing more than a Red Herring. Are Cops using that gear on daily car stops? Are they responding to a family dispute or shoplifter in APCs? Did you make a report to an Officer in a PC and MICH that yoir car got broken into? C'mon, give me a break.

 

Cops live in your neighborhoods. Their kids to go to school with yours. They go to the same churches, shop at the same grocery store and use the S&W banks. They are not an invading army and are not hearing up for the NWO. They are getting equipment to do their jobs better, to keep them safe while trying to help you on the worst day of your life.

 

One other thing that is bothering me. I keep reading about how "Cops can Ruin you life". Is everyone that is arrested simply an innocent man that is just misunderstood by the Cops? Oh, the Cops MADE you rob that liquior store. The Police told you it was OK to beat your wife? Is there no personal responsibility?

 

 

I am pretty sure you read bits and pieces of what you wanted to out of my my posts and totally missed the following..

 

I generally defend police.. you included in pretty much every post that ever happens here..

I openly admitted the response in Boston was reasonable..

I totally admit that departments need access to things at certain times...

 

the issue that I have is it is not financially reasonable for you to be captain America.. it is reasonable that at some point you may need backup.. you MIGHT need help from another department.. I get it you have confidence in your skill set.. but I am guessing if you run across a bomb you are probably not going to try to just disarm it.. I am going to bet that you will call someone in..

 

my point if you read my posts is that pretending the police is not being militarized is silly... did I say they were watching me? or ready to attack me? NOPE... do I live in fear of them? NOPE..  are they far more military in both tactics and equipment than they were say 30 years ago... YES..

 

look at a soldier in the 1960s... look at a cop in the 1960s... 

evaluate and compare...

now look at the modern LEO and soldier.. 

then tell me the police have not become "more militarized"... police now.. more mimic the military.. than they did in the past.. as far as I can tell at least...

 

and back to the whole point of this thread.. none of that is even an issue providing it is applied with restraint and accountability.. 

[LWRCfanboy 0]

 

One other thing that is bothering me. I keep reading about how "Cops can Ruin you life". Is everyone that is arrested simply an innocent man that is just misunderstood by the Cops? Oh, the Cops MADE you rob that liquior store. The Police told you it was OK to beat your wife? Is there no personal responsibility?

 

i pretty sure you know thats now what he means. it happens all the time cops beat up ppl shoot them kill them... of course not all cops everywhere but it does happen so be reasonable and dont pretend this is soo false... 

[vladtepes 1,060]

i pretty sure you know thats now what he means. it happens all the time cops beat up ppl shoot them kill them... of course not all cops everywhere but it does happen so be reasonable and dont pretend this is soo false... 

 

when you consider the vast number of law enforcement.. and the relatively low amount of serious issues.. it is reasonable top assume that the police are pretty safe and for the most part helpful... what you see is the worst of the worst.. and that is what sells news.. the worst of the worst is by no means a representation of the whole.. 

[bravozulu14 0]

Since this wasn't addressed I'll ask again....

 

hypothetically speaking, since we know active shooter response teams and highly militarized police forces were formed for things like Columbine, high crime inner cities, etc.  and most pro-2A supporters have pointed out, an armed society is a polite society and the only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun and crime has fallen in every place that has strong 2nd Amendment protections....  By empowering the American populous to defend themselves in such situations could an argument be made that the complete removal of gun free zones and 50 state reciprocity of conceal carry permits drastically reduce (not eliminate) the need for such teams? 

[Soju 153]

Absolutely not. Only police can be trusted with guns and are responsible enough to do the right thing. If we let regular people carry guns in places like schools and other gun-free zones, there will be needless shootings by overreacting mall ninjas. Do you really want Joe Shmoe the janitor pulling out his pistol with children around?

[blksheep 466]

Absolutely not. Only police can be trusted with guns and are responsible enough to do the right thing. If we let regular people carry guns in places like schools and other gun-free zones, there will be needless shootings by overreacting mall ninjas. Do you really want Joe Shmoe the janitor pulling out his pistol with children around?

I don't. This all day.^^^

[High Exposure 5,664]

I am pretty sure you read bits and pieces of what you wanted to out of my my posts and totally missed the following..

 

I generally defend police.. you included in pretty much every post that ever happens here..

I openly admitted the response in Boston was reasonable..

I totally admit that departments need access to things at certain times...

 

the issue that I have is it is not financially reasonable for you to be captain America.. it is reasonable that at some point you may need backup.. you MIGHT need help from another department.. I get it you have confidence in your skill set.. but I am guessing if you run across a bomb you are probably not going to try to just disarm it.. I am going to bet that you will call someone in..

 

my point if you read my posts is that pretending the police is not being militarized is silly... did I say they were watching me? or ready to attack me? NOPE... do I live in fear of them? NOPE.. are they far more military in both tactics and equipment than they were say 30 years ago... YES..

 

look at a soldier in the 1960s... look at a cop in the 1960s...

evaluate and compare...

now look at the modern LEO and soldier..

then tell me the police have not become "more militarized"... police now.. more mimic the military.. than they did in the past.. as far as I can tell at least...

 

and back to the whole point of this thread.. none of that is even an issue providing it is applied with restraint and accountability..

 

Vlad, you are supportive and that wasn't addressed at you directly. Your post just covered a lot of the discussion in one neat package so I used yours as a template for my response.

 

I do think it was unfair to use a photos of something you are OK with to make a point about an issue you aren't OK with, but that is really neither here or there.

 

I still have a hard time with your "it looks like" argument as well as the idea that we shouldn't use what works because the military does it that way. I said it earlier but I will say it again - at he end of the conventional war and the start of te COIN war the military adopted tactics that are used by Police and SWAT, not the other way around. Arrest, containment, interviewing and evidence collection - So are the military "LEO-ized" or "SWATerized" now?

 

I don't want to be Capt America. I do want to do my job right, help people, and go see my wife an kid when my 12 is up. I want to start and end my shift with the same guys. That doesn't mean I will trame your rights or treat residets like an enemy combatant. That means I want gear that will give me a chance. The right tools for the right job. I don't want a SMAW for a car stop, but having a rifle on a gun call is nice.

 

So militarization comes down to fiscal responsibility now? I am confused. The DRMO program gives rifles and equipment to PDs for free

 

By the way, everything except the rifle and shotgun I am issues inlaid for myself. The PC, the continuing training, all of it - out of my pocket.

 

If I know something works, is legal, and constitutional why can't I use it? Why do I have to reinvent the wheel?

 

You bring up cops in the '60s, it was the Wild West to be a Cop in the 60's. Old timers refer to it as "the good old days". If I did 1/4 of the stuff that those guys did I would lose my job or be in jail. You want that back? You don't think that if they knew then what we know now the Cops wouldn't have the similar gear? Is a disparity in equipment all that would take to make you think Cops were not militarized?

 

There are tactics and gear that work for certain things and there is tactics and gear that doesn't work. If I have to make entry to rescue a hostage in NJ or a soldier has to do it in Afghanistan the same gear and the same tactics apply. That isn't militarization - that is efficiency, that is smart, that is responsible.

 

Since this wasn't addressed I'll ask again....

 

hypothetically speaking, since we know active shooter response teams and highly militarized police forces were formed for things like Columbine, high crime inner cities, etc. and most pro-2A supporters have pointed out, an armed society is a polite society and the only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun and crime has fallen in every place that has strong 2nd Amendment protections.... By empowering the American populous to defend themselves in such situations could an argument be made that the complete removal of gun free zones and 50 state reciprocity of conceal carry permits drastically reduce (not eliminate) the need for such teams?

 

Sure it could work, I know plenty of non-cops that could capably handle parts of active shooter response.

But first a few issues that need to be planned for:

 

Where would you respond from?

How would you be notified that you are needed?

How much time to you actually spend in the school/mall/possible scene of violence where we can rely on you instead of Police to address the issue?

What shift would you work and what days are you available?

If you get hurt or killed what are the repercussions?

How do we keep the armed good guys from shooting other armed good guys responding to the scene?

How do you link up with the armed good guys or are you planning on addressing any problems alone?

How will you communicate with follow on assets (EMS, EOD, CSI) that may be needed?

Will you be conducting the HR portion of this incident as well if the situation evolves that far? Or will you just stop and form a perimeter?

Do you believe it takes special training to provide this service? Follow up - If so will you pay for your own training ammo and gear? If not, who will?

If you are trained, equipped, and ready, who else would you trust besides yourself to handle these incidents? Or is a CCW enough of a certification?

Who processes the crime scene, evidence, and witnesses?

Who makes notifications to families and talks to the press?

If you blow it (and actually even if you do it right) who handles your lawsuit for you? Or do you have insurance?

[Soju 153]

Looks clearly have to do with it. Perception is reality. Do you really think it matters to someone who sees a cop in camouflage fatigues and a drop holster why they are dressed like that? Good reason, okay reason, bad reason? Irrelevant. They look more like a soldier going into battle then the friendly neighborhood officer.  Whether it is a good thing or not, the reality is there is a militarization of police in many aspects. Denying that is ignorant.

[High Exposure 5,664]

We can't always be the friendly neighborhood Officer to everyone. If there is a victim that we are there to help we aren't Officer Friendly to the actor. Officer respectful and Officer Professional but not always Officer friendly.

 

However, regardless if I am on patrol in a Class B Uniform, a barricaded person job in SWAT gear, or in court in a class A uniform, I can always be respectful, I can always so my job, be courteous to residents, compassionate to victims and ruthless to criminals. That has nothing to do with how I look. That has to do with character not appearances. Looks aren't all there is to perception.

 

The scumbags shouldn't think I am Officer friendly.

 

Do you think the guy I just wrote a ticket to for doing 50 in a 25 thinks I'm a friendly neighborhood officer because I am wearing an 8- point hat?

 

You think the guy I just locked up for touching his stepson thinks I'm Officer Friendly because my duty belt is leather basket weave?

 

If we are thought of as the good guys, or the bad guys, is subjective to who we are dealing with.

 

If I go to little kids house and take a report for his stolen bike you think he cares if I am dresses in a BDU or a class A dress uniform?

 

Does the store owner that calls us because he was robbed care if I'm carrying revolver or semi auto or a hip holster or a thigh rig?

 

Where are all these Cops I battle-rattle? I don't see them on patrol, being SRO, enforcing traffic, teaching DARE, taking reports, going to medical calls.

 

I see the gear come out when responding to a shots fired call, or a man with gun call - you know when it is appropriate. Not on a traffic stop or a welfare check.

 

You know something funny, the only people so far that I have met that shout "the Police are becoming Militarized" are my fellow gun owners. The people I have the most in common with politically and idealistically are the ones that fear the worst from me and trust me to do what's right the least.

[vladtepes 1,060]

Vlad, you are supportive and that wasn't addressed at you directly. Your post just covered a lot of the discussion in one neat package so I used yours as a template for my response.

 

I do think it was unfair to use a photos of something you are OK with to make a point about an issue you aren't OK with, but that is really neither here or there.

 

I still have a hard time with your "it looks like" argument as well as the idea that we shouldn't use what works because the military does it that way. I said it earlier but I will say it again - at he end of the conventional war and the start of te COIN war the military adopted tactics that are used by Police and SWAT, not the other way around. Arrest, containment, interviewing and evidence collection - Sonia the military "LEO-ized" or "SWATerized" now?

 

I don't want to be Capt America. I do want to do my job right, help people, and go see my wife an kid when my 12 is up. I want to start and end my shift with the same guys. That doesn't mean I will trame your rights or treat residets like an enemy combatant. That means I want gear that will give me a chance. The right tools for the right job. I don't want a SMAW for a car stop, but having a rifle on a gun call is nice.

 

So militarization comes down to fiscal responsibility now? I am confused. The DRMO program gives rifles and equipment to PDs for free

 

By the way, everything except the rifle and shotgun I am issues inlaid for myself. The PC, the continuing training, all of it - out of my pocket.

 

If I know something works, is legal, and constitutional why can't I use it? Why do I have to reinvent the wheel?

 

You bring up cops in the '60s, it was the Wild West to be a Cop in the 60's. Old timers refer to it as "the good old days". If I did 1/4 of the stuff that those guys did I would lose my job or be in jail. You want that back? You don't think that if they knew then what we know now the Cops wouldn't have the similar gear? Is a disparity in equipment all that would take to make you think Cops were not militarized?

 

There are tactics and gear that work for certain things and there is tactics and gear that doesn't work. If I have to make entry to rescue a hostage in NJ or a soldier has to do it in Afghanistan the same gear and the same tactics apply. That isn't militarization - that is efficiency, that is smart, that is responsible.

 

Sure it could work, I know plenty of non-cops that could capably handle parts of active shooter response.

But first a few issues that need to be planned for:

 

Where would you respond from?

How would you be notified that you are needed?

How much time to you actually spend in the school/mall/possible scene of violence where we can rely on you instead of Police to address the issue?

What shift would you work and what days are you available?

If you get hurt or killed what are the repercussions?

How do we keep the armed good guys from shooting other armed good guys responding to the scene?

How do you link up with the armed good guys or are you planning on addressing any problems alone?

How will you communicate with follow on assets (EMS, EOD, CSI) that may be needed?

Will you be conducting the HR portion of this incident as well if the situation evolves that far? Or will you just stop and form a perimeter?

Do you believe it takes special training to provide this service? Follow up - If so will you pay for your own training ammo and gear? If not, who will?

If you are trained, equipped, and ready, who else would you trust besides yourself to handle these incidents? Or is a CCW enough of a certification?

Who processes the crime scene, evidence, and witnesses?

Who makes notifications to families and talks to the press?

If you blow it (and actually even if you do it right) who handles your lawsuit for you? Or do you have insurance?

 

 

unfortunately.. or fortunately.. just because something works does not make it OK..

 

kicking in the door of EVERY home.. and running it with a K9 would deal a substantial blow to drug dealers.. it could in one swift motion cripple the entire criminal underworld.. but you can't do that.. because the innocent have rights.... but more importantly... does training EVERY cop to act in an elite capacity benefit the general public? I think some feel that there is an enormous disconnect between LEO and the general population.. I am bias due to having tons of friends and family involved... but I can see the argument that maybe its a little ridiculous to have a guy that looks like a swat team action figure responding to a store to pick up a kid for stealing a DVD... right tool for the right job... I can bang drywall nails in with a sledgehammer.. and they WILL go in.. but there are better more subtle tools for that..  I think what some people are trying to convey to you (and others) is that while there may be a need to deploy certain gear at certain times... there are definitely cops representing you that act as if they are storming a drug house when picking up the town drunk... there was a time where you could walk up to a cop and ask directions.. and the cop would talk to you in a friendly nice way sending you off where you need to go... seems more often than not in current times they will peer at you through some super tight fitting tactical sunglasses with hands in a calculated position offering you directions in a very robotic way.. all the while making you feel like they assume you are up to something awful... that is an EXTREME description... and it does NOT describe EVERY cop.. but if you are honest with yourself.. you KNOW I just described several people you work with.. lol

[vladtepes 1,060]

We can't always be the friendly neighborhood Officer to everyone. If there is a victim that we are there to help we aren't Officer Friendly to the actor. Officer respectful and Officer Professional but not always Officer friendly.

 

However, regardless if I am on patrol in a Class B Uniform, a barricaded person job in SWAT gear, or in court in a class A uniform, I can always be respectful, I can always so my job, be courteous to residents, compassionate to victims and ruthless to criminals. That has nothing to do with how I look. That has to do with character not appearances. Looks aren't all there is to perception.

 

The scumbags shouldn't think I am Officer friendly.

 

Do you think the guy I just wrote a ticket to for doing 50 in a 25 thinks I'm a friendly neighborhood officer because I am wearing an 8- point hat?

 

You think the guy I just locked up for touching his stepson thinks I'm Officer Friendly because my duty belt is leather basket weave?

 

If we are thought of as the good guys, or the bad guys, is subjective to who we are dealing with.

 

If I go to little kids house and take a report for his stolen bike you think he cares if I am dresses in a BDU or a class A dress uniform?

 

Does the store owner that calls us because he was robbed care if I'm carrying revolver or semi auto or a hip holster or a thigh rig?

 

Where are all these Cops I battle-rattle? I don't see them on patrol, being SRO, enforcing traffic, teaching DARE, taking reports, going to medical calls.

 

I see the gear come out when responding to a shots fired call, or a man with gun call - you know when it is appropriate. Not on a traffic stop or a welfare check.

 

You know something funny, the only people so far that I have met that shout "the Police are becoming Militarized" are my fellow gun owners. The people I have the most in common with politically and idealistically are the ones that fear the worst from me and trust me to do what's right the least.

 

I dont fear anything from you.. or any other police for that matter..  

I am simply stating that I see that the police ARE more military in nature...

 

and what that means is.. 20 years ago.. police and military looked.. acted.. very different.. and today... they are more similar..

to me that is fact.. if you feel its not.. then hey whatever.. you disagree.. cool.. 

 

I don't PERSONALLY care what the police wear or don't wear.. I hate when they waste my tax money on stupid shit they don't need to keep up with a city that is 50 times its size while the government is in a financial crisis... that is MY issue.. and that is not even with individual police... since they do not make those decisions.. 

[Soju 153]

Looks aren't all there is to perception.

 

Of course not. But far more people see police then actually deal with them personally. When you only have to go by looks, and they look like a combat soldier, that is the perception. That is my point. The uniform shouldn't dictate the person, but on some levels, it absolutely does. Whether it is a good or a bad thing, true or false, people form perceptions and mindsets based on appearance.

 

 Dressing like that gives people the impression that LEO's are no longer peace officers here to help but military types out to control. This is by design, and that is coming straight from the horses mouth. If you want to be perceived as a peace officer who's job is to maintain the peace, enforce laws, and deal with bad guys, you can't dress like you are about to raid a village. It doesn't have to be true for it to be reality.

[High Exposure 5,664]

Actually it doesn't really describe anyone I work with or know in the profession. That doesn't mean it doesn't happen, it means that when it does tere is a articulable and legitimate reason.

 

And so now basic safety tactics should be violated because every time we blade our gun side away from someone we don't know we are militarized? I shouldn't wear Oakley's now? WTF seriously you have a problem with my sunglasses? Gimme a break Vlad.

 

Again, there are people out there that want to kill us for no reason then we wear blue to work and may send them to prison if we catch them. We do certain things a certain way for a certain reason. The military doesn't do that stuff, they would just shoot you if you are a threat.

 

So, where are all these door kicking K9 searches occurring? Where are these Cops wearing SWAT gear on a shoplifting calls? I don't see them.

 

By the way - Appropriate armor for the threat level and a long gun does not make an "Elite" cop. It makes a Cop that can respond to calls appropriately with a chance of getting the job done correctly with the least amount of injury to all parties involved.

 

"Just because something works or not works doesn't make it OK" - really? So we should do what? The wrong thing, the thing that is more dangerous, more complicated, more expensive, just to be different? That is ludacris...

[vladtepes 1,060]

Actually it doesn't really describe anyone I work with or know in the profession. That doesn't mean it doesn't happen, it means that when it does tere is a articulable and legitimate reason.

 

And so now basic safety tactics should be violated because every time we blade our gun side away from someone we don't know we are militarized? I shouldn't wear Oakley's now? WTF seriously you have a problem with my sunglasses? Gimme a break Vlad.

 

Again, there are people out there that want to kill us for no reason then we wear blue to work and may send them to prison if we catch them. We do certain things a certain way for a certain reason. The military doesn't do that stuff, they would just shoot you if you are a threat.

 

So, where are all these door kicking K9 searches occurring? Where are these Cops wearing SWAT gear on a shoplifting calls? I don't see them.

 

By the way - Appropriate armor for the threat level and a long gun does not make an "Elite" cop. It makes a Cop that can respond to calls appropriately with a chance of getting the job done correctly with the least amount of injury to all parties involved.

 

"Just because something works or not works doesn't make it OK" - really? So we should do what? The wrong thing, the thing that is more dangerous, more complicated, more expensive, just to be different? That is ludacris...

 

 

I think you read my post sideways and upside down and put things together that were not together... 

[High Exposure 5,664]

Of course not. But far more people see police then actually deal with them personally. When you only have to go by looks, and they look like a combat soldier, that is the perception. That is my point. The uniform shouldn't dictate the person, but on some levels, it absolutely does. Whether it is a good or a bad thing, true or false, people form perceptions and mindsets based on appearance.

 

 Dressing like that gives people the impression that LEO's are no longer peace officers here to help but military types out to control. This is by design, and that is coming straight from the horses mouth. If you want to be perceived as a peace officer who's job is to maintain the peace, enforce laws, and deal with bad guys, you can't dress like you are about to raid a village. It doesn't have to be true for it to be reality.

It is good that most people don't have to interact with Police. That means I am doing my job. That means they are having happy good lives. I don't get to see people on their best days. I don't get called to share in good news or attend a birthday celebration.

 

We aren't raiding homes everyday, or shooting people in the streets or interrogations of residents.

When I smile and wave as I drive by or stop and talk to kids playing nobody cares what I am wearing (usually a Class B/BDU uniform).

 

I have never heard anyone I have interacted with on any level - victim or actor - say the the thigh pockets on my pants make me look scary or my sunglasses are intimidating.

 

Military types out of control? Raid a village? Where are these Mei Lei Cops? Where are these out of control military looking peace officers? Where are these atrocities these affronts to the Constitution happening if they are so prevelant?

 

They aren't.

[johnott 5]

(Sorry, I just can't help myself.)

 

http://apnews.excite.com/article/20130731/DA7SPSGO2.html  "AP IMPACT: Little restraint in military giveaways"

 

Here are a couple of interesting excerpts from the article:

 

"An Associated Press investigation of the Defense Department program, originally aimed at helping local law enforcement fight terrorism and drug trafficking, found that a disproportionate share of the $4.2 billion worth of property distributed since 1990 has been obtained by police departments and sheriff's offices in rural areas with few officers and little crime."

 

""Critics fear the glut of freebies is helping to transform many local police departments into paramilitary forces. Norm Stamper, a retired Seattle police chief who is now a spokesman for a nonprofit group that supports legalizing and regulating illicit drugs, said the program is fueling a pervasive, troubling trend.

"The harm for me is that it further militarizes American law enforcement," Stamper said. "We make a serious mistake, I'm convinced, in equipping domestic law enforcement, particularly in smaller, rural communities, with this much military equipment.""

 

-I have no comment, just posting information.

[LWRCfanboy 0]

Im not trying to be a dick but the cops in this thread really need to relax ... Im sure theres great cops out there but there are cops that are huge dicks ... And when you work at walmart or home depot being a dick gets you a complaint or two ... But when your a cop being a dick could mean you beat someone senseless.. And like i said ITS NOT EVERY COP OBVIOUSLY but some cops do that they even kill unarmed citizens... Im sure the cops on this forum are kool if not they most likely wouldnt be here but if you vouch for every cop in the world then your fools ... Of course every cop isnt gonna be good just like everyone in any profession isnt gonna be good the difference is being a cop is the ONLY profession your SUPPOSED to be a good guy.... But still there will be bad apples and you (high exposure) shouldnt stick your neck out for ppl (some cops) that you dont even know... Being a cop isnt like playing on the same football team ... Your individuals ,one can be wrong while the rest are still immune to that wrong doing...

[High Exposure 5,664]

Fanboy, thank you I appreciate it.

 

I am not saying that all cops are perfect, I am not saying that all cops are stalwart examples of what a cop should be. I'm not even saying all cops are not criminals. Police officers are chosen for the ranks of the human race, the same shortcomings as everyone else, The same ratio of assholes to decent people, the same ratio of nutjobs to normal. And some of them are going to slip through the cracks of the hiring process. That's the case for any profession out there and is nothing anyone can do to change it.

 

I stick up for cops that I don't know because I want to believe that the people who do this job do it for the right reasons and do it the right way. I know there are some bad apples out there, but on the whole they are decent people.

 

My problem is the attempt to deny an entire profession of some of the necessary equipment to properly do business because of unfounded fear based on an intimidating appearance or a few isolated instances where the line was crossed or what some believe is irresponsible spending. It is shortsighted, fear mongering, and a mistake.

 

Note that I am not saying that cop should be SWAT trained, should be wearing helmets and plate carriers and carrying rifles 24/7, but if a job requires it, if a call type calls for it, the equipment should be available to the officers to use appropriately.

 

Equipment and tactics to safely and efficiently accomplish a task should not be rationed based on their appearance and the belief that they instill fear in the residents you serve.

 

If a job requires an armored vehicle to safely remove hostages from an area or to approach a crisis sight without being shot then it should be available for officers to use. If officers have a standoff with an armed subject they should have long guns, they should have armor, they should have communications and uniforms that are applicable to the job.

 

They should also accountable and have the standards, professionalism. They should be held to a higher standard to use the equipment correctly. And if they don't, those that abused the trust they were given should be nailed to the wall. But the rest, the one to do the right thing, shouldn't be deprived because of the actions of a few. That's no different than saying no one should have an AR because a mad man walked into a school in CT, or a movie theater in CO, or a Pathmark in Old Bridge, NJ and shot the place up.

 

Cops aren't supposed to be the bad guys, they are not supposed to violate your rights, or take the law into their own hands, or scare the residents they serve. And for the most part, they don't.

 

How many cops in how many Departments are in United States? With all the men and women doing this job across the country every minute of every day, hearing in the "news" (Because yeah, they never get it wrong, they never have an agenda) about the few times officers made mistakes does not make a pandemic. It just means that somebody messed up. It's not evidence of the New World order, it's not a training exercise for cops to invade your neighborhoods.