Had you read the articles posted in this thread you would know the vehicles were either going to be destroyed or donated to local police departments. Hence, cost is not a factor.
Originally Posted By: [LoD
Vermithrax] Give me any logical reasons why it's better to have these things than sell them
Just so I get this right; Cops owning military vehicles is bad so we should sell them to fund diabetes research. If that is the foundation of your argument then you are loony toons homie.
"The sun smiles on his leaves, and his photosynthesis is without flaw!"
I think their point is that the commonality of a military-grade armored vehicle on the roads of civilian America operated by police officers whose job it is to respond to domestic threats responsibly is yet another piece of evidence supporting the theory that the government has militarized against the citizenry.
Which is a sub-issue of whether the United States government is actually militarizing against the citizenry and subverting democratic values.
Which is the debate you guys have not been having in the gun thread, the cliven bundy thread, and now this one lol.
Had you read the articles posted in this thread you would know the vehicles were either going to be destroyed or donated to local police departments. Hence, cost is not a factor.
Originally Posted By: [LoD
Vermithrax] Give me any logical reasons why it's better to have these things than sell them
Just so I get this right; Cops owning military vehicles is bad so we should sell them to fund diabetes research. If that is the foundation of your argument then you are loony toons homie.
False, they would be refurbished (jobs) and sold to allies and various other countries (recouping some of the cost to tax-payers.) Instead we are giving them away at zero cost to police departments around the nation.
Sonya]Such a fail thread. I'm with Obs. I'm failing to see the connect between the police owning an MRAP, and the loss of civil liberties.
Who knew that government could "overreach" or rob me of my freedoms by parking an armored car in the garage? Here's my question though guys... do we "lose" liberties each time they buy an MRAP? Or is it like a one-time thing?
For example, if the cops in Indiana buy an MRAP, have I lost some of my liberty even though I don't live in Indiana? Or is it based on your proximity to said MRAP? Maybe those of us in California lose less liberty than those of you in the midwest, since you are closer in proximity to the MRAP?
And jesus -- what the fuck happens if they buy a second MRAP? Do I lose more liberties if they have two parked in the garage. I also forgot to ask -- do they need to actually use the MRAP for me to lose my liberties? Or is it enough that it's parked in the garage?
And if they have to use it... does "use" mean driving? So if they take it on a spin around the block, do I lose liberties each time they take it around the block or, again, is it a one-time deal? Or do they actually have to use it in the course of police work?
Jesus. Who knew the buying a single truck could cost us so much fucking liberty!
Another fail of a fucking thread.
This is a piece of shit fail of a sarcastic rebuttal.
I think this man would disagree with you, you know, if he wasn't dead by being shot by police while unarmed who happened to have a MRAP in his front yard.
But I'm sure you an Obs are totally cool with deployment of an armored vehicle in a domestic neighborhood because the police were allegedly "told he had guns". Weird how it turned out he was completely fucking unarmed. I'm sure the cops wouldn't lie about that to cover their ass though.
How about this one? Guy get the SWAT team and their armored vehicles at his house and his buddy shot dead because he had some strippers and blow in his house. Again though, the police were allegedly told "he had guns and would shoot at them." Again, the man and his dead friend were totally unarmed. But I am sure the cops wouldn't lie.
Remember, there was no wrong doing on the part of the cops. The city is just agreeing to a 3.5 million dollar settlement because it just wants to put the matter to bed.
Had you read the articles posted in this thread you would know the vehicles were either going to be destroyed or donated to local police departments. Hence, cost is not a factor.
Originally Posted By: [LoD
Vermithrax] Give me any logical reasons why it's better to have these things than sell them
Just so I get this right; Cops owning military vehicles is bad so we should sell them to fund diabetes research. If that is the foundation of your argument then you are loony toons homie.
If you think that's a valid summary of my argument, you should learn reading comprehension.
You neglected to mention all the other costs involved with keeping and maintaining them and training of the officers to use them.
Hexen]I think their point is that the commonality of a military-grade armored vehicle on the roads of civilian America operated by police officers whose job it is to respond to domestic threats responsibly is yet another piece of evidence supporting the theory that the government has militarized against the citizenry.
Well at least one smart person here understands what's being said.
Hexen]I think their point is that the commonality of a military-grade armored vehicle on the roads of civilian America operated by police officers whose job it is to respond to domestic threats responsibly is yet another piece of evidence supporting the theory that the government has militarized against the citizenry.
Which is a sub-issue of whether the United States government is actually militarizing against the citizenry and subverting democratic values.
Which is the debate you guys have not been having in the gun thread, the cliven bundy thread, and now this one lol.
Exactly, the posture of the state has been elevated because the state foresees a possible retaliation by its citizenry, what other justification is there really? Police gear and tactics have become uniform almost across the board with a stock pile for a domestic military to be stood up funded by the federal government. (1.5 billion rounds of ammunition, lots of hollow points?)
Justifications? violent crime has been dropping for 20 years.
The officer in the first video I posted clearly speaks candidly about returning vets and our ability to defeat police tactics through our training. When Afghanistan ends there will be even more veterans back here at home. Rome anybody?? Who fucking knows but they are definitely posturing.
Marine veteran with no criminal record killed in his own home by SWAT team with armored vehicles. Police open fire within 38 seconds of the first knock on the door. He was woken up by the raid and in fear, he ordered his kids and wife into a closet and grabbed his legally owned weapon. Cops lied and said he fired first. Turns out, his weapon was found to be not fired and still on safety.
Best part? The warrant was allegedly due to suspicion of marijuana sales BUUUUUTTT they found no drugs in his home.
His wife got 3.5 million dollar settlement after filing suit.
If you guys are ok with this shit, then you are the crazy fucks here, not me.
Even if you're okay with innocent people being gun downed by police, how about all the wasted tax payer money settling civil suits because of police pretending to be soldiers when dealing with American citizens?
Vermithrax]how about all the wasted tax payer money settling civil suits because of police pretending to be soldiers when dealing with American citizens?
Nah, thats not true Vermi...they are just wearing my uniform.
Vermithrax]how about all the wasted tax payer money settling civil suits because of police pretending to be soldiers when dealing with American citizens?
Nah, thats not true Vermi...they are just wearing my uniform.
