Militaristic police and schoolkids

Status
Not open for further replies.

WeedWhacker

Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2006
Messages
795
Location
Las Vegas, Nevada
Conditioning, or an isolated instance?

Radley Balko and the CATO institute have done a bit of looking into the militarization of civilian police forces, which is bad enough as it is, but this takes it to the gov't schools/education centers. Okay, so I'm being overly dramatic, but is this what kids should think of the police, as opposed to the once-friendly uniformed cop on the corner whom you could ask directions from, etc.?

I found it amusing that this incident took place in Wyoming, Michigan, which confused me for a few moments. :)
 
I'm not entirely certain what the main cause/motivation is for the militarization of the police. I do know this:

1] The militarization of the police IS happening.


The 2 major reasons, one reactionary, the other sinister are probably part of the equation, but the question is - in what proportion?

1] To increase government power.
2] In reaction to greater and more dangerous criminal violence.

Now, #2 could be used as an excuse for #1....

Ultimately, I think it is just a mix of all of it. I think, (like Jefferson did) that this is the NATURE of government/military/authority/police. It is inevitable, and you should expect it to happen. You task them with a job, that job is impossible to do to perfection - yet humans will try. You cannot stop murder, drugs and any crime which is motivated by variations in human behavior. So, as a society, we task authorities with combating human nature. An impossible goal that essentially becomes a power-grab and an arms race.

Mixed in with that, you'll get the occasional tyrant who really does lust for power and domination over regular people. You have totally hardworking, God honest people who are just trying to do a stressful, difficult and dangerous job. And everything in between.


The solution is a pro-liberty solution. You consider all the "evils" in society, and you choose to make the most heinous and disruptive ones illegal (like murder, rape etc...) The lesser ones, such as drug use, prostitution etc...you leave be. You have to weight it out. The less which is illegal, the less the police will have to do to combat it. And the less the police will seek greater and greater power.


Many things which are illegal today, were legal in the past in America - yet no problems existed. Meddlers, authoritarians, nosy people, interventionists, and generally those who can't mind their own business, whether it be because they have tyrannical urges, religious motivations, or whatever -- have pushed to make many things illegal. Some of them are in the government. In order to create more power, you must create a threat or problem, then offer a solution that increases your power. Then you have just regular American citizens who demand "there should be a law...." all the time. That very statement tells a lot about the way some people think, or have been taught to think. Others believe that what their God tells them they should impose upon you, and they use government as a vehicle to do this. It's bad enough we have government the way it is, but there are millions of Americans that demand far worse than what the government proposes.

It is all very sad.

In the end, brilliant men like Jefferson reduced and condensed this all into one great and simple equation - the RKBA. That's it. Everyone should be armed, and armed well. Being armed solves many of these problems. Most of these problems never even form or come into being when there is a heavily armed populace.


Unjustified No knocks won't happen if the community assembles the militia and pays the local PD a visit. No one would take away someone's property (Kelo style) if the community assembled their militia to persuade certain entities. Virtually every wrong in American history could have been dealt with peacefully in Jefferson's vision of an armed-citizen, militia society. They were truly the greatest political scientists because they truly knew that government was destined, even in their form, to become tyrannical. Rather than try and solve that problem by rearranging the parts, you instead deal with the source of the problem directly - force projection. Government, police, authorities...cannot tyrannize when their ability to project force is equal to or weaker than the population. Of course, this also makes their job difficult because opportunists in society will take advantage of this condition. Rather than ban effective arms (1934 GCA), we should instead ask if that should be the "price of freedom"....Unfortunately, public education and wars have destroyed a few generations many, many decades ago - and these individuals lost touch with what being a classical American was like. Since then, it has been an uncontested power-grab by the government at all levels. Today, we're not different, but we remember back and read about it in history books and dream of an America where the citizen is supreme again.


As for the topic above....I don't know. We've had threads about police pointing loaded guns with LIVE ammo at school kids in their drills and raids and "lock downs"....some have argued this is to scare them straight, or for the police to "flex" to the future criminals, or to desensitize students to a police-state. We've seen massive taser abuse. We've seen bad raids. You name it. Could go on for hours.


I know one thing. There was a time in America where schools had books on guns, kids played cowboys and indians, some high schools had rifle teams...and no one got shot. Today, schools act like, are like, and look more like prisons than schools.


If you treat children like criminals, they will become criminals. Lose the restrictions. Teach real subjects and lose the social-engineerings. Bring back the humanity. It'll work. If not, it's better than the alternative, which is more of what we have now.
 
The "militarization" of the police is a response to the crimes that are happening in our society. It would be ridiculous to insist that all police go back to wearing ties, goofy hats, and .38 revolvers in a day and time when we have terrorism, school shootings, etc.

The answer is to get rid of the circumstances which require a paramilitary police force. Unfortunately, we can only do that by bringing back days of honesty, integrity, and personal responsibility. That isn't going to happen anywhere that liberal Democrats hold sway. When we excuse and subsidize bad behavior, we get more of it.
 
The cops in the town where I grew up were a bunch of thugs who routinely harrassed and beat people. I would be scared if we armed those guys like the military, but it doesn't have to be that way. When I was in Hong Kong, they has amazingly professional police. There were regular beat cops and elite guys in fatigues carrying automatic weapons. Guess what? I felt perfectly safe. Why? They were well trained, precise, professional and polite.

The problem with many localities in this country is that they don't want to pay for quality police. They hire people right out of high school, put them through some basic training, give them a gun and pay them $12/hour. Then they wonder why they end up with a bunch of thugs on a power trip. You get what you pay for. I have no problem arming and armoring our police with the best technology available, IF we take the time and care to make sure the police we hire are professional. An associates degree should be the minimum standard to get in the door. I also think the pay should be good enough to attract and retain good people.

I have never had a single bad experience with a State Trooper in any state. I may not have liked getting a ticket or whatever, but they were always super professional and polite. I never got the feeling that I was dealing with a yahoo. Why? Almost all of them are ex-military, they are better trained and they appear to be held to a high standard of conduct. Why can't all police be the same way?
 
In Mass it is very difficult to become a police officer because there are many training, educational, and testing requriements that are mandated by the Mass Civil Service act. You need at least a four year college degree, and some miltary service to even apply to become a recruit. Candiates also have to go through extensive physc exams, and background checks. It seems in Mass don't not have the problems of out of control police as other states with looser controls on Police training and testing. Even in small rural towns the Police useally are of a very high caliber in professionalism. Also only cities of a certain population size have SWAT teams.
 
Here we have higher standards as well but we still get alot of the buttholes from high school (a few of them were/are myfriends) as cops. They really havent changed much. The ones that really changed were the buttheads who became marines. Wow.
 
Police Commander had a good idea...notify people.

Look at the final paragraph and you see the error. That fault was not the police. The children, if advised in advance, would have participated and the practice still could have been run. Again, a bad call, but not by the police.

Doc2005
 
On the basis of the article posted, I see no issue. Perhaps the drill was a little over-zealous in nature. However, I'm of the mindset that we as citizens need to be better prepared for catastrophe. Sure, what are the odds of a school shooting occuring at your childs school? Probably pretty far off. But, I think we can all agree that over the last few years, those odds have been increasing. I'd rather my child be prepared and know what to look for than catch a stray because he was standing in the hallway looking like a deer in the headlights.

On the basis of the posting....I dunno. I remember growing up and knowing all the nieghborhood officers and they'd give out baseball cards and talk with us. My father was a state trooper in Alabama and then went to ABI. So I always had this great respect for officers of the law. But as I got older and starting having interactions with them, my attitudes changed. It constantly felt like I was always being treated as a criminal, just for minor traffic violations (cause that's all I ever been in trouble for...speeding and the like). I think the shift in the mindset of some officers is contributing to the negative stereotype that has been building for years. And it by no means is every officer of the law, I'm not niave to think that. But I tell ya, when just about every interaction is negative, it leaves you wondering.
 
Don't Tread, I agree with everything you've written.

Medulla, you are correct to some degree, but When I was a kid in the 1960s my view of the police was 100% the friendly men in uniform who would help you if you needed help. I never saw or heard of policemen carrying military weapons, or wearing military garb, and certainly not wearing face covering. In fact, my older brother used to remind me how different we are in America from other nations where the police walk the streets with submachine guns, and could stop and detain you just because they didn't like your look. I have witnessed my own country transform into closer and closer approximations of this bad example my brother used to use to teach me to appreciate my own country, and the liberties we enjoy. Today, a child's image of policemen is that of masked men in black ready to bust in your door in the middle of the night with assault rifles and submachineguns, rather than the friendly man in blue or tan ready to offer a hand that I was familiar with as a child.

As for the Founders, their most fundamental fear for the future of our nation was that the central government would 1) adopt a standing army, and 2) use it to intimidate the citizens of the United States into surrendering most or all of their liberties. They took measures to make sure both would not happen. Eventually their measures in both regards have been systematically undermined and undone. One way they got around it all was to militarize civilian law enforcement, and convert it into an arm of government power instead of a servant of the people answerable to the people directly through election. Another was to increasingly centralize in DC the control of all State and local police agencies through federal funding schemes. This issue should be a grave concern to everyone interested in restoring liberty to this nation.
 
Yes, those are key reasons. But do not underestimate the power of public education. Many Americans have voluntarily forfeitted their rights. No one believes the RKBA is legitimate in terms of fighting tyrannical government.


They really won with schools teaching kids a lot of BS.
 
The problem with many localities in this country is that they don't want to pay for quality police.
I think that requiring higher educational standards would be akin to only hiring more insitutionalized people. While higher education is required for many professions, requiring it just to further institutionalize police would actualy lead to a more detached police force. It is my understanding that many LEO positions already do require additional education consisting of legal classes. Do you really want to make your police Lawyers with badges?
 
It would be ridiculous to insist that all police go back to wearing ties, goofy hats, and .38 revolvers in a day and time when we have terrorism, school shootings, etc.



I, for one, insist on the goofy hats and .38 revolvers. :neener:



Terrorist attacks and school shootings are crimes where there is clearly a victim. Destroying someones house, shooting their dog, and terrorizing the neighborhood at 0300 for two joints is where I question the actions of a militant police force.
 
they screwed up big time!!!!

Rule #1 for running drills is to make sure that the drill is safe and conducted in a controlled manner. This ALWAYS includes notifying all affected agencies that you are conducting a drill.

I was the drill coordinator on board a Fast Attack submarine for two years.....I would have had my head chopped off......( been relieved for cause, and taken to NJP as a minimum ) if I made this kind of screw up.

They are very lucky that no one was seriously injured!
 
Re: goofy hats and .38 revolvers

My dad has been active LE for 41 years. He got started back in the era of goofy hats. A good cop will be a good cop regardless of headgear. An ego-tripping jerk will be an ego-tripping jerk, as well. Back in the old days, there were just as many jerks as today. Brutality and other failings were, if anything, more routine. Back then, a cop would often do something like go upside your head with a nightstick and tell you "Go home. I don't want to see you out again tonight." No paperwork. No record. Nothing. Today, the same guy gets arrested, charged, etc. Big ol' paper trail. Plenty of accountability along the way. Which would you really prefer if you are the one who has to interact with the officer?
 
It isn't just the police who have become militarized....I am of the opinion that the entire nation never really "de-militarized" following WWII. 9/11 has exaggerated the condition...but the trend would have continued regardless.

Why are the police more militarized?

How about:

Preferential treatment in hiring former military?
Increasing characterization of crime, drugs, terror, etc. as "war".
High number of LEOs who are performing "dual service" as both LEO and MP in Reserve or Guard units?

etc., etc., etc.,


"War" footing requires mobilizing for war....
 
The term 'militarization' to me illustrates a bad thing. It means dressing up your police force in jackboots and giving them armbands. They then execute no-knock raids, put their boots on the necks of citizens and give cavity searches to school kids and old women at check point charlies on the interstates.

Could this simply mean making the police force more organized, or simply better equipped? How about superior training? I did basic MP/SP training at basic training five years ago and I can guarantee it's more intense and demanding than some state trooper training regime. I know here on base we have militarized guards employed by the DoD. They're not active duty, but they're not civilians either. Maybe militarizing means make better, which is not to say all things government or military IS better.
 
Back in the old days, there were just as many jerks as today. Brutality and other failings were, if anything, more routine. Back then, a cop would often do something like go upside your head with a nightstick and tell you "Go home. I don't want to see you out again tonight." No paperwork. No record. Nothing. Today, the same guy gets arrested, charged, etc. Big ol' paper trail. Plenty of accountability along the way. Which would you really prefer if you are the one who has to interact with the officer?
Well, the people smashing in doors and terrorizing civilians today are typically insulated from the community at large. They usually operate only in tactical circles. They are not usually the beat cop. That said, even the beat cop of old didn't go rapping just anyone up side the head. Generally, this kind of thing was confined to marginalized individuals, known street toughs and the like, not the ordinary working man, or his wife and kids, and certainly not anyone of any social standing. A beat cop of old would quickly lose his job if he extended this kind of treatment to "regular folks " So today we have equal opportunity brutality. You can even be a successful white businessman and have the door to your home smashed in, your cat stomped, your son body slammed to the ground, and your pregnant wife thrown against the wall. Wrong house? Too bad. No one loses his job. Yeah, things sure have improved. :scrutiny:
 
I have never run into a rude or mean cop. Not once in 36 years. Even the cops that busted me for doing stupid things when I was a teenager were professional and friendly with me. I actually sat here for an hour trying to think of just one mean or unprofessional thing that a cop has ever said or done to me and I can't think of even one.

All of my kids look up to the police and love it when they get to go and talk to the officers. The same goes for most of my kids friends. My kids have had a lot of exposure to the police in a lot of the areas that we have lived in. They see them come to the schools to talk to the class, they see my friends come to the house, and they see a great cop who also volunteers with the local fire department with me.

The cops that I know now are just regular people with a job, not insane psychopaths seeking world domination. EVERY person, that I have known, that has ever told me the cops are harassing them or following them has deserved it. Every one. Those people are the ones that blame the cops for catching them doing something wrong. "I was only a little drunk, he just didn’t like me. I drive better when I am drunk anyway so there was no way that he knew could know I was drunk." This is a direct quote from my BIL.

Now having said all of that, I am not naïve, nor and I making apologies for the police. I know that there are bad cops out there, and I know that there are good cops that have made bad choices and plenty of mistakes. I have seen that cops sometimes get preferential treatment when they screw up but I believe that they should be held accountable to the same degree that any other person would be. I don’t, however, see the police as something to be afraid of. I don’t see the terrorizing of the people.

Hmmm…
 
doncol said:

EVERY person, that I have known, that has ever told me the cops are harassing them or following them has deserved it. Every one. Those people are the ones that blame the cops for catching them doing something wrong.

You must only hang with felons and criminals then...cause the police never get it wrong...nor do they ever intentionally act in bad faith. :rolleyes:


Wesker said:

The term 'militarization' to me illustrates a bad thing. It means dressing up your police force in jackboots and giving them armbands. They then execute no-knock raids, put their boots on the necks of citizens and give cavity searches to school kids and old women at check point charlies on the interstates.

Putting armbands and jackboots on your police would be nazification, not militarization. :neener:
 
We sure get a lot of stories like this in here..

If it isn't the ATF destroying someones business then it's the ATF with their knee on the back of some kids neck outside the Westly Foundation. If it's not the Virginia open carry group then it's some SWAT team shooting the family dog and setting the house on fire. If it's not Shaq on a police raid then it's the TSA hassling gun owners when they try to fly. Or Lee Paige sueing the DEA over the film of him shooting himself in the foot.

Lot of it going on. Hard to see it as a good thing.
 
You must only hang with felons and criminals then...cause the police never get it wrong...nor do they ever intentionally act in bad faith.

Not intentionally, but I know a few. As for the getting it wrong or intentionally acting in bad faith part, the last part of my post says that I understand that this does happen sometimes. My point was that I just dont see all LEOs as Jack Booted Thugs. Some bad, most good.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top