Printable View
It is well known, that one of Detroit's major problems has been crime. Some areas in Detroit [[inner city) have better police coverage than others. With the city having a high deficit and not enough police, should the Mayor call in the National Guard to help reduce the crime?
Haha. Worked great in 1967. All they did was kill a few "snipers."
The mayor has no authority over the National Guard.
Can someone move this thread?Quote:
Originally Posted by Tig3rzhark
No, keep it here. This is a relevant local issue.Quote:
Originally Posted by R8RBOB
As for calling out the Nat'l Guard, that might be a problem when October 1st rolls around and Lansing shuts everything down.
I do not think this idea would work well [[supposing the legal hurdles had been passed and it actually were to be don't), for the following two reasons:
1) Most of the soldiers in the Guard are not from Detroit and will not be trusted by the community
2) The National Guard is not a police force, and not properly trained in policing. Perhaps MPs could be put out on loan to the DPD, or work in conjunction with the DPD, but still, MPs are trained for a different job.
That said, I think public safety is a huge issue, and getting more police out on the streets is a high priority. The million dollar question is how to do that given the economic situation in the city and the state.
Well, when Highland Park was under receivership, the Wayne County Sheriffs took over policing there. Whether that can be done here, I can highly doubt that it can.
But we know that there's not enough cops and the citizens around here don't trust the cops, especially since it has been under federal oversight for quite some time, and continues to be so.
So what can we do short of encouraging everyone to arm themselves and work on their fast draw?
The National Guard can ONLY be deployed by the governor and the Commander-in-Chief of the US Armed Services [[Barack Obama)Quote:
Originally Posted by MCP-001
The mayor can ONLY request that the governor deploy the Guard in cases of civil unrest. General crime is not a strong enough reason to deploy a military force in a urban city.
Not to mention that it sets a horrible precedent.Quote:
Originally Posted by R8RBOB
Forget the National Gaurd. The People of Detroit are police force. The second amendment says that People have the rigt to bear arms and states to have a militia. Start a community police force, a neighborhood watch service or block clubs. They would help to keep the stranger dangers out of the streets and make Detroit safer of all citizens.
Federal troops, including the National Guard while federalized, cannot act as a police force: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posse_Comitatus_Act
And even military police units are not trained for civic police duty -- busting drugs, hookers, gangs, thieves, etc. They are trained to handle POWs, internal military problems, and basic civil order functions in areas under military control -- curfews, street patrols, etc.
I live downtown. There is simply no need to Humvees fulled of armed troops to be on patrol short of a riot that is beyond the control of police.
I seem to recall the policing of Boston in the mid-1770s by British troops caused some sort of colonial ruckus ...
Bill, speaking as somebody who went through MP training, I can tell you that MPs are taught how to subdue drunks, answer domestic violence calls, write tickets, write up reports on traffic collisions, etc. Handling prisoners is actually another MOS entirely 96A, not 95B. Being an MP on a base is quite similar to being a cop in a city; that's why cities consider MP duty a decent qualification for a candidate.
It would be funny to see a Humvee up on blocks.
Sometimes, I think we already have a police state. We don't need a military state.
I support it [[along with FEMA). I think Detroit should be declared a Natural Disaster Area.
[[Didn't I just say this last week? :D)
I recently saw a piece on TV regarding the crime in Philly and the steps the newly elected Mayor enacted to reduce crime. Philly cops along with State and Federal agencies were cracking down big time. And not just responding to crimes in progress but hunting down folks with warrants, setting up stings etc. So far it's been very successful. Wish I could remember the program I was watching.
Big Dog, I've never seen any thing close to a police state in Detroit. It's more like a state of lawlessness these days. I'm a civil libertarian but I'll take federal, county and police from other local municipalities roaming the streets of Detroit over the thugs who are right now.
The state police ranks have been decimated by budget cuts so they aren't in a position to lend much help, but what if area sheriffs and municipal police joined with DPD to patrol, do traffic detail, do detective work, etc. The crooks are hitting the suburbs pretty good these days and many of the crooks are from Detroit as evidenced by a number of unfortunate suburban crimes this summer. Why not have Chief Evans deputize other area police & sheriffs as DPD police and have them patrol with DPD, doubling the size of the DPD force. It would lower crime in Detroit as well as the surrounding suburbs. Sounds like a win to me for everyone.
I would love to see that happen. I would also love to see the formation of a metropolitan government here. Now whether a metropolitan government has worked for others, I would like to know if it has...Quote:
Originally Posted by BVos
Bill, speaking as somebody who went through MP training, I can tell you that MPs are taught how to subdue drunks, answer domestic violence calls, write tickets, write up reports on traffic collisions, etc. Handling prisoners is actually another MOS entirely 96A, not 95B. Being an MP on a base is quite similar to being a cop in a city; that's why cities consider MP duty a decent qualification for a candidate.
I know, but tickets, traffic accidents and drunks are the reason some people think we might need MPs roaming around. Most posts don't have the sort of criminal violence that plagues Detroit. And one of my close friends that has been an MP since the Balkans campaign said the MP battalions have focused on training for Iraq and Afghanistan ops far more than the traditional civic/domestic stuff.
And it's not MPs I think the writer thinks we need. I suspect he wants infantry squads patrolling the streets, not MPs and civil affairs units. My MOS 0311 and 0369 training didn't cover breaking up crack rings, LOL, at least not without heavy firepower. Tempting, but I suspect we might see strongly worded editorials concerned about all the man-made shell holes ruining the natural urban decay ...
Good points all. One thing I learned is that posts do have is a hell of a lot of very dangerous DV calls. Take 'em into separate rooms, and never the kitchen! :)Quote:
Originally Posted by BShea
But, basically, yeah, unless you're gonna treat Detroit like Fallujah, sending in troops isn't the right tool.
I would think that the 1967 experience alone would be enough to convince the powers that be to hesitate and re-think before sending the National Guard in to police the city again.
What can be done to reduce crime in Detroit? Well, a working economy and education system would be a start. Crime was worse here during the crack boom of the 80's, and even to some extent during the heroin boom of the 70's, and Detroit like pretty much all major cities in the country saw a drop in crime during the 90's. The causes of that drop are in dispute, but some things clearly seem to have contributed: the decline in crack usage, a rather lengthy economic uptick, and changes in policing methods. With the economic downturn though, and particularly with the chaos it has brought here in Detroit, including reduced policing, crime certainly does seem to be on the rise. But sending in a heavily armed army of occupation is clearly not the answer, nor will it do anything at all to address the underlying problems, it will only create long-term resentments.