President Bans Military-Style Equip. For Police [[incl. Wayne, Oakland, Macomb etc)

[DeLemur]

Great news. The Police are here to provide public safety, not be the military. They need to community police and talk to those they protect, not show up in a military tank. It changes their approach having military grade gear. ISIS have pulled off two attacks. Less damage than regular, daily shooters here in Metro Detroit. This is the right step for how to Police the Metro Detroit communities.

[Wesley Mouch]

Great news. The Police are here to provide public safety, not be the military. They need to community police and talk to those they protect, not show up in a military tank. It changes their approach having military grade gear. ISIS have pulled off two attacks. Less damage than regular, daily shooters here in Metro Detroit. This is the right step for how to Police the Metro Detroit communities.

In the last couple months, at least 3. 1) Paris, 2) San Bernadino, 3) Russian Airliner... and that's just the big ones.

NBC News: "Since October 10, ISIS and its sympathizers around the world have killed at least 525 people in six attacks in six countries outside its so-called caliphate." [[http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/isi...-death-n475861)

The current logic is that to minimize uncivilized attacks, you have to act fast. Waiting for the military isn't really a good strategy.

You should consider what police response you would want when your children are held hostage by murders. Or do you just think they should call the National Guard after they've secured the permiter around the grocery store.

[DeLemur]

The gear is unnecessary. This is what was banned:
tracked armored vehicles, weaponized aircraft, bayonets, grenade launchers, large-caliber firearms and some camouflage uniforms

No PD needs a tracked [[IE: tank) or weaponized aircraft or a damn grenade launcher. These are items used in war. As brazen as the attacks have been, none have required a war time military grade response. Boston, CA, TN, TX. None have required these weapons.

The reality is day to day crime. The 14 dead in San Bernardino we accumulate in 2 weeks in Metro Detroit. That's what we deal with 98% of the time, day to day crime. So why equip Police forces for attacks that A. don't need this weaponry in response and B. rarely happen?
You need police to be public safety, not the Army. The Army invades, defends and kills people. We don't need the Army in our neighborhoods.

In the last couple months, at least 3. 1) Paris, 2) San Bernadino, 3) Russian Airliner... and that's just the big ones.

NBC News: "Since October 10, ISIS and its sympathizers around the world have killed at least 525 people in six attacks in six countries outside its so-called caliphate." [[http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/isi...-death-n475861)

The current logic is that to minimize uncivilized attacks, you have to act fast. Waiting for the military isn't really a good strategy.

You should consider what police response you would want when your children are held hostage by murders. Or do you just think they should call the National Guard after they've secured the permiter around the grocery store.

[Jimaz]

Wouldn't TACOM have sufficient equipment to loan to local jurisdictions in emergencies?

I tried to go to their website but was warned that it's untrusted. LOL!

[oladub]

Great news. The Police are here to provide public safety, not be the military. They need to community police and talk to those they protect, not show up in a military tank. It changes their approach having military grade gear. ISIS have pulled off two attacks. Less damage than regular, daily shooters here in Metro Detroit. This is the right step for how to Police the Metro Detroit communities.

I agree that the militarization of local police has to end. However, it was Obama who was handing all this military equipment out so I prefer Obama's new position to his old one. It our immigration policy, or lack of enforcement of that policy, that is a problem. On immigration policy, virtually all Democrats and a sizable portion of Republicans are capitulating. Even FDR ended most German and Japanese immigration after 2,500 were killed at pearl Harbor. Yet Bush, Obama, and company, open the doors to Muslim immigrants after they killed 2,996 on 9/11. When the IS tells us that they are infiltrating the refugee movement, why not believe them? What is often not considered is that IS, Al Queda, and all the rest of the Islamic terrorist groups have a capacity to create far more casualties than the daily shootings In Metro Detroit. 9/11 should have taught us all that point. 9/11 was brilliant. The same evil genius that brought us 9/11 could also show up with backpack nukes or other WMDs. The Fort Hood and San Bernadino type flareups aren't what we should be worried about. It's WMDs we should worry about and it sure isn't abortion clinic bombers who will bring in the nukes.

[G-DDT]

This may be the third time I posted this. Just advance to 6:52.

[bust]

This may be the third time I posted this. Just advance to 6:52.

That John Oliver segment is great!

Note the ban does not affect the Saginaw Sheriff's giant MRAP shown in the video because it's not a tracked vehicle. He's still safe from land mines.

Here's a handy tip for sharing youtube videos...

To share a url for a video at a specific time append to the query string an additional parameter with the key t and the value [x]m[y]s, where [x] = the minute of the time you want to share, and [y] = the second.

For example, the following link shares the John Oliver video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUdHIatS36A

This link shares the same video and starts it at the 6:48 point:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUdHIatS36A&t=6m48s

[G-DDT]

Gotcha.

By the way, thanks for the post [[#17), Bobl. I like catching those strands of inconsistencies.

[Honky Tonk]

The gear is unnecessary. This is what was banned:
tracked armored vehicles, weaponized aircraft, bayonets, grenade launchers, large-caliber firearms and some camouflage uniforms

No PD needs a tracked [[IE: tank) or weaponized aircraft or a damn grenade launcher. These are items used in war. As brazen as the attacks have been, none have required a war time military grade response. Boston, CA, TN, TX. None have required these weapons.

The reality is day to day crime. The 14 dead in San Bernardino we accumulate in 2 weeks in Metro Detroit. That's what we deal with 98% of the time, day to day crime. So why equip Police forces for attacks that A. don't need this weaponry in response and B. rarely happen?
You need police to be public safety, not the Army. The Army invades, defends and kills people. We don't need the Army in our neighborhoods.

HTF do you know? Do you patrol a beat? Are you in law enforcement? Do you deal with these situations day in and day out? How do you know what's needed? "14 dead in San Bernardino we accumulate in 2 weeks in Metro Detroit" That's the 2nd time you've posted that nonsense. Did you stop to think it took 15 minutes to accumulate 14 dead and 17 wounded, and it takes 2 weeks to do that in Detroit? Another damn bar stool General.

[Ray1936]

Back about 1960, the DPD obtained a surplus military "DUKU", or amphibious 'duck', as it was called. It sat around for some years in the MO garage on Jefferson, and finally a lieutenant [[I won't mention the name of Mike Somero) took a crew out on it and into the Detroit River. The rusted bottom popped out and six coppers had to swim for it just off Belle Isle. Hope the new stuff is a little better, whatever it might be. <<This is a true story, any resemblance to persons living or dead is intentional.>>

[Bobl]

Ray1936: I remember hearing a story about that exploit at a family picnic. Uncle Bill, DPD, made the story last for an entire Altes beer. I was just an eavesdropping kid.

[Wesley Mouch]

The gear is unnecessary. .... We don't need the Army in our neighborhoods.

I disagree with your conclusion, but you are 99% right. Mostly, military-style gear is probably mostly unnecessary at the local level.

But there's that 1%. Before Paris. Before NYC. We didn't know what was facing us. Mike Morrell [[on Charlie Rose) pointed out that we didn't see the Paris attacks coming. We probably won't know what's coming next. More San Bernadinos? More WTCs? Or something else we can't imagine.

These Islamic Infidels didn't just have guns. They also had an improved multi-pipe bomb on some kind of 'car'. And they had a lot of ammo. If that bomb went off... And the next time will probably be different -- and could be bigger.

Whether the Police have the tools, or the National Guard has the tools, I really don't care. But what's important is that somebody does - that they're well-trained - and that there's a plan to get them where needed fast.

I also know that hand guns and rifles may not be enough for the unknown challenges we'll undoubtedly face next.

[Ray1936]

Ray1936: I remember hearing a story about that exploit at a family picnic. Uncle Bill, DPD, made the story last for an entire Altes beer. I was just an eavesdropping kid.

Oh, yeah, it happened. I think one of the things that I'm so fortunate for is that it seems like the only stories I recall from my 29 DPD years were the funny things that happened. There were so many of them! The tragedies I came across just seem to slip across the bridge of forgetfulness. And that's healthy. Even during the tragedy of the '67 riot, the event that always comes to my mind is in the night hours after the first day, through the smoke on 12th street, we could hear the rumbling of tanks [[actually ATV's, armored tactical vehicles). Our lieutenant peered into the night and asked Charlie Beech, one of the guys, "Are those our tanks?". Charlie never missed a beat. "If they ain't, I'm leaving." Picture a squad of old motorcycle cops holding their sides laughing during all that.

[Jimaz]

This may be the third time I posted this. Just advance to 6:52.

Hilarious. How does John Oliver do that so well? It's too difficult to disagree with him while you're laughing so hard. He is genius.

Who promotes these unnecessary expenditures of public funds? Lobbyists for the Military Industrial Complex.

Your tax dollars at play.

[Richard]

I disagree with your conclusion, but you are 99% right. Mostly, military-style gear is probably mostly unnecessary at the local level.

But there's that 1%. Before Paris. Before NYC. We didn't know what was facing us. Mike Morrell [[on Charlie Rose) pointed out that we didn't see the Paris attacks coming. We probably won't know what's coming next. More San Bernadinos? More WTCs? Or something else we can't imagine.

These Islamic Infidels didn't just have guns. They also had an improved multi-pipe bomb on some kind of 'car'. And they had a lot of ammo. If that bomb went off... And the next time will probably be different -- and could be bigger.

Whether the Police have the tools, or the National Guard has the tools, I really don't care. But what's important is that somebody does - that they're well-trained - and that there's a plan to get them where needed fast.

I also know that hand guns and rifles may not be enough for the unknown challenges we'll undoubtedly face next.

None of that really matters though all of the attacks so far have happened and the reply was reaction,not prevention.They cannot stop them.

The only thing that can stop it while in progress is somebody in the group with military urban combat training and experience with a weapon.

First on scene officers will become targets through no fault of their own going into a situation without any information.

I would say SWT or swat should be allowed to have any means necessary to confront any perceived situation because that is what their core mission is and they train for it.

This whole thing started because of the news stories of the sheriffs in small towns driving around in bullet proof Humvee when the only threat would be a pissed off squirrel throwing nuts at pedestrians.

Another reason may very well be,is all the last conflicts we have been in,the equipment has been left in the field and not shipped back because of cost factors.That is 100s of thousands of support equipment.

Which leaves our military with a severe shortage of equipment at this point,when the other conflicts were on going the national guard stations had at best a few pieces of equipment on hand,now they are restocked but to enter into a another conflict that equipment will be first to ship with nothing to replace it.

[Wesley Mouch]

None of that really matters though all of the attacks so far have happened and the reply was reaction,not prevention.They cannot stop them.

The only thing that can stop it while in progress is somebody in the group with military urban combat training and experience with a weapon.

First on scene officers will become targets through no fault of their own going into a situation without any information.

I would say SWT or swat should be allowed to have any means necessary to confront any perceived situation because that is what their core mission is and they train for it.

This whole thing started because of the news stories of the sheriffs in small towns driving around in bullet proof Humvee when the only threat would be a pissed off squirrel throwing nuts at pedestrians.

Another reason may very well be,is all the last conflicts we have been in,the equipment has been left in the field and not shipped back because of cost factors.That is 100s of thousands of support equipment.

Which leaves our military with a severe shortage of equipment at this point,when the other conflicts were on going the national guard stations had at best a few pieces of equipment on hand,now they are restocked but to enter into a another conflict that equipment will be first to ship with nothing to replace it.

So you would then recommend something akin to Sky Marshals, say, in theatres and other 'public assembly' spaces? It might be a better option than hardening the targets. Joe Louis Arena can afford metal detectors, but nightclubs can't.

What do the Israelis do? They seem to have fast reaction to these infidels like the kids who killed a Palestinian man for looking like he was Jewish. Might be something to learn.

As I said earlier, I do agree with the anti-gear camp mostly -- but think we need a positive approach, and not just a negative take it away approach. Fowlerville's force probably doesn't need nor can handle such gear -- but Ann Arbor might be large enough to have the training necessary. Certainly Chicago would.

[Richard]

I do not know what the answer really is,all we are really doing is playing wack a mole and spending billions on security that has no results,air marshals and such give a false sense of security and appeases the public into thinking something is being done to ensure the safety.

If we send a missile to a terrorist we take them out and another pops up and it is going to be a forever thing,what is in the mind of a radical or what threat can we give them that would cause them to think twice,do they care more about the rest of their family then their cause?

Hussein threatened to kill GWs father and look how well that ended,we cannot threaten them with death because they already are prepared to die.We cannot run around being scared to fly or send our kids to school or go shopping.Or live in a perception of military rule in our daily lives.

It does not help when something happens that politically all these agendas are being thrown out there,all they are saying is they do not care enough about American lives to get to the core of the issue.

They are fooling nobody with a veil of safety,I think it is worse in giving a false sense of security and becoming complacent.

They have sniffers that they could drone fly all day long over a city to pick up explosive scents,you could arm a city with F14 fighters all day but we cannot stop them,it is not a weapon thing,it is a physiological thing,maybe stick a bunch of physicists in a room and figure out what scares them.Some were upset about the whole waterboarding thing but yet they want to be safe.Take the gloves off and do what it takes so they think twice about their actions before they accrue.

But that is the problem,we have been dealing with this for 60 years and still are in the same dilemma with the same results and on our soil now.

[Johnnny5]

Who promotes these unnecessary expenditures of public funds? Lobbyists for the Military Industrial Complex.

Actually it's President Obama in this case.


Once again, the President's action is not outlawing or banning local police from obtaining or using these items. As mentioned in the article, Macomb County is just going to buy another armored vehicle when theirs is taken from them. All it's doing is making us the U.S taxpayer buy them twice.

[Bobl]

bust: Thanks for the tip, [[post 32) , about sharing videos. I started a thread here, long ago, asking for tech advice to us oldsters. I have learned a bit since then, but still rely on a neighborhood 14 year old for advice.

[Detroit Stylin]

500 and some change over the last three years killed in terrorist attacks eh?

Well these numbers are unarmed men and women killed by the very police you want to militarize just THIS year up till September...

http://www.mintpressnews.com/776-peo...narmed/209127/

But hey if someone is going to kill us it may as well be ourselves while we are blaming other groups for what they MAY do to us...

[bust]

Thanks for the article. Reading that, and following a couple links, I found the source of their data:

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/n...s-us-database#

I trust The Guardian to get their facts correct better than most sources.

And I truly did not expect the number to be so high. 1061 people killed by police in the U.S. so far this year. No doubt in many cases that was a reasonable outcome. But the statistic is terrible nonetheless.

I do not understand why our country is so violent. It is a shame we are not doing more to end the cycle.

But I do believe we are making progress. At least that's what the numbers seem to say:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/17/up...rime.html?_r=0
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/27/op...rime-wave.html

More progress is clearly needed. I don't have sure answers how. But I believe further militarizing the police and thereby alienating the communities they are enlisted to serve is not the right answer. And I do not trust every municipality provides their police force sufficient training to handle their firepower.

I profoundly respect the danger, difficulty, and importance of the job of police. Meanwhile I have high expectations they do their job professionally.

I was impressed how the police in London took down the subway knife terrorist with nothing more than courage and a taser:

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/v...-station-video

If guns were as plentiful in London as they are here I'm sure the scene would have been very different.

Again, I have no sure answers.

[Wesley Mouch]

Thanks for the article. Reading that, and following a couple links, I found the source of their data:

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/n...s-us-database#

I trust The Guardian to get their facts correct better than most sources.

,,,

Again, I have no sure answers.

I read Stylin's article as well. Didn't get their point. They presented stats on # of people killed by cops. But of course what matters is context. What was the suspect doing? Why?

Where the did bother to provide stats they were only of the inflammatory kind -- alleging that because more men and blacks were killed, this somehow suggests that the situations where they killed were presumably driven by sexism and racism. I would suspect that of those 161 dead, that at least 90% were cases where Mother Teresa would have done the same if she were a cop. At most, the remaining 10% might be where there's doubt -- and I respect all efforts to control bad decisions by cops, while I condemn all efforts to generalize that cops are by nature bad actors who are happy to kill black men.

[bust]

I condemn all efforts to generalize that cops are by nature bad actors who are happy to kill black men.

No one said that. And I shared the link to the Guardian because it's a much more thorough, current, and objective source of information. Meanwhile you ignored and edited out the entire thrust of my comment. Even that part you agree with.

[Richard]

So here we are as mature adults having a discussion and voicing our personal opinions on the matter,lets take a step back and ask law enforcement how they feel about the issue.

Back in May 19 2015 the Free press posts this piece.

Cops: Federal weapons ban won't have much impact

"My first reaction is that it's much to do about nothing," said Oakland County Sheriff Michael Bouchard, noting that most police agencies in Michigan don't have the now-banned equipment, such as armored tanks or specialized aircraft. "Most of what we get from the federal government, about 84% of it, has nothing to do with weapons. It's filing cabinets, surplus clothes, that kind of thing. So this is not going to have much impact."

http://www.freep.com/story/news/loca...tion/27558451/

Which says okay law enforcement does not have an issue with it,Right?

Well maybe not so, because when we jump forward to the OPs link of Dec 3 2015,it becomes a whole different story.

Michigan cops fume over loss of U.S. military vehicles

Christina Hall and L.L. Brasier, Detroit Free Press 9:07 a.m. EST December 3, 2015

Local sheriffs say donated military equipment plays important safety role for officers, public

http://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/2015/12/02/federal-military-surplus-return/76605640/


So how exactly does it go from no big deal to a life saving event,there is a bit of contradiction there?

Or is it a matter with law enforcement like it is with us and it boils down to each individuals views on what is important?

[bust]

Or is it a matter with law enforcement like it is with us and it boils down to each individuals views on what is important?

Without a doubt.