Confused after throwing a deafening and blinding “flashbang” into a home, police mistakenly shot and killed a sleeping seven-year-old.

 

What Killed Aiyana Stanley-Jones? | Mother Jones

 

"I'm worried they went Hollywood," said a high-ranking Detroit police official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity due to the sensitivity of the investigation and simmering resentment in the streets. "It is not protocol. And I've got to say in all my years in the department, I've never used a flash-bang in a case like this."

 

The official went on to say that the SWAT team was not briefed about the presence of children in the house, although the neighborhood informant who led homicide detectives to the Lillibridge address told them that children lived there. There were even toys on the lawn..

 

In addition to a link I posted earlier that I doubt any of the mouth breathers read:

 

Homeland Security increasingly lending drones to local police - Washington Times

 

Far from the battlefields of Afghanistan, a Predator drone was summoned into action last year to spy on a North Dakota farmer who allegedly refused to return a half dozen of his neighbor’s cows that had strayed onto his pastures.

 

South Carolina sheriff buys tank to conduct raids and it even comes with a detachable .50 cal. How cute.

 

The Richland County, South Carolina Sheriff's Department (that's them above) just obtained an armored personnel carrier, complete with a belt-fed, .50-cal turreted machine gun. Sheriff Leon Lott has charmingly named the vehicle "The Peacemaker," and insists that using a caliber of ammunition that even the U.S. military is reluctant to use against human targets (it's generally reserved for use against armored vehicles) will "save lives."

 

South Carolina sheriff buys tank to conduct raids - Boing Boing

 

Arkansas city goes under martial law

 

Following a rise in violent crime in Paragould, an Arkansas town of around 26,000 residents, the mayor and police chief announced that starting this month police in SWAT gear carrying AR-15s would patrol the streets.

 

“If you’re out walking, we’re going to stop you, ask why you’re out walking, and check for your ID,” police chief Todd Stovall told a December town hall meeting. As if to render the implementation of a visible police state more palatable, Stovall assured residents that police stops would not be based on any profiling: “We’re going to do it to everybody,” he said.

 

Arkansas town?s martial law plan - Salon.com

 

 

A town with two murders since 99 gets a tank.

 

It's not quite a tank. But the quaint town of 23,000 -- scene of just two murders since 1999 -- had just accepted a $285,933 grant from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security to purchase a Bearcat, an eight-ton armored personnel vehicle made by Lenco Industries Inc.

 

Police 'Tank' Purchase Riles New Hampshire Town

 

Two SWAT Teams shut down a neighborhood in Colorado for four hours to search for a man suspected of stealing a bicycle and merchandise from Wal-Mart

 

Police close off east Fort Collins neighborhood to serve warrant | 9news.com

 

Arizona SWAT Team Defends Shooting Iraq Vet 60 Times

 

Tucson SWAT Team Defends Shooting Iraq Marine Veteran 60 Times - ABC News

 

SWAT team members fired 71 times and hit Guerena 60 times, police said.

 

In a frantic 911 call, Vanessa Guerena begged for medical help for her husband. "He's on the floor!" she said, crying, to the 911 operator. "Can you please hurry up?"

So let's see.....

 

Predator drones, flashbang grenades, tank like vehicles with mounted .50 cal that is belt fed for a town with hardly any crime, patrolling the streets with AR-15's and kevlar vests and threatening to stop anyone and everyone if you're on the streets.

 

 

 

 

 

Sounds like legit police work.

 

You need to do your research on the "swat" team raiding someone's house over "student loan fraud". Took me 10 seconds to find out it A.) wasn't a swat team, and B.) they were executing a search warrant as part of a criminal investigation.

 

Here's a link to a blog detailing how the news got it wrong by reporting what you are still reporting.

 

http://m.dailykos.com/story/2011/06/09/983514/-DOE-Detention-of-Kenneth-Wright-an-Update-of-the-story-and-An-Apology

 

Whether or not they should have used one of these so called "no knock warrants" is still up for debate. However you should stop with the "swat team raided a house for student loans" bull.

 

Wait so your saying the media only got half of the story right? I'm shocked. Yet that doesn't make headlines of course.

So let's see.....

 

Predator drones, flashbang grenades, tank like vehicles with mounted .50 cal that is belt fed for a town with hardly any crime, patrolling the streets with AR-15's and kevlar vests and threatening to stop anyone and everyone if you're on the streets.

Sounds like legit police work.

 

They are not Predator Drones, they are for surveillance only...none have surface to air missiles like a Predator.

Armored trucks aren't anything new, law enforcement has had some version of armored vehicles for 50 years, you can even buy one for your very own if you like.

 

.50 Cal Machine gun? Go to Knob Creek Machine gun shoot and see how many civilians own their very own belt fed machine gun.

 

By patrolling the streets with AR-15's what is you problem with that? Would you prefer that they be locked up in city hall instead of in the patrol unit on the street where in case of emergency it would be needed.

 

Kevlar Vest? Really you don't think officers should wear Kevlar vest when on patrol? Several officers lives are saved each year by wearing these vest...you want them to leave them in the trunk or back at the station? BTW you too can own all the Kevlar vest you want.

 

In case of emergency the police should secure an area, I have no problems with curfews. A few hours after the tornadoes in Moore, OK there were looters going through the wreckage and undamaged businesses trying to steal anything they could. That way anyone that was in there after hours was someone that was up to no good.

 

Yeah, that or maybe it was Saturday night.

 

And please, for the sake of me not having to repeat myself again and again, pay attention to what is posted. Take your time and re-read if you have to.

 

Nobody has said they are against the officers having semi-automatic weapons. I've said I am against them patrolling in military style equipment. Using military style tactics.

 

I'm all for police having the appropriate weapons to keep the peace. I am not however, for them having weapons I or an ordinary citizen can't have.

 

Do you understand? I've simplified it as much as possible.

 

How would you do it? What would you suggest instead? What are the "military style tactics" that are so worrisome to you?

So let's see.....

 

Predator drones, flashbang grenades, tank like vehicles with mounted .50 cal that is belt fed for a town with hardly any crime, patrolling the streets with AR-15's and kevlar vests and threatening to stop anyone and everyone if you're on the streets.

 

Sounds like legit police work.

 

I'd have to read up more on the use of predator drones before I say much about them.

 

Flash bangs serve a legitimate purpose and I have no issue with police special units having them. The story where a 7 year old was killed is awful but that doesn't mean all police should stop using flash-bangs.

 

I don't support patrolling with AR's unless its special circumstances which are very rare, like Boston. Even then I think it should be limited. I think they did a good job.

 

Threatening to stop everyone and patrolling every day duties with AR's seems extreme and based o nothing more than reading the title it seems excessive.

 

With that said, you can cherry pick all the bad stories you want. No one here is denying the fact that the police make mistakes. Sometimes some bad people make it into the police world and do stupid things. That doesn't mean the police shouldn't have adequate equipment to keep themselves safe and give them an advantage should a dangerous situation occur.

I will say I do think its a good idea for all patrol officers to have AR's readily available. I don't think they should be marching the streets with them out but they should have them in their cars.

Yeah, that or maybe it was Saturday night.

 

And please, for the sake of me not having to repeat myself again and again, pay attention to what is posted. Take your time and re-read if you have to.

 

Nobody has said they are against the officers having semi-automatic weapons. I've said I am against them patrolling in military style equipment. Using military style tactics.

 

I'm all for police having the appropriate weapons to keep the peace. I am not however, for them having weapons I or an ordinary citizen can't have.

 

Do you understand? I've simplified it as much as possible.

 

 

You can repeat yourself, or choose not to. The lack of understanding is clearly on your part. There is not one example of police having or using equipment that is not available to you. You can purchase a BearCat if you want. It will cost you about 250K and would be very impractical for every day use. You might have noticed that the article in question mentions that the department was applying for a grant to pay for the equipment. Meaning that they likely can't afford to purchase it from their own budget. As for using it on patrol, that will not happen. The vehicle gets about 5 miles per gallon, is slow, cumbersome, and in every way impractical for the task. If used for patrol it's useful lifespan would be four or five years at best. If used for SWAT type opporations it would likely last 25 years. There is not one police department in the country using BearCat vehicles for every day regular patrol. In fact there are probably no more than ten departments in the entire country that have more than one BearCat. There are probably less than twenty-five BearCats in use in law enforcement in the entire Commonwealth.

 

Ease your mind. The police have nothing that you cannot get yourself. You can buy the same vehicles, guns, surveillance equipment, (photo, video, and listening devices) ballistic protective gear, and clothing. You could even buy a drone or a helicopter if you so chose.

 

So again, what is it that is really the concern? That they have the things that they might need in the performance of their duty?

 

Do to the times we live in the role of the police has changed. A decade ago we had Colombine and the World Trade Center. Today we have Sandy Hook and the Boston Marathon bombing. Ten years ago protocol for active shootings was to contain them until a SWAT team arrived. After Colombine that was deemed impractical. The response was to create response teams made up of the first four officers to arrive at such incidents and for them to engage in a tactical operation and immediately address the threat. After Sandy Hook police further changed their response. Now, in many cases, the first officer on scene is to engage in a one man (or woman) tactical response to the threat. Such a mission is much like the mission of a marine in combat. The difference being that the officer has many more restrictions in his ability to use force that may protect himself. (As an example a soldier might use cover fire to advance his position. A police officer is accountable for every round fired and unintended casualties are not accepted as part of the cost of an operation. They are punished as criminal acts and or civil violations.) To accomplish this mission they are given tools that are necessary for the task. God bless them for being there when we need them and God be with them if they are ever called to preform such a task. Not having the power of God to watch over them I offer my hard earned tax dollars to provide for their needs. Just as I do for those who serve in our armed services.

 

You can repeat yourself, or choose not to. The lack of understanding is clearly on your part. There is not one example of police having or using equipment that is not available to you. You can purchase a BearCat if you want. It will cost you about 250K and would be very impractical for every day use. You might have noticed that the article in question mentions that the department was applying for a grant to pay for the equipment. Meaning that they likely can't afford to purchase it from their own budget. As for using it on patrol, that will not happen. The vehicle gets about 5 miles per gallon, is slow, cumbersome, and in every way impractical for the task. If used for patrol it's useful lifespan would be four or five years at best. If used for SWAT type opporations it would likely last 25 years. There is not one police department in the country using BearCat vehicles for every day regular patrol. In fact there are probably no more than ten departments in the entire country that have more than one BearCat. There are probably less than twenty-five BearCats in use in law enforcement in the entire Commonwealth.

 

Ease your mind. The police have nothing that you cannot get yourself. You can buy the same vehicles, guns, surveillance equipment, (photo, video, and listening devices) ballistic protective gear, and clothing. You could even buy a drone or a helicopter if you so chose.

 

So again, what is it that is really the concern? That they have the things that they might need in the performance of their duty?

 

Do to the times we live in the role of the police has changed. A decade ago we had Colombine and the World Trade Center. Today we have Sandy Hook and the Boston Marathon bombing. Ten years ago protocol for active shootings was to contain them until a SWAT team arrived. After Colombine that was deemed impractical. The response was to create response teams made up of the first four officers to arrive at such incidents and for them to engage in a tactical operation and immediately address the threat. After Sandy Hook police further changed their response. Now, in many cases, the first officer on scene is to engage in a one man (or woman) tactical response to the threat. Such a mission is much like the mission of a marine in combat. The difference being that the officer has many more restrictions in his ability to use force that may protect himself. (As an example a soldier might use cover fire to advance his position. A police officer is accountable for every round fired and unintended casualties are not accepted as part of the cost of an operation. They are punished as criminal acts and or civil violations.) To accomplish this mission they are given tools that are necessary for the task. God bless them for being there when we need them and God be with them if they are ever called to preform such a task. Not having the power of God to watch over them I offer my hard earned tax dollars to provide for their needs. Just as I do for those who serve in our armed services.

 

Fantastic post. Bravo.

What military style weapons are they being given? I've yet to see police officers patrolling the streets with any thing that most civilians don't have access to as well.

 

I got pulled over by a tank the other day. It was a little disconcerting.

 

I bet San Diego PD wishes they would have had their own tank on this day!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C4nlcmmt8X0

 

How would stop this guy? Homemade tank made out of a Bulldozer!

You can repeat yourself, or choose not to. The lack of understanding is clearly on your part. There is not one example of police having or using equipment that is not available to you. You can purchase a BearCat if you want. It will cost you about 250K and would be very impractical for every day use. You might have noticed that the article in question mentions that the department was applying for a grant to pay for the equipment. Meaning that they likely can't afford to purchase it from their own budget. As for using it on patrol, that will not happen. The vehicle gets about 5 miles per gallon, is slow, cumbersome, and in every way impractical for the task. If used for patrol it's useful lifespan would be four or five years at best. If used for SWAT type opporations it would likely last 25 years. There is not one police department in the country using BearCat vehicles for every day regular patrol. In fact there are probably no more than ten departments in the entire country that have more than one BearCat. There are probably less than twenty-five BearCats in use in law enforcement in the entire Commonwealth.

 

Ease your mind. The police have nothing that you cannot get yourself. You can buy the same vehicles, guns, surveillance equipment, (photo, video, and listening devices) ballistic protective gear, and clothing. You could even buy a drone or a helicopter if you so chose.

 

So again, what is it that is really the concern? That they have the things that they might need in the performance of their duty?

 

Do to the times we live in the role of the police has changed. A decade ago we had Colombine and the World Trade Center. Today we have Sandy Hook and the Boston Marathon bombing. Ten years ago protocol for active shootings was to contain them until a SWAT team arrived. After Colombine that was deemed impractical. The response was to create response teams made up of the first four officers to arrive at such incidents and for them to engage in a tactical operation and immediately address the threat. After Sandy Hook police further changed their response. Now, in many cases, the first officer on scene is to engage in a one man (or woman) tactical response to the threat. Such a mission is much like the mission of a marine in combat. The difference being that the officer has many more restrictions in his ability to use force that may protect himself. (As an example a soldier might use cover fire to advance his position. A police officer is accountable for every round fired and unintended casualties are not accepted as part of the cost of an operation. They are punished as criminal acts and or civil violations.) To accomplish this mission they are given tools that are necessary for the task. God bless them for being there when we need them and God be with them if they are ever called to preform such a task. Not having the power of God to watch over them I offer my hard earned tax dollars to provide for their needs. Just as I do for those who serve in our armed services.

 

The lack of understanding is on my part but you asked me what my concern is? It's like arguing with someone that has the wit of Helen Keller.

 

how many times do I have to post it: My concern is the militarized tactics that are becoming socially acceptable and more prevalent when something bad happens. My concern is the blatant disrespect for our rule of law.

 

My concern is when a murder happens or there may be a spark of violent crime, an entire city goes on lockdown. Warrantless searches happen, people are told they must show ID when walking around by cops with AR's, families being forced out of their homes without probable cause and then people cheering it as if it was a victory for 'muricah.

 

I'm well aware of the weapons I am able to buy. And you are incorrect that individuals can buy or obtain whatever weapons law enforcement has. In VA, I can't even get a radar detector without some type of consequence if I am caught. Each city, and in cities, especially those in Chicago, LA, NYC, DC, etc, they have ridiculous restrictions on firearms. That may be the dumbest post I may have read on here.

 

And the city in NH applied for the grant, and got the quarter of a million tank like vehicle with belt-fed 50 cal because of possible terrorist threats from groups such as the Free Staters -- a group that prides itself on a non-violence principle. Give me a break. They can't pay for it, then they shouldn't get it. They don't even have a legitimate use for it.

 

Again, the vehicles and equipment, from drones to tanks, is not my main concern. It's the tactics too many towns and cities are using when something bad happens.

 

It's becoming socially acceptable and because a majority may think martial law for a short period of time is the right thing to do -- out of fear -- you are throwing the rule of law in the trash.

The lack of understanding is on my part but you asked me what my concern is? It's like arguing with someone that has the wit of Helen Keller.

 

how many times do I have to post it: My concern is the militarized tactics that are becoming socially acceptable and more prevalent when something bad happens. My concern is the blatant disrespect for our rule of law.

 

My concern is when a murder happens or there may be a spark of violent crime, an entire city goes on lockdown. Warrantless searches happen, people are told they must show ID when walking around by cops with AR's, families being forced out of their homes without probable cause and then people cheering it as if it was a victory for 'muricah.

 

I'm well aware of the weapons I am able to buy. And you are incorrect that individuals can buy or obtain whatever weapons law enforcement has. In VA, I can't even get a radar detector without some type of consequence if I am caught. Each city, and in cities, especially those in Chicago, LA, NYC, DC, etc, they have ridiculous restrictions on firearms. That may be the dumbest post I may have read on here.

 

And the city in NH applied for the grant, and got the quarter of a million tank like vehicle with belt-fed 50 cal because of possible terrorist threats from groups such as the Free Staters -- a group that prides itself on a non-violence principle. Give me a break. They can't pay for it, then they shouldn't get it. They don't even have a legitimate use for it.

 

Again, the vehicles and equipment, from drones to tanks, is not my main concern. It's the tactics too many towns and cities are using when something bad happens.

 

It's becoming socially acceptable and because a majority may think martial law for a short period of time is the right thing to do -- out of fear -- you are throwing the rule of law in the trash.

 

Dumbest post you've read. You must not read your own crap. Not one time in my entire life, living in three different states, have I ever been subjected to such random checks, city wide lockdowns, or Marshall law. These incidents are incredibly uncommon and not becoming the accepted norm. What they are is widely reported upon and even more widely distorted to fit the agenda of the anti government conspiracy theorists. Look at the links posted in this thread and trash rags that they come from. With little effort most have been proven untrue by other posters.

 

Imagine the audacity of the Boston area police asking for identification from someone on the streets of an area where they were searching for(and found) a known terrorist. Why would you be on the streets? For an emergency? Yes, and easily explained to police who would willingly help you. Outside of that there is no reason and so the police remove you because your not smart enough to stay away from danger yourself.

There is a great deal of excellent discussion occurring in this thread. However, if some of you do not lay off the childish personal barbs, I will close the thread.