Is Rand Paul a Libertarian? This doesn't read like a republican's thought process. Very thought provoking coming from him. He's definitely running for POTUS talking like this.

 

Senator Rand Paul on Ferguson: We Must Demilitarize the Police - TIME

So when members of the drug trade and domestic terror groups show up with automatic weapons, armor piercing ammunition and RPG's, law enforcement is supposed to respond with tasers and peace signs?

So when members of the drug trade and domestic terror groups show up with automatic weapons, armor piercing ammunition and RPG's, law enforcement is supposed to respond with tasers and peace signs?

 

RPG's? Really?

So when members of the drug trade and domestic terror groups show up with automatic weapons, armor piercing ammunition and RPG's, law enforcement is supposed to respond with tasers and peace signs?

 

So just to get this on record then, you're in favor of municipalities turning their police forces into standing armies that patrol American soil?

^ Scrap that. Don't answer it. That was cheap.

 

I won't comment on the shooting. I don't know what happened and I don't know what either party was thinking.

 

But the police response in the first few days afterward was just this side of deranged. I do believe they made things worse. Busting down innocent people's doors, firing teargas canisters into private property that had nothing to do with anything, and arresting journalists for doing their jobs was complete madness and shouldn't be something that happens in America. What we saw in those days wasn't a police department but a peacekeeping force... and that's FAR beyond the scope of what their authority or directives should be. They're not trained for it and they aren't good at it.

 

So just to get this on record then, you're in favor of municipalities turning their police forces into standing armies that patrol American soil?

 

What would your limits be on police equipment that is either issued or available for use? What crosses the line as too much in your opinion?

What would your limits be on police equipment that is either issued or available for use? What crosses the line as too much in your opinion?

 

Certainly I don't believe LMPD, for example, ought to have a vehicle that amounts to a tank. What's a police force going to do with a 50-cal mounted on an armored vehicle? Menace people is what.

 

When given that equipment, it's hard to blame them for that response given that, were I a police officer, I'd have been terrified of retaliation in those days immediately following.

 

To be honest, it's less about equipment for me than about their rules of when to use SWAT and other militarized forces. It should be far more rare than it is. What I saw in Ferguson in the immediate aftermath frightened me... both on the part of those taking advantage of the situation to loot or cause mayhem, and on the part of the authorities to essentially declare martial law and suspend the God-given freedoms American should have. They put Ferguson on lockdown and they really, really didn't have to.

This is a case study in how to properly put kerosene on a fire. Whoever is in charge of PR at the Ferguson P.D. is incompetent, or wasn't listened to. Going out and accosting journalists in a McDonalds wins you no favors. My feeling on this is that the National Guard needs to train in riot control and crowd restraint. They should be called in right away. Municipalities should not handle this beyond the time it takes to mobilize the guard. They are not adequately trained for it.

Every question in the world comes down to this now: all or nothing. I have no problem with police being armed, being prepared. I don't really even have a problem with police having some military vehicles. But I do have a problem with police that dress in camouflage, that storm houses to serve warrants, that seize money (often illegally) from criminals (or supposed criminals) and use that money to buy even more toys to drive through town on the Independence Day parade. I have a problem with police viewing people as guilty first. I have a problem with police who anticipate violence and initiate conflict. I have a problem with police who harass, beat, and arrest those who break trivial laws, only to see police do the exact same things in their squad car, claiming it was necessary. I have a problem with police officers who want "to play army" with their job, when in fact the army doesn't handle things the way most city police do. But as much as anything, I have a problem with people who are so fascinated by authority, so taken by force, so scared of "bad guys" that they are willing to go along with every questionable action by every police force, using statements like this

 

So when members of the drug trade and domestic terror groups show up with automatic weapons, armor piercing ammunition and RPG's, law enforcement is supposed to respond with tasers and peace signs?

 

assuming that unless the police go in like the Normandy Invasion then drug dealers and terrorists will completely take over the word. Well drug dealers and terror groups exist, and always have existed, from the time of Andy Griffith to today's Iraq-lite policing method. And maybe I'm going to be labeled a liberal. Perhaps I'll be told I have no clue what I'm talking about. Someone will likely tell me to make sure and call that bobby-wielding policeman when a gun-toting house invader shows up after midnight and see how that goes. And all that's fine. I just wish that one side would be strong enough to deescalate, to try and work with the other side, rather than just constantly ratcheting up the stakes to see who blinks first. But maybe that's just me.

 

Certainly I don't believe LMPD, for example, ought to have a vehicle that amounts to a tank. What's a police force going to do with a 50-cal mounted on an armored vehicle? Menace people is what.

 

When given that equipment, it's hard to blame them for that response given that, were I a police officer, I'd have been terrified of retaliation in those days immediately following.

 

To be honest, it's less about equipment for me than about their rules of when to use SWAT and other militarized forces. It should be far more rare than it is. What I saw in Ferguson in the immediate aftermath frightened me... both on the part of those taking advantage of the situation to loot or cause mayhem, and on the part of the authorities to essentially declare martial law and suspend the God-given freedoms American should have. They put Ferguson on lockdown and they really, really didn't have to.

 

I've never seen a police dept with a 50 cal machine gun mounted on a tank or tank like vehicle. I have seen vehicles with bullet proof glass an bullet resistant doors and body panels. But no mounted machine guns.

This is a case study in how to properly put kerosene on a fire. Whoever is in charge of PR at the Ferguson P.D. is incompetent, or wasn't listened to. Going out and accosting journalists in a McDonalds wins you no favors. My feeling on this is that the National Guard needs to train in riot control and crowd restraint. They should be called in right away. Municipalities should not handle this beyond the time it takes to mobilize the guard. They are not adequately trained for it.

I agree with everything you say here but it also highlights another issue with local governments. Ferguson is just over 20,000 people, we are not talking a major city with trained PR officials. I wish the Mayor or higher entity would have stepped in immediately to hire out someone to handle PR.

I've never seen a police dept with a 50 cal machine gun mounted on a tank or tank like vehicle. I have seen vehicles with bullet proof glass an bullet resistant doors and body panels. But no mounted machine guns.

 

S.C. Sheriff's Department Armored Vehicle with Belt-Fed Machine Gun - News - POLICE Magazine

 

http://www.examiner.com/article/columbia-sc-pd-gets-un-blue-armored-vehicle

Edited August 20, 201412 yr by AverageJoesGym

 

S.C. Sheriff's Department Armored Vehicle with Belt-Fed Machine Gun - Nes - POLICE Magazine

 

http://www.examiner.com/article/columbia-sc-pd-gets-un-blue-armored-vehicle

 

Google comes through again...I would still say this is much more of an outlier than common place. FWIW I see no reason for a gun like that in LE.

I agree with everything you say here but it also highlights another issue with local governments. Ferguson is just over 20' date='000 people, we are not talking a major city with trained PR officials. I wish the Mayor or higher entity would have stepped in immediately to hire out someone to handle PR.[/quote']

 

State should have stepped in to help sooner...as far as PR goes, if the initial lie about what happened hadn't been proliferated there wouldn't have a need for any response.

 

Certainly I don't believe LMPD, for example, ought to have a vehicle that amounts to a tank. What's a police force going to do with a 50-cal mounted on an armored vehicle? Menace people is what.

 

When given that equipment, it's hard to blame them for that response given that, were I a police officer, I'd have been terrified of retaliation in those days immediately following.

 

To be honest, it's less about equipment for me than about their rules of when to use SWAT and other militarized forces. It should be far more rare than it is. What I saw in Ferguson in the immediate aftermath frightened me... both on the part of those taking advantage of the situation to loot or cause mayhem, and on the part of the authorities to essentially declare martial law and suspend the God-given freedoms American should have. They put Ferguson on lockdown and they really, really didn't have to.

 

No police departments have tanks with mounted .50 cal. If you can show me one I'll agree they need to lose it.

 

In fact no police department probably has a tank. They have armored vehicles. Big difference.