- 2,647
In violent protest incidents, a theme emerges: Videos contradict police accounts
There seems to be very little consequence to lying to the public.
There seems to be very little consequence to lying to the public.
Too bad that article is blocked by a paywall.In violent protest incidents, a theme emerges: Videos contradict police accounts
There seems to be very little consequence to lying to the public.
Well damn, I need to move and switch jobs! Also explains why so many APD move to different cities after their training and a few years experience under their belt. They average $35-50K a year.$100,000 a year, sometimes as much as $135,000 a year.
In addition to the power tripping typical police do. Other people lives as a means of catharsis / lessening stress! /sWell damn, I need to move and switch jobs! Also explains why so many APD move to different cities after their training and a few years experience under their belt. They average $35-50K a year.
It's really that simple. Police officers should not carry military-grade weapons. Police are civilians, not military. It boggles my mind how much large police forces spend buying weapons directly from the military.Studies show that militarizing the police makes them more violent
"even controlling for other possible factors in police violence (such as household income, overall and black population, violent-crime levels and drug use), more-militarized law enforcement agencies were associated with more civilians killed each year by police."
Just for context, may I ask what specifically you mean by "military-grade weapons"?It's really that simple. Police officers should not carry military-grade weapons. Police are civilians, not military. It boggles my mind how much large police forces spend buying weapons directly from the military.
I think he's referring to AR-15s which are the non-military variant of the M4?Just for context, may I ask what specifically you mean by "military-grade weapons"?
Armored vehicles and helicopters, grenade launchers, M16/M4s, ballistic shields, etc. It isn't just firearms that urban police forces get from the military. Under Trump, who has eased restrictions on police forces obtaining supplies from the military, the amount of money police forces spend on military-grade supplies has increased, at over $200,000,000 a year now.Just for context, may I ask what specifically you mean by "military-grade weapons"?
Are we including civilian AR-15 variants in this?M16/M4s
I think this is the part where our opinions will diverge a bit. I would definitely question the use of force and weapons of the police but I do think armor seems like one of those things that's kinda hard to argue against. One of those "better to have it and not need it" kind of things.Armored vehicles and helicopters, ballistic shields, etc.
I think this is much more to the point than cutting police budgets/forces in half. Another point is that many new recruits in the recent decade have come from veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan who may have lingering emotional/psychological trauma issues to work out.Studies show that militarizing the police makes them more violent
"even controlling for other possible factors in police violence (such as household income, overall and black population, violent-crime levels and drug use), more-militarized law enforcement agencies were associated with more civilians killed each year by police."
Armored vehicles and helicopters, grenade launchers, M16/M4s, ballistic shields, etc. It isn't just firearms that urban police forces get from the military. Under Trump, who has eased restrictions on police forces obtaining supplies from the military, the amount of money police forces spend on military-grade supplies has increased, at over $200,000,000 a year now.
Fair enough.I think helicopters make sense for a police force, they are far better at locating a suspect on the run then police at ground level. They are also way more useful in police chases and if choppers were used more effectively high speed chases wouldn't really need to happen. The helicopter could just follow the suspect's car and direct ground units to head them off. It'd prevent some of the more serious collisions and property damage.
I would say so. Although the AR-15 is technically a civilian weapon, it functions more like a military-grade one.Are we including civilian AR-15 variants in this?
In what way exactly?I would say so. Although the AR-15 is technically a civilian weapon, it functions more like a military-grade one.
It's the exact same rifle, only in semi-auto only instead of full auto.In what way exactly?
I understand what you're saying here, but I'm not sure that was the best way of saying it...Police were trained in the of the available 30-06 Springfield, but of course no female officer could handle one these things for more than a round or two. The AR-15 can be handled by females and slender framed men quite successfully.
That would be the part I was alluding too.It's the exact same rifle, only in semi-auto only instead of full auto.
I would imagine it would be from the expectation that the police need to equipped and prepared to deal with any conceivable situation that can happen, and react as quickly/effectively as possible. On paper, it doesn't sound that unreasonable.Here's ultimately what I'm getting at. Why does the US need a militarized police force, when a more militarized police force is linked to a greater amount of deaths/police brutality and shows no real decrease in crime?
Oof.So, what's the solution? LAPD and other urban police departments (most of which have budgets in the multi-billions) should have massive budget cuts (in the billions) and mass layoffs (in the thousands).
Well, I guess there really isn't a positive way to phrase that defunding the police will result in less cops. I'm aware that my optics generally aren't too good when it comes to a political discussion.Oof.
That's some unfortunate phrasing there.
That particular post replying to OP.They were talking about the female part with the guns.