David Spade Donates $100K to Phoenix PD for AR-15s

[ravonaf]

What else could your bolded statement mean? Please explain.

http://www.google.com/search?q=poli...a:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&safe=active

http://www.newswithviews.com/Evensen/greg.htm

http://www.reason.com/news/show/121169.html

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=14363

http://www.cato.org/pubs/briefs/bp-050es.html

http://www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_home/1999/Jun-13-Sun-1999/opinion/11359171.html

I can go on and on. But I think you understand what I mean.

between the lines Joseph Farah The militarization of the domestic police
Posted: November 06, 1997
1:00 am Eastern

By Joseph Farah
© 2008 WorldNetDaily.com



* In California alone, more than $30 million in excess military hardware has been distributed -- mostly free of charge -- to more than 200 law enforcement agencies since November 1996.

* Nationally, a total of 43,253 items originally valued at $204.3 million went to more than 11,000 government law enforcement agencies in all 50 states over a one-year period.

* Bayonets, weapons of deadly hand-to-hand combat, have bolstered the arsenals of police in 23 states as part of a massive flow of surplus military gear.

What gives? Why is all this deadly hardware purchased with U.S. taxpayer dollars to fight foreign enemies now being turned on unsuspecting American civilians at the very moment they are being disarmed by local, state and federal governments?

The militarization of local police departments is getting so brazen even many local governments are having second thoughts about the program. In Los Angeles, for instance, one of the nation's biggest police departments is saying it was a mistake to accept the bayonets and is shipping them back to the Army.

More than 6,400 surplus bayonets went to law enforcement agencies between Oct. 1, 1996 and Sept. 30, 1997, according to the federal Defense Logistics Agency in Washington. But what on earth would domestic police departments do with bayonets?

For once I agree with the American Civil Liberties Union.

"We can imagine no circumstances whatsoever where it would be appropriate for a local police agency to put a bayonet on the end of a rifle," said John Crew, an ACLU attorney.

It turns out they were requisitioned by a sergeant in the LAPD. But what about elsewhere? What about North Carolina, Connecticut and Indiana where far more bayonets were distributed? And why is the federal government even making this stuff available for the purposes of domestic law enforcement? Do they so distrust the American people? Evidently so. Washington won't even report to the people where the gear is going.

Just imagine if the Illinois state police had bayonets on their rifles the day they kicked down Shirley Allen's door in Roby? Instead of being unfairly incarcerated in a mental ward right now, she might have been shish kebab.

This whole program turning over military gear to local cops got started in 1990 with the requirement that agencies use the weapons to fight drugs. But that rule was quietly dropped by the Clinton administration last year when the program was dramatically expanded.

What other goodies are local and state police departments getting from the military? Everything from fatigues to office equipment to helicopters, armored vehicles, body armor, assault rifles and night-vision gear. Hmmm. I'll sleep better at night knowing I'm so well-protected.

All of this wouldn't be quite so alarming if it didn't occur simultaneously with the militarization of the growing ranks of federal cops. There are now more than 80,000 armed federal personnel involved in law enforcement in agencies as diverse as the FBI and the Environmental Protection Agency. It's the standing army the Founding Fathers so feared might develop along with a strong central government.

Another ominous trend is the growing cooperation between not only the dozens of federal law enforcement agencies which routinely perform joint military-syle raids on unsuspecting civilians, but also the way the feds work so closely with local and state cops. The federal government has also taken the lead role in training local and state police officers as well at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center that has plans to turn out some 25,000 new U.S. cops each of the next three years.

On top of that, if you really want to venture into the realm of the paranoid, there's the plan currently before Congress to authorize the hiring of more foreign police -- specifically those from the Royal Hong Kong Police department -- into the federal law enforcement agencies. Such hiring is already permissible, under earlier legislation, at the local and state level.

What ever happened to the concept of "government of the people, by the people and for the people"? Have we strayed so far? Has the schism between government and the governed become so large that only one side can be trusted with guns? Is this not the path only to tyranny?

 

[expvideo]

I can go on and on. But I think you understand what I mean.

I understand that you have a problem with the police having the same "gear" that I have. Your reasoning being that it is similar to military gear, and that this kind of thing should only be for the military, which you didn't say, but insinuate (whether or not intentionally). You have the same problem that the antis have. I own almost everything that a police officer would use. I have a right to own it. Having a problem with the police having it IS having a problem with civilians having it.

BTW, your quoted article is sickeningly anti. "Deadly weapons of hand-to-hand combat". It's a freaking knife. Come on!

 

[ravonaf]

I understand that you have a problem with the police having the same "gear" that I have. Your reasoning being that it is similar to military gear, and that this kind of thing should only be for the military, which you didn't say, but insinuate (whether or not intentionally). You have the same problem that the antis have. I own almost everything that a police officer would use. I have a right to own it. Having a problem with the police having it IS having a problem with civilians having it.

No. Please go back and read my post. I specifically said it's not the weapon but the politics of how it may be used. I have no problem with inanimate objects. Those are just tools. I have aproblem with living in a police state. I have a problem with Police using those tools in an inappropriate manner.

 

[CoRoMo]

...giving free money to government...

I guess this money will actually be given to the firearms industry.

 

[expvideo]

No. Please go back and read my post. I specifically said it's not the weapon but the politics of how it may be used. I have no problem with inanimate objects. Those are just tools. I have aproblem with living in a police state. I have a problem with Police using those tools in an inappropriate manner.

And when you put it that way I agree with you, but when you try to make a quick point without explanation and simply say "army gear and army tactics" it is easily misinterpretted. Had you explained this in the first place, we wouldn't be arguing. You need to consider how someone reading your post will interpret it, because we all aren't on the same set of tracks. Try reading your first post from the perspective of someone who thinks you are complaining about the police having semi-automatic rifles, and you will see what I mean about how it could easily be misinterpretted.

Thank you for clarifying.

 

[ravonaf]

And when you put it that way I agree with you, but when you try to make a quick point without explanation and simply say "army gear and army tactics" it is easily misinterpretted. Had you explained this in the first place, we wouldn't be arguing. You need to consider how someone reading your post will interpret it, because we all aren't on the same set of tracks. Try reading your first post from the perspective of someone who thinks you are complaining about the police having semi-automatic rifles, and you will see what I mean about how it could easily be misinterpretted.

Thank you for clarifying.

I see your point. I'll try to be more clear in the future. There's a fine line between appearing to be anti-LEO and pro-freedom. Some of my best friends are LEO's.

I happen to believe everything is connected. For every action there's going to be a re-action. Police budgets across the country are sky-rocketing. They are arming up. There are far more Police in this country than ever before by a long shot. When I see a story about Police needing AR-15's I see the worst case scenario, and others may not. Anyways, Merry Christmas

 

[expvideo]

I see your point. I'll try to be more clear in the future. There's a fine line between appearing to be anti-LEO and pro-freedom. Some of my best friends are LEO's.

I happen to believe everything is connected. For every action there's going to be a re-action. Police budgets across the country are sky-rocketing. They are arming up. There are far more Police in this country than ever before by a long shot. When I see a story about Police needing AR-15's I see the worst case scenario, and other may not. Anyways, Merry Christmas

Well I'm sorry for giving you a lecture. I do agree with you about the militarization of the police force. I am fine with them having rifles and body armor, but the ones that are wearing tactical uniforms with external vests that have rifle pouches and look like a dark blue/black version of military gear... Those are the ones I have a problem with. I see it all the time. Walking through the mall, even. What the hell is wrong with them? It's the mall, not Iraq. I really hate the attitude that goes with it too.

It's not the rifles that bother me either, it's the tactical clothing and tactical attitudes that create a very strong us-vs-them impression, and makes the police completely unapproachable. They are not here to fight terrorism on the streets. They are here to help keep our communities safe, investigate crimes and enforce the laws. They need to do it in a friendly and professional manner, not through fear.



Is this what a public servant looks like?

 

[rondog]

The police in this country are "arming up" because the criminals they're up against are "arming up". There's hundreds of minority street gangs all over the country armed with AK and SKS variants, and God only knows what kind of machineguns, and you don't want our cops to be able to defend against that threat? Open your eyes.

 

[expvideo]

The police in this country are "arming up" because the criminals they're up against are "arming up". There's hundreds of minority street gangs all over the country armed with AK and SKS variants, and God only knows what kind of machineguns, and you don't want our cops to be able to defend against that threat? Open your eyes.

Yeah. They should be arming up. But they shouldn't be trying to look like black and blue storm troopers. And they shouldn't be treating everyone they meet like a terror suspect.

Here's my point... It's ok for cops to look like this:

But they're starting to look like this:

That is a BIG problem. One style is appropriate for interacting with the public and one is not. I think that is pretty obvious.

 

[kd7nqb]

I saw the story on TV News saying that officers wanted to buy their own and the Chief would not allow it due to training and "need" issues. As far as I am concerned David Spade did a great thing by eliminating the money argument but I wonder if there is something deeper going on.

As far as the Hollywood thing goes I think there are a few guys out there that are pretty solidly Pro 2nd Ammendment, I am specifically thinking of when Drew Carey bought his friends and Family AR's in 1994 under the argument of if the Government does not want you to have one, you need one.

 

[Erik]

Good for David Spade.

 

[rondog]

Your feelings about how they dress and "appear" is just your opinion and your problem. I personally don't give a rat's ass how they dress, as long as they have the tools they need to keep the maggots under control. We have cops here in Denver that wear cowboy hats and ride horses, I suppose THAT would bother you too? Oh, and the motorcycle cops wear leather jackets and knee-high boots! <shudder>

You people that are all freaked out about this country becoming a "police state" crack me up.

 

[expvideo]

As far as I am concerned David Spade did a great thing by eliminating the money argument but I wonder if there is something deeper going on.

I doubt it. It sounds to me like he just wanted to help out his hometown cops, and he has the money to do it.

I am specifically thinking of when Drew Carey bought his friends and Family AR's in 1994 under the argument of if the Government does not want you to have one, you need one.

Really?! I have a newfound respect for Drew Carey. I never really liked him that much, but that's a pretty cool thing for him to have done.

 

[woodybrighton]

there is a point high speed low drag stuff fine if your kicking in doors not really needed if your standing around.
not sure why you'd want bayonets probably somebody clearing out an armoury

 

[hankdatank1362]

While I hate to drift off topic about the "need" for tactical gear and weapons available to rank-and-file Law Enforcement, everyone must realize that it is not a black and white issue.

When better guns, gear, and training are NEEDED (i.e. North Hollywood bank robbery), they are truly needed, and any delay in their implementation will only cost lives.

However, when they are not needed, they are possibly just as dangerous as a standing army (misuse of tactical teams for minor drug offenses, possibly at even the wrong address.)

 

[Sinixstar]

And with the switch from patrol cars to tanks I'm not going to be surprised either. Using a force with army gear and army tactics to police citizens isn't a good thing.

So you're saying only the military should have military hardware?

 

[expvideo]

I agree hankdatank. It is a complicated issue and it is not black and white. Unfortunately, that's how life is, though. I could legally walk around with an AR-15 slung across my back and a tactical vest full of magazines and a pistol in a leg holster. I could even run into a situation where I needed them. But it is very inappropriate for me to run around in that stuff all day and interact with other people. Having it in your car is one thing. Wearing it to the mall is another. As a citizen, I would rather wait 10 minutes for SWAT to show up than to have every cop I see at the mall thinking that they are SWAT.

 

[Sinixstar]

I'm not sure I understand the argument that cops shouldn't have AR's.
The stuff i'm seeing tossed around is the exact same argument antis use to say average people shouldn't have AR's. Our response is - if it's pointed at your head, it doesn't matter if it's a full auto or a 22 bolt gun.

So I guess my question is - why the double standard?
If you got a bad apple who wanted to play tough guy in uniform - does it make a difference whether he has an AR or a Riot Gun, or even just his side arm? Last I checked bullets were not self aware, and any of 'em would kill someone just as dead.

I mean, it's just mind boggling to me. Any joe off the street can go buy an AR with cash in hand and a simple background check - yet we're saying the police shouldn't have them because they're dangerous and could be misused?

 

[seale]

Wow, this thread has been completely hijacked by the government worshiping mentality. It was about 50/50 yesterday but today if you don't have this ultra idealized view of government and it's agents, you're not only not welcome but you will be called names.

The government worshipers have totally altered the debate of this thread in a way that has chilled dissent. They have changed the whole debate to cast you as "negative" if you dare look critically at giving gifts to government.

Put simply, a fool, who is free to be foolish with his money, has just handed $100,000 over to government, an entity which taxes us to death, and the fool is getting nothing in return. This fool (mr spade) is REWARDING government for mismanaging our piles of tax money.

This is why I have no respect for government worshipers. You have to think and speak in glowing adoration of government agents or they insult your patriotism, cast you as being mean to their heroes, cast you as "negative," and cast you as ungrateful for their glowing "heroism."

I'm not sure I understand the argument that cops shouldn't have AR's.

No, you understand it, you just refuse to accept it. Many of us do not want the police MILITARIZED. Many of us do not want ANYBODY spraying 5.56mm rifle bullets in our neighborhood and the supposed "need" for cops to be carrying ARs is baloney because almost no criminals use ARs. This notion that police are "outgunned" is television created FICTION.

 

[Sinixstar]

No, you understand it, you just refuse to accept it. Many of us do not want the police MILITARIZED. Many of us do not want ANYBODY spraying 5.56mm rifle bullets in our neighborhood and the supposed "need" for cops to be carrying ARs is baloney because almost no criminals use ARs. This notion that police are "outgunned" is television created FICTION.

So basically what you're saying is - these guns are too dangerous to be on the street?

 

[takhtakaal]

Those of you who don't want the police to have patrol rifles really should watch the video on this thread:

http://shadowspear.com/vb/showthread.php?t=6771

 

[hankdatank1362]

Many of us do not want ANYBODY spraying 5.56mm rifle bullets in our neighborhood

So you don't want anyone - LEO or average law abiding citizen - having access to these arms?

 

[athensguy]

I guess my problem is that the police think we're all maggots, as rondog suggested. With more than half of the folks in jail being there for non-crimes (making something illegal doesn't make me consider it to be a crime automatically. I wouldn't feel guilty of a crime if I carried by Glock 19 in Cali., but I would be guilty of breaking the law.) and the US having the highest rate of incarceration along with the most complicated law structure and the most laws of any country, I feel like we could do with fewer police and less police equipment, rather than more.

The trafi-cops down the street from me wear fatigues and do nothing but issue traffic citations in their one red light speed trap.

 

[Sinixstar]

EXP - that last picture was taken looking into the WTC Path train station from Chruch Street (NYC). From the looks of the number of cops in the background - that's probably a mid-morning shift rotation. Probably around 10:00-10:30 am.

If you want to see something a bit "scarier" - you should go two-three blocks west, and a half dozen blocks south. On the corner of Wall/Broad. Nice big police barricade set up in front of the NYSE, makes your picture there kinda look wimpy in comparison.

actually, if you look at the satellite view :
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=...041,-74.010514&spn=0.000815,0.001743&t=k&z=20

You can see all the Police Emergency Response vehicles lined up facing west on Wall Street.

But ya know, I suppose - there's no real NEED for any kind of protection there. I mean, WTC is already gone - just a hole in the ground now. No reason why anybody might want to commit any terrorist acts or anything. Ya know, all that talk of attacks against the Holland Tunnel, and the NYC subway system - that's just talk. I mean, they haven't actually DONE anything yet - so - this is just police trying to bully people around obviously.

 

[Sinixstar]

I guess my problem is that the police think we're all maggots, as rondog suggested.

Is this something you're gathering from direct personal experience with police, or direct personal experience with people on the internet?