Trump expected to lift ban on military gear to local police forces

a reply to: intrptr


Thank-you for contributing an informed, intelligent post to this thread!

Right leaning me will be writing the white house about this nonsense.

How about we just hold onto it for a while until it is needed in war? Instead of footing a bill again because local police might use it once every decade...

a reply to: seasonal

Well this is another major proof Trump is nothing more than a stooge for TPTB.

a reply to: Arnie123


Soooo.. you do see an issue? Kind of a contradictory post

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: Arnie123

Funny how the story says police dept are cash strapped and the Oshkosh contract for the Humvee replacement is $30,000,000,000 -plus.

I imagine those Humvees get pretty bad gas mileage so how are cash strapped police departments going to pay for all that gas?

as another poster pointed out, if the police have them they will have to use them for something to justify the expense of having them.
if I ever see a police Humvee pulling someone over for speeding, then I`ll know that the tax payers are getting screwed.

originally posted by: norhoc
a reply to: seasonal


Sorry, I agree with Obama on this one. We don't need police armed and geared up like the military

The problem was that the police are being outgunned by drug gangs.

www.dailymail.co.uk... iffs-warn.html

a reply to: Tardacus

The police have no use for this equipment. Training is expensive-maintenance is expensive.

The equipment is designed for one purpose to make killing (war) more efficient-should not be used on civilians.

a reply to: stormcell

The problem was that the police are being outgunned by drug gangs.

www.dailymail.co.uk... iffs-warn.html

National Guard.

What's the big deal? Government only looks out for the well-being of it's citizens, they certainly don't mean us any harm. We can trust them with our education and our health-care, government is a trustworthy institution. I'm sure these weapons and vehicles will be used to protect and serve The People.

If they paint them up in nice colors and promise to use them for good, can they keep them?

I don't think they are getting any tanks or Apache's are they? AC-130 would be a fun thing, wouldn't it?

I do believe having armored vehicles for them is a good thing. Ask that MN gal that was shot through the squad car door.
Although I don't think there is enough armored hummers to go around.

They already have some scary looking vehicles as it is. Weapons? SWAT has a good deal of the same ones.

Body armor? Good.

What equipment are people objecting to?

A hammer can build a house or kill someone. It's just a tool.

If you give Police military weapons you have to give them military ROE, as well.

When I was in the military we weren't even allowed to load our weapons without an order and a citizen

casualty didn't get you a slap on the wrist and a paid vacation.

Can the highway patrol get some apache's with sidewinders too?

Jfc, yeah militarize the police force, maybe they could jdam the weed smokers houses.


Hopefully this is fake news, or Trumps fake hope.

Aahhhhhhh!
Doom porn!

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: Tardacus

The police have no use for this equipment. Training is expensive-maintenance is expensive.

The equipment is designed for one purpose to make killing (war) more efficient-should not be used on civilians.

exactly, these things can`t be used by the police on a daily basis or probably even a yearly basis,if it breaks down they can`t go to autozone and get a new alternator for it for $40. The maintenance and operating costs of these things make them completely impractical for police departments. maybe they could park them in the county storage lots and the police could use them for bugout shelters when the SHTF?

a reply to: burgerbuddy

The tax payers can`t afford to have these things on the local police payroll. These things are fine for the federal government because the federal government can borrow trillions of dollars by snapping their fingers, local governments can`t do that,and taxpayers can`t afford to have their local taxes increased high enough to maintain these things.

a reply to: seasonal

Except your missing the fact it will now be used against American citizens......


Didn't the conspiracy crowd used to be united against things like marshal law and arming law enforcement with military weapons???

This is just such a blantantly bad idea.. I don't see how anyone could applaud it..

a reply to: Tardacus

More than that they will now be used AGAINST US citizens..

Anyone afraid of black helicopters should be flipping their $H!T...

At this point I think all that matters to Trump is undoing something Obama has done.

I don't think it really matters what it is, just the Obama part.

originally posted by: underwerks
At this point I think all that matters to Trump is undoing something Obama has done.

I don't think it really matters what it is, just the Obama part.

Was that not the implication of "Make America Great Again"? Undoing everything the "dirty liberals" did?

I'm fine with the vehicles, not the rest.

Those vehicles are awesome for emergencies like flooding or riot control. Being armored doesn't make them dangerous.

Perhaps they should give them to fire departments or rescue units first though. Also not sure what the cost of maintenance on one of those things is like. If some department that would never need one snaps one up and ends up paying out the ass just to have one, yeah stupid idea.