TexasCHLforum.com

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/08 ... -says.html

The Trump administration is preparing to lift an Obama-era policy that restricted surplus military equipment from being used by local law enforcement agencies.

The government program, which allowed local police to use military equipment such as armored vehicles, firearms, ammunition and grenade launchers, had been curtailed when President Obama signed an executive order in 2015 banning it.

I used to see no problem with cops obtaining equipment designed for use in war. I'm a little older and (hopefully) a little wiser, now I DO see a problem with it - at least some of it.

Don't get me wrong; I support the police; I support law & order; the police do need to be able to do their jobs. But (in my opinion) cops don't need grenade launchers and tanks. (See the book: "Rise of the Warrior Cop: The Militarization of America's Police Forces")

I'm surprised that I find myself actually agreeing with the Obama administration in this case. But I think we need to take a very hard look at this policy of giving real "weapons of war" to police departments for use against American citizens.

What do you think?

As distasteful as I find it, I do agree with Former President Obama. The police should not be armed with the tools of war.

DevilDawg wrote:As distasteful as I find it, I do agree with Former President Obama. The police should not be armed with the tools of war.

Agreed with both parts of your statement.

I make an exception in dealing with terrorists nad organized protester groups like AntiFa rioting, looting, setting houses on fire, ...
In those cases outgunned and outmanned police forces should be allowed to take effective measures to protect law abiding citizens.

As an example I name Europe using tanks with water cannons and gas mixed in to control situations like mentioned above.

Sorry, I disagree. When 100 cops are mobbed by 500 antifa thugs carrying clubs and machetes, we are at war. Cops might not need grenade launchers, but they need body armor, shields, SMGs with rubber bullets, shotguns with rubber slugs, etc. Police have held back ever since Ferguson, and that needs to stop. We are getting close to armed revolution.

It is also better to use armored vehicles vs. horses in case of rioters and looters vs. police forces.
Too many horses were hurt in the past!

Military on one end, police on other. Military capabilities to LE, bad move. This is not good.

As usual I see both sides. I feel that certain equipment, that has been properly demilitarized in many cases, is acceptable. My rule of thumb is that the vast majority of (read all) military gear should not be placed in law enforcement hands unless it is offered for sale to the public in the exact same configuration.

They use 40mm tear gas and bean bag rounds so I have no problem with the launchers. Tanks, no. MRAPs like the Cougar not so much problem with.

Belt fed machine guns, HE grenade rounds, incendiary and tracer rounds, main battle tanks, and attack helicopters. All should be standard police equipment in this post 9/11 era.

It's the masses (us) that don't need weapons of war like Hi-Cap magazines and assault weapons like the Ruger Mini-14.

G.A. Heath wrote:As usual I see both sides. I feel that certain equipment, that has been properly demilitarized in many cases, is acceptable. My rule of thumb is that the vast majority of (read all) military gear should not be placed in law enforcement hands unless it is offered for sale to the public in the exact same configuration.

and with no paperwork beyond what it currently takes for conventional firearms, i.e., nics/ltc/4473. no class iii tax stamps, etc.
( I always wanted a 6x6 with twin .50 mounts front and rear)

Some years ago the local sheriffs office received this...


I think it has been very helpful for the department and I have no objection to this kind of equipment. May save some LEO lives.

I think we need to remember before the shooting spree from the clock tower at the University of Texas,there was no such thing as SWAT Teams.I belive that if military equipment protects the lives of the police and civilians the decision should be up to the individual departments.

skeathley wrote:Sorry, I disagree. When 100 cops are mobbed by 500 antifa thugs carrying clubs and machetes, we are at war. Cops might not need grenade launchers, but they need body armor, shields, SMGs with rubber bullets, shotguns with rubber slugs, etc. Police have held back ever since Ferguson, and that needs to stop. We are getting close to armed revolution.

Welcome home, brother.

In the event of large scale civil disturbance, the Governor can call out the National Guard. Until then, the police and fire fighters are on their own. I don't expect them to be as well armed as my artillery battery, but I do expect them to be better armed than I, as a civilian, am. These are the folks who run to the sound of the guns. I will help as I can, but the best I can do have their backs. They deserve and need the tools to do the job well. They need and deserve the training to survive in the toxic environment in which they work daily. Much of the tools and training will resemble military tools and training. That is the nature of the beast.

oljames3 wrote:

skeathley wrote:Sorry, I disagree. When 100 cops are mobbed by 500 antifa thugs carrying clubs and machetes, we are at war. Cops might not need grenade launchers, but they need body armor, shields, SMGs with rubber bullets, shotguns with rubber slugs, etc. Police have held back ever since Ferguson, and that needs to stop. We are getting close to armed revolution.

Welcome home, brother.

In the event of large scale civil disturbance, the Governor can call out the National Guard. Until then, the police and fire fighters are on their own. I don't expect them to be as well armed as my artillery battery, but I do expect them to be better armed than I, as a civilian, am. These are the folks who run to the sound of the guns. I will help as I can, but the best I can do have their backs. They deserve and need the tools to do the job well. They need and deserve the training to survive in the toxic environment in which they work daily. Much of the tools and training will resemble military tools and training. That is the nature of the beast.

I don't expect my small town PD, to bankrupt the city coffers to get armored personnel carriers, or anti aircraft batteries, but in large cities, like Houston, Dallas, etc, where there is a greater chance of large scale, civil unrest, rioting etc., I can see the need for heavier armaments, than just patrol cars, and 12 gauge shotguns. It took a robot controlled explosive to take out the shooter in Dallas, last year, so if something like that can save lives, then I'm all for it. Despite law enforcement, having heavier equipment, there have been very few instances, where I felt the police over reacted, to any situation, by bringing more than what was necessary, to deal with any issue. JMHO

For those against this program, what type of equipment are you against LE having? My local departments just got armored personnel carriers and level IV body armor. I've yet to see any local departments getting any "offensive" type weapons and the ones that did they use them only as non-lethal. I do understand your point if they were getting attack helicopters or twin .50cals mounted on their MRAPS but not armored transport vehicles or vests.

I believe this program should be extended to provide body armor to all first responders. I know the medics in Dallas would have appreciated vests during the shooting last year.