Police Now “Armed For War” Against Returning Veterans

[spongeworthy]

I don't read or follow Alex Jones myself, but I'm in Austin so I have friends who do. This popped up on my FB feed tonight and I found it to be an interesting perspective that I hadn't seen before regarding the domestic use of MRAPs.

http://www.infowars.com/police-now-arme ... -veterans/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Sgt. Dan Downing of the Morgan County Sheriff’s Department states, “When I first started we really didn’t have the violence that we see today,” adding, “The weaponry is totally different now that it was in the beginning of my career, plus, you have a lot of people who are coming out of the military that have the ability and knowledge to build IEDs and to defeat law enforcement techniques.”

I'm curious if this is a more prevalent thought than just of one police sergeant being spun up by Jones' crew. Although I wasn't alive to see the return of WWII or Vietnam veterans, I don't recall ever hearing of them being thought of as domestic threats, though we are now in drastically different times post-OKC and 9/11. Today's veterans seem to be doing more harm to themselves than anyone else given the reported rate of suicides.

[The Annoyed Man]

It's Alex Jones's "reporting". Take it with a fist sized rock of salt. He's a whackadoodle.

[baldeagle]

I don't read or follow Alex Jones myself, but I'm in Austin so I have friends who do. This popped up on my FB feed tonight and I found it to be an interesting perspective that I hadn't seen before regarding the domestic use of MRAPs.

http://www.infowars.com/police-now-arme ... -veterans/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Sgt. Dan Downing of the Morgan County Sheriff’s Department states, “When I first started we really didn’t have the violence that we see today,” adding, “The weaponry is totally different now that it was in the beginning of my career, plus, you have a lot of people who are coming out of the military that have the ability and knowledge to build IEDs and to defeat law enforcement techniques.”

I'm curious if this is a more prevalent thought than just of one police sergeant being spun up by Jones' crew. Although I wasn't alive to see the return of WWII or Vietnam veterans, I don't recall ever hearing of them being thought of as domestic threats, though we are now in drastically different times post-OKC and 9/11. Today's veterans seem to be doing more harm to themselves than anyone else given the reported rate of suicides.

When Vietnam veterans came back from the war the prevalent theme was that they were drugged out psychos who could go off on a rampage at any second. Later the theme changed to they were poor forlorn victims of a bad war, beset with PTSD and unable to cope with life.

None of it is true. As a group, Vietnam veterans are better educated, more successful, more wealthy and have fewer psychological problems that their peers who did not serve. Their suicide rate is no different than the non veteran population.

[talltex]

Sgt. Downing...SWAT team commander..." The weaponry is totally different now than it was at the beginning of my career". In WHAT way?? The guy looks to be in his mid 30's-40 yo... that means his career started sometime in last 15-20 years max...as far as I know, there are no "new" weapons available to the civilian population in the last 40 years other than the deadly "assault rifles" and they've been around since before he was born.

All the vets that came out of WWII and Vietnam also were capable of handling explosives and military weapons and yet no one considered them a threat to OUR country.

The most telling statement to me is later when he says " it's about making sure we go home safe at night, so no matter what the cost, it's worth it." That's the answer thrown out to cut off any questions about WHY domestic police departments need SWAT teams using military combat equipment and techniques...they must be kept safe from the civilians.

[GlockDude26]

I'd like to quote what alot of times is asked to us mere citizens.....if you're not doing anything wrong, then what are you afraid of?????

[ddstuder]

It's Alex Jones's "reporting". Take it with a fist sized rock of salt. He's a whackadoodle.

While I do agree with you about AJ, I do commend his coverage of the Bundy Ranch fiasco.
I believe if he had not uncovered the Harry Reid connection, there would still be a Waco sized standoff!

[baldeagle]

I wrote about Vietnam veterans this morning, because I know those statistics off the top of my head. I didn't write about younger veterans, because I wasn't as sure. Now I am. Suicide rates among younger vets are no different than the general population. http://archive.redstate.com/stories/war ... g_veterans" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

There are a number of issues with stories about vet suicides. First of all, there's an implied "understanding" that serving in combat drives one crazy. It just has to, doesn't it? I mean, how can anyone kill another person and still be normal? Yet, among Vietnam vets, the ones who served in combat are MORE stable, not less, than the ones who didn't. Liberals (and by that I mean, in this case, journalists) have a belief that serving in war does things to a person that makes them forever different, forever scarred. They are convinced that serving in war leads to mental problems, adjustment issues and a host of other issues that they like to bring up periodically. NONE of them are true, and this can be proven statistically. That doesn't matter. They still trot out these stories every time the DoD releases its statistics on military mortality (active and veteran).

I've been reading these breathless stories about poor veterans who are so beset with their awful memories that they simply can't go on with life since I first picked up a newspaper. They never change. And they're always grossly overblown, completely misleading and easily proven false. As with any population, all the usual human maladies afflict vets just as they do everyone else. But combat is not the cause. Human frailty is.

[Redneck_Buddha]

It's Alex Jones, so it couldn't possibly be true! Here's an idea: let's completely dismiss the words of someone we've been told is a kook. That'll give us a well rounded perspective! <\sarcasm>

[bauer]

I wrote about Vietnam veterans this morning, because I know those statistics off the top of my head. I didn't write about younger veterans, because I wasn't as sure. Now I am. Suicide rates among younger vets are no different than the general population. http://archive.redstate.com/stories/war ... g_veterans" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

There are a number of issues with stories about vet suicides. First of all, there's an implied "understanding" that serving in combat drives one crazy. It just has to, doesn't it? I mean, how can anyone kill another person and still be normal? Yet, among Vietnam vets, the ones who served in combat are MORE stable, not less, than the ones who didn't. Liberals (and by that I mean, in this case, journalists) have a belief that serving in war does things to a person that makes them forever different, forever scarred. They are convinced that serving in war leads to mental problems, adjustment issues and a host of other issues that they like to bring up periodically. NONE of them are true, and this can be proven statistically. That doesn't matter. They still trot out these stories every time the DoD releases its statistics on military mortality (active and veteran).

I've been reading these breathless stories about poor veterans who are so beset with their awful memories that they simply can't go on with life since I first picked up a newspaper. They never change. And they're always grossly overblown, completely misleading and easily proven false. As with any population, all the usual human maladies afflict vets just as they do everyone else. But combat is not the cause. Human frailty is.

While I agree with you just about all your points here, there are two, that I personally do take a little different view on.

1. Serving in a conflict zone DOES make you forever different, and I'm not talking about the guys/gals that never once left the wire in 12 months. Thats not to say its a bad thing, and in the overwhelming and vast majority of cases it isn't bad. It causes an individual, at least in my case, to take a very different view on life and society. That change is usually a good one. Now for the small percentage of those that it affects in a negative way you are correct that the media and journalists like to blow it way out of proportion, thats just their MO and always will be. I have issues with super large crowds, cars that are overloaded in the trunk (squatting), loud, unexpected noises, and moderate size fireballs produced from semis hitting a jersey barrier on I35 (I lost it on a family trip when this happened at 2am 2 lanes to my right and a few car lengths in front of us). Are these adjustment issues? Yea, I believe so but I deal with them rationally and calmly as most vets of a combat zone do. However, the same can't be said for everyone. My point is seeing combat does present people with these types of issues regardless of what official statistics say. Why? Those statistics are skewed because people like me would/do deny on record that those issues exist for fear of being labeled by a government agency/entity.

2. Some individuals that face combat ARE beset with awful memories that they are unable to handle. Everyone will react different when placed through the stresses that combat produces. The larger issue here is the unwillingness or incapability of those vets (or active) to attain help in dealing with those memories. Lets face it, the VA is joke and there is no way around that fact. Barry made it a point in 2008 to claim that vets and fixing the VA were at the top of his priority list, there has been absolutely no ground made on that promise and in fact it's easy to say the VA is worse now than it was pre Jan 09.

On a side note: Sgt. Downing is a complete genius. Its not like anyone with Internet access doesn't also have the ability to find the same knowledge of how to build IEDs and defeat LE techniques. The amount of critical thinking he possess is awe inspiring

[bauer]

It's Alex Jones, so it couldn't possibly be true! Here's an idea: let's completely dismiss the words of someone we've been told is a kook. That'll give us a well rounded perspective! <\sarcasm>

I didn't have to be told he is a kook. That's a conclusion I came to on my own years ago.

[baldeagle]

While I agree with you just about all your points here, there are two, that I personally do take a little different view on.

1. Serving in a conflict zone DOES make you forever different, and I'm not talking about the guys/gals that never once left the wire in 12 months. Thats not to say its a bad thing, and in the overwhelming and vast majority of cases it isn't bad. It causes an individual, at least in my case, to take a very different view on life and society. That change is usually a good one. Now for the small percentage of those that it affects in a negative way you are correct that the media and journalists like to blow it way out of proportion, thats just their MO and always will be. I have issues with super large crowds, cars that are overloaded in the trunk (squatting), loud, unexpected noises, and moderate size fireballs produced from semis hitting a jersey barrier on I35 (I lost it on a family trip when this happened at 2am 2 lanes to my right and a few car lengths in front of us). Are these adjustment issues? Yea, I believe so but I deal with them rationally and calmly as most vets of a combat zone do. However, the same can't be said for everyone. My point is seeing combat does present people with these types of issues regardless of what official statistics say. Why? Those statistics are skewed because people like me would/do deny on record that those issues exist for fear of being labeled by a government agency/entity.

2. Some individuals that face combat ARE beset with awful memories that they are unable to handle. Everyone will react different when placed through the stresses that combat produces. The larger issue here is the unwillingness or incapability of those vets (or active) to attain help in dealing with those memories. Lets face it, the VA is joke and there is no way around that fact. Barry made it a point in 2008 to claim that vets and fixing the VA were at the top of his priority list, there has been absolutely no ground made on that promise and in fact it's easy to say the VA is worse now than it was pre Jan 09.

On a side note: Sgt. Downing is a complete genius. Its not like anyone with Internet access doesn't also have the ability to find the same knowledge of how to build IEDs and defeat LE techniques. The amount of critical thinking he possess is awe inspiring

First of all, thank you for your service.

I'm aware of those things, but I was trying to keep the post overly long. I'm glad you brought them up. As to your point 1, those are survival instincts. They may lessen over time but will probably never go away completely. As to point 2, I seldom blame the vets for that. The system is stacked against them. I hate the VA. I've told my wife that if I am ever incapacitated and the VA is her only choice, let me die in peace at home. Until our country is willing to tackle PTSD correctly (not as a disease or disability but as a natural reaction to extreme trauma) and find treatment methodologies that help the vets overcome the impulses and deal with the images (not medicate them), I will not blame the vets for not seeking help. They may be scarred by combat, but they're not stupid. (And I certainly don't mean to imply that you blame the vets. Please don't take it that way.)

[bauer]

The biggest challenge in dealing with PTSD is as you said it's looked at as a disease or disability. The stigma that surrounds it is the #1 reason I feel vets are unwilling to seek help and that needs to be fixed. I agree with you, I'll never allow myself in a VA hospital.

Its like you said in your first post, these issues are extremely overblown by the media and that does nothing to encourage soldiers/sailors/marines/airmen to seek help when needed.

I have noticed a trend in some politics, like Dan Downing, where it is believed that because the current crop of vets served in Iraq/Afghanistan and came home with some issues then thats makes them a threat to society. Clearly, not the case but it's a reason being used to further their political agendas. The idea that they are a threat is absurd beyond all belief especially considering the statistics you found regarding the fact that people are safer in a room with a vet than with an average citizen.

[WildBill]

None of it is true. As a group, Vietnam veterans are better educated, more successful, more wealthy and have fewer psychological problems that their peers who did not serve. Their suicide rate is no different than the non veteran population.

I think a lot of these negative stereotypes began and have been perpetuated by movies such as Rambo, The Deer Hunter, Platoon, Blue Thunder, etc. Some of the more recent movies and TV shows have substituted the "troubled" Iraq or Afghanistan vet as the protagonist.

WWII vets have been called the greatest generation. Many of them volunteered to go to war. Many died and many were wounded. Most of those who came back wanted to get back and live a normal peaceful life. Many got educated through the GI bill and became the first member of their family to get a college education. There are many success stories for the "greatest generation." I believe it is the same for most Vietnam vets.

[The Annoyed Man]

It's Alex Jones, so it couldn't possibly be true! Here's an idea: let's completely dismiss the words of someone we've been told is a kook. That'll give us a well rounded perspective! <\sarcasm>

I didn't have to be told he is a kook. That's a conclusion I came to on my own years ago.

Exactly. If it walks like a duck, and talks like a duck........

Look, I agree that there are severe systemic issues in this government of ours, and those issues are going to take fairly radical solutions to fix........but they are only radical if you think that the Founders were "radical". But that said, there are some media outlets on the conservative/libertarian side of things (of which I am a part) which make the rest of us look bad just because those media outlets are just so bizarre. Alex Jones is squarely in the middle of that bizarreness.