Home Original Content Funny Pictures Funny GIFs YouTube Funny Text Funny Movies Channels Search

hide menu
#24 - tangentialrex (05/04/2013) [-]
The problem wasn't the occupation, it was the forces used for the occupation.

SWAT forces in full gear, with rifles, patrolling the streets in MRAPs; FBI Hostage Rescue Team wearing multicam and scanning the streets, ATF and FBI agents running around with rifles and riot gear, etc., etc.

These units are overly militarized.
A peacekeeper exists to do exactly that; i.e., keep the peace.
A soldier's main duty is to eliminate enemy forces.

When you begin to blur the line between the two, by giving peacekeepers automatic weapons and armored vehicles, you let them believe that they are there solely to kill. And regardless of crime, everybody in the U.S. is entitled to a fair trial.

TL;DR Police were fine, MRAPs and automatic weapons were a bit overboard.
#93 to #24 - elementofloyalty (05/05/2013) [-]
"Keeping the peace," is a 						********					 excuse for what I see as a terribly uninformed opinion when you consider the scale of unknowns in dealing with a situation that could have easily taken hundreds of lives. You can't keep peace you don't have. Sometimes you must use force to make peace before it can be kept. The "don't fire. We want to keep the peace, not make it," method only sporadically works in practice; as such remained evident during UN "peacekeeping" struggles in Rwanda.   
   
Which is it? Police were fine, automatic weapons were not? But the police had automatic weapons. Were the national guard without automatic weapons fine? On a similar note, "Mine Resistant Ambush Protected" vehicles in a proven bombing situation were a bad call? Should they have pulled up in old station wagons and tricycles? I mean, who needs a bomb resistant vehicle when patrolling for a bomb suspect that possibly has bombs on him in a civilian area with an unknown amount of accomplices oh may also have bombs on them.   
   
And lets not show too many numbers. Our citizens may think we are being too forceful and get scared of the police searching for the bombing suspect that already took 3 lives in an attempt to take many more.   
   
SWAT (and National Guard) are made to have full gear. You can't always get by with just the bare minimum and it'd be arrogant to think you could.   
FEBRUARY 28th, 1997: Two men rob Bank of America with automatic weapons and effective homemade bulletproof clothing. The severe lack of stopping power by local police during the post-robbery firefight helped the situation draw out long enough to cause not only the deaths of the robbers, but the injury of 15 people, 10 of which were cops. The whole situation only dissolved once SWAT teams arrived with heavy firepower that could stamp out the threat the robbers posed to the city's' innocent civilians.   
   
Such armor and weapons are brought as precaution because of large uncertainty held by not only police, but by the population. Hush.
"Keeping the peace," is a ******** excuse for what I see as a terribly uninformed opinion when you consider the scale of unknowns in dealing with a situation that could have easily taken hundreds of lives. You can't keep peace you don't have. Sometimes you must use force to make peace before it can be kept. The "don't fire. We want to keep the peace, not make it," method only sporadically works in practice; as such remained evident during UN "peacekeeping" struggles in Rwanda.

Which is it? Police were fine, automatic weapons were not? But the police had automatic weapons. Were the national guard without automatic weapons fine? On a similar note, "Mine Resistant Ambush Protected" vehicles in a proven bombing situation were a bad call? Should they have pulled up in old station wagons and tricycles? I mean, who needs a bomb resistant vehicle when patrolling for a bomb suspect that possibly has bombs on him in a civilian area with an unknown amount of accomplices oh may also have bombs on them.

And lets not show too many numbers. Our citizens may think we are being too forceful and get scared of the police searching for the bombing suspect that already took 3 lives in an attempt to take many more.

SWAT (and National Guard) are made to have full gear. You can't always get by with just the bare minimum and it'd be arrogant to think you could.
FEBRUARY 28th, 1997: Two men rob Bank of America with automatic weapons and effective homemade bulletproof clothing. The severe lack of stopping power by local police during the post-robbery firefight helped the situation draw out long enough to cause not only the deaths of the robbers, but the injury of 15 people, 10 of which were cops. The whole situation only dissolved once SWAT teams arrived with heavy firepower that could stamp out the threat the robbers posed to the city's' innocent civilians.

Such armor and weapons are brought as precaution because of large uncertainty held by not only police, but by the population. Hush.
User avatar #45 to #24 - blokrokker (05/05/2013) [-]
American doctrine is, has always been, and probably will always be, overwhelming response to violent actions.
User avatar #100 to #45 - elementofloyalty (05/05/2013) [-]
It's not just American doctrine regardless of this occasion being of American trouble.. Most countries capable of reacting in such a manner usually do react so. That's probably because underwhelming force is a fool's gambit, and even educational guesses at the 'proper' amount is no better.

You can never be too sure.
#32 to #24 - sandle (05/05/2013) [-]
you're right considering they could have had more powerful bombs at their disposal and could have injured or killed hundreds of other people, including children... I'd definitely rather have this guy on the case...
User avatar #169 to #32 - konradkurze ONLINE (05/05/2013) [-]
its a simple fact, usa has lowered the standards and budget of police forces to make them useless and direct more money towards the military
User avatar #33 to #32 - tangentialrex (05/05/2013) [-]
You're just proving my point.

Why give this asshole a select-fire M16 and let him loose in the streets? Leave that to somebody with actual training.
User avatar #35 to #33 - sandle (05/05/2013) [-]
you just tried to unsay what you said before... don't put out swat teams with automatic weapons use cops. now you're saying don't use cops with automatic weapons. you're going in circles here.
User avatar #37 to #35 - tangentialrex (05/05/2013) [-]
Now you're putting words in my mouth.

I said that an untrained unit, armed with gear far beyond their need or ability to use, are a danger to the U.S. population. SWAT and PD do not train to the standards as some divisions in the U.S. government do, and as such do not need this amount of armament. They are likewise not held to marksmanship requirements that other organizations are.

Please attempt to read my posts before you post next time.
Thank you.
User avatar #178 to #37 - sandle (05/05/2013) [-]
SWAT: Special Weapons And Tactics. They are trained exceptionally well not only in combat but hostage situations and negotiations. sounds like exactly what the situation called for to me.
User avatar #58 to #37 - Offspringofwolves (05/05/2013) [-]
theyre actually trained to use those weapons otherwise they wouldnt use them
User avatar #30 to #24 - largeheadphones (05/05/2013) [-]
They were acting like they had a nuke hidden away in the city somewhere, not just two homemade bombs.
#98 to #30 - elementofloyalty (05/05/2013) [-]
It wasn't "just two".
User avatar #177 to #98 - largeheadphones (05/05/2013) [-]
Only two that went off, but yea, more were supposed to go off.
#29 to #24 - dontknowme (05/05/2013) [-]
which would you prefer, an over prepared police officer who could potentially stop someone preparing another person or an under prepared officer who kind of just stands there and doesn't realize what's going on? and option c, let the people keep blowing **** up and killing random people and the police and law enforcement do nothing?
User avatar #31 to #29 - tangentialrex (05/05/2013) [-]
I'd prefer a police force that was trained to deal with these situations over any idiot with a **** ton of gear. Believe me, gear doesn't mean **** without proper training.

Take the FBI's Hostage Rescue Team, in the picture I posted above. They train with Delta Force, DEVGRU, SAS, SBS, GIGN, and other elite anti-terror units around the world.

They were fully justified in being on the streets. They did not use MRAPs (as far as I saw), and generally acted more professionally than the SWAT teams in the same areas.

Meanwhile, SWAT, with their minimal training and tacticool gear, and cowering in their boots (and armored vehicles) and aiming their rifles at anything that moves.
 Friends (0)