Steven_1974
Member
I imagine that would be cutting costs associated with the militarization of the police. So many departments all across the country used their bloated budgets to buy military equipment. None of which they need to police a city.
-
Hello, please take a minute to check out our awesome content, contributed by the wonderful members of our community. We hope you'll add your own thoughts and opinions by making a free account!
Political Thread
- Thread starter Bama Ravens
- Start date
- Status
I imagine that would be cutting costs associated with the militarization of the police. So many departments all across the country used their bloated budgets to buy military equipment. None of which they need to police a city.
Rosie
Member
Conservative, not unbiased.
Sandbar
Member
None of which they need? Disagree 100% about that. I see nothing wrong with them acquiring semi-automatic rifles, NVG's, flash bang grenades , breaching equipment and sniper rifles used by SWAT and gang units. I work with LEO's to utilize these tools and to implement useful military tactics that save lives. Do they need armored vehicles? They can be useful to certain departments in certain situations but as a whole...No
I’m not worried because it won’t happen. JFC. Russian and Chinese troops? You seriously need counseling and stronger meds.
No. You will lose brain cells. It’s fifteen minutes you can’t get back. Your time is better spent scraping the skin off your taint with a cheese grater.
I do have to agree. It is going to be a $hitshow for sure. Both of them. The first debate could last a week and we wouldn’t get a sane answer out of either of them.
You get my first downvote for that absolutely horrible yet accurate to the situation image that is now in my head.
More training in de-escalating is needed. More focus on community policing. Taking that money away and not putting it to better use is insane. More training on less lethal use of force would be great.
I do what I can. My feelings are hurt for the downvote. LOL
Jessy89
Member
I agree but what do police supposed to do. When a criminal opens fire on them? Also resource officers should not be removed from schools. They protect our children.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sandbar
Member
Yes.....They already receive this training but not enough of it. I work more with SWAT and gang units on entry, room clearing, shooting situations but what little de-escalating and use of force training they get (while excellent) just isn't enough. They should be hammering situational training non stop. I know policing isn't war but look at the amount of training I had before ever being deployed (close to 3 years) and the amount of training we did between deployments. You have to do this to increase effectiveness and limit unnecessary casulaties. Defunding sure as hell isn't going to accomplish this
Sandbar
Member
When a criminal opens fire on them is the worse case scenario. Its the situations like what happened in Atlanta that need to be rectified. They did a great job at de-escalation but the gentlemen should have never gotten that tazer. With that being said, don't run from the police
Jessy89
Member
I don’t think that cop should have been fired. May suspended with pay and put back in police academy. I certainly believe it was a bad mistake. Definitely not a George Floyd situation though
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That's good times
Sandbar
Member
It was a rush to judgement yes and this is going to cause major problems down the road regarding LEO's being able to do this job safely for all involved. The atlanta cop will walk away but his life is obviously changed forever
So this is the second time you have held up Nathan Jessup as a figure to be emulated and admired as an officer. I find that hard to believe coming from someone of your standing. Nathan Jessup, the commanding officer in the movie "A Few Good Men" ordered two Marines to break the law and was going to allow them to be court marshaled for the crime he ordered them to commit had the defense atty not caught him in the lie. If that is the kind leadership you respect then a lot of your posts make sense now.
Sandbar
Member
You are thinking too much my man......
I think the compare/contrast of Colonel Jessup is a good one. He is what you want in a leader. A man who is respected by his men. The problem runs up the chain of command. NCO tells the LPO, LPO tells section chief, section chief tells LT, LT tell XO, XO tells CO. CO, so there is no miscommunication, goes to the LT and explains what exactly he wants done. He knows he is a hard ass, but he is a fair hard ass. Everyone is equally worthless (LOL). There is zero special treatment. He doesn’t mince words. He is abrupt and to the point. That, in my eyes, is what made a couple of my CO’s stand out. A few others? Not so much. Those were the “ladder climbers”. They didn’t care about the men, they just wanted good FITREP’s in their files and they wouldn’t let anyone screw it up for them. They were the worst. I’m a liberal, but I’d respect the hell out of a leader like Colonel Jessup.
Shaggy
Member
Sandbar
Member
Yes!.....You want men looking out for you that are willing to be called grotesque while taking the heat so others can sleep comfortable at night under that blanket. Being a great leader doesn't always mean being an asshole (Jocko Willink was certainly NOT a Jessup) but you have to be willing to do things other see as unsavory to be effective. One day people (some people) will see this about Trump
- Status