If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(National Review)   What do Dept. of Agriculture, the Railroad Retirement Board, the TVA, the Office of Personnel Management, the Consumer Product Safety Commission, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service all have in common? Hang on, someone's at the door   (nationalreview.com) divider line 311
    More: Scary, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Human Resource Managements, raw milk, TVA, Federal Bureau of Prisons, Radley Balko, law enforcement agencies, Cliven Bundy  
•       •       •

3717 clicks; posted to Politics » on 21 Apr 2014 at 11:05 AM (30 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



311 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2014-04-21 08:37:35 AM  
With criminals like Bundy running loose, I can see the reason pretty easily.
 
2014-04-21 08:54:19 AM  

vpb: With criminals like Bundy running loose, I can see the reason pretty easily.


i1123.photobucket.com
Show us where the bad man touched you.
 
2014-04-21 09:24:49 AM  
I was assured by Those That Know that we already have enough laws and we just need to start enforcing them. How do those agencies expect to do so?
 
2014-04-21 09:31:17 AM  

enry: I was assured by Those That Know that we already have enough laws and we just need to start enforcing them. How do those agencies expect to do so?


How was it done prior to the advent of a militarized branch of the goddamn Department of Education?
 
2014-04-21 09:37:47 AM  
That's not SWAT at the door.  They don't knock first, remember?  They just come in and shoot your dogs and your house up. (Well, maybe it's the right house.)
 
2014-04-21 09:41:01 AM  
You finally got your green on this, D_I_A.
 
2014-04-21 09:45:50 AM  
We're all *very concerned* about the militarization of the government, now that white people are being targeted.
 
2014-04-21 09:46:24 AM  
And the answer is: As more and more "Patriots" arm themselves to the teeth and continue to view any gubmint official as "corrupt" and any law they are charged with enforcing as "Unconstitutional", we will have to have a militarized response plan for each of those departments.

Personally, I think that we could get away with having a separate "SWAT" department that each of those other departments call upon when they think it will be needed.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2014-04-21 09:58:07 AM  

Dancin_In_Anson: vpb: With criminals like Bundy running loose, I can see the reason pretty easily.

[i1123.photobucket.com image 150x329]
Show us where the bad man touched you.


I guess stealing at gunpoint and threatening to kill people is cool with you eh?
 
2014-04-21 09:58:48 AM  
The Department of Education?  What kind of nation has a SWAT team in their Department of Education?

This one, apparently.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2014-04-21 09:59:02 AM  

Dancin_In_Anson: enry: I was assured by Those That Know that we already have enough laws and we just need to start enforcing them. How do those agencies expect to do so?

How was it done prior to the advent of a militarized branch of the goddamn Department of Education?


Since when have SWAT teams been "militarized"?
 
2014-04-21 10:02:33 AM  

Ennuipoet: The Department of Education?  What kind of nation has a SWAT team in their Department of Education?

This one, apparently.


No. It doesn't.
 
2014-04-21 10:07:05 AM  

vpb: Since when have SWAT teams been "militarized"?


To "Libs" every pistol is a Glock, every semi-auto rifle an AK-47. To "Cons" every warrant is executed by SWAT and every "SWAT" member not in a shirt and tie carrying a .38 revolver is "Militarized".
 
2014-04-21 10:11:24 AM  

vpb: Since when have SWAT teams been "militarized"?


Since recently I suppose.
 
2014-04-21 10:12:36 AM  

Dancin_In_Anson: How was it done prior to the advent of a militarized branch of the goddamn Department of Education?


First of all, John Hunt has been raked over the coals in the Politics tab so often for contradicting himself from column to column that nothing he says can be considered credible without explicit citations. This is a guy who has made a career of insulting everyone he disagrees with, and then pens a column called "Why are Liberals so Rude to the Right?" This book he's hyping, Rise of the Warrior Cop, does look interesting, but mentions nothing about SWAT teams associated with the Dept. of Education except for a single unsupported reference on page 308 (I looked). In fact, virtually all the DOE mentions in the book are about taking power away from the DOE and giving it to the DEA. Having said this, it does look like an interesting read about the rise of creeping military statism in general, and Hunt's general column makes some salient points about the 4th Amendment and the use of military-like power in domestic sphere in the last few paragraphs. Like many Ameircans, I find it very frustrating to see the FDA defanged when it comes to regulating multinational corporations's manipulation of the American food supply while using military-style power to raid small independent businesses with no lobbyist power. Of course Fund has taken the fringest unsupported point of the book and made it his centerpiece.
 
2014-04-21 10:15:22 AM  

Gecko Gingrich: No. It doesn't.


But the DOE does say in the referenced statement it has a law enforcement arm. That's different from a SWAT team to be sure.
 
2014-04-21 10:16:28 AM  

Gecko Gingrich: Ennuipoet: The Department of Education?  What kind of nation has a SWAT team in their Department of Education?

This one, apparently.

No. It doesn't.


That makes me feel slightly better.
 
2014-04-21 10:17:00 AM  

Somacandra: But the DOE does say in the referenced statement it has a law enforcement arm. That's different from a SWAT team to be sure.


Yes?
 
2014-04-21 10:17:10 AM  

Somacandra: First of all, John Hunt has been raked over the coals in the Politics tab so often for contradicting himself from column to column


So that means none of the raids he referenced happened. Thanks for clearing that up.
 
2014-04-21 10:23:04 AM  

Dancin_In_Anson: So that means none of the raids he referenced happened. Thanks for clearing that up.


It means that they probably didn't happen exactly as stated or implied.

I'm curious, are there any instances where a SWAT raid is warranted in your opinion?
 
2014-04-21 10:24:54 AM  
Maybe the department of education wouldnt need a swat team if kids stopped shooting up schools?

The only thing that can stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. But not too many guns or vests or helmets or walkie talkies.
 
2014-04-21 10:25:56 AM  

vpb: I guess stealing at gunpoint and threatening to kill people is cool with you eh?


well, when you repeatedly and willfully break federal law, you might just earn the attention of the authorities.
 
2014-04-21 10:27:15 AM  

Gecko Gingrich: I'm curious, are there any instances where a SWAT raid is warranted in your opinion?


Sure.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2014-04-21 10:29:02 AM  

Dancin_In_Anson: vpb: Since when have SWAT teams been "militarized"?

Since recently I suppose.


No, police forces have had armored vehicles for decades.  They are just getting the military ones for free instead of buying them.

Using military surplus doesn't mean you are militarized unless you think every boy scout with a folding shovel from the Army/Navy surplus store is militarized.
 
2014-04-21 10:31:56 AM  

Dancin_In_Anson: Sure.


Could you expound on that?
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2014-04-21 10:41:39 AM  
Armored SWAT vehicles have been around for a while.  Some wealthy people even have armored vehicles.  There are people who even collect tanks and other armored vehicles.  They are perfectly legal to own, as long as any weapons are de-milled.
 
2014-04-21 10:45:44 AM  

vpb: Using military surplus doesn't mean you are militarized unless you think every boy scout with a folding shovel from the Army/Navy surplus store is militarized.


TIL

This:

img.alibaba.com

Is no different than this:

i1123.photobucket.com


Gecko Gingrich: Could you expound on that?


No problem. A SWAT response is appropriate when dealing with people like this. Maybe notsomuch when dealing with people like this.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2014-04-21 10:55:18 AM  

Dancin_In_Anson: vpb: Using military surplus doesn't mean you are militarized unless you think every boy scout with a folding shovel from the Army/Navy surplus store is militarized.

This:

Is no different than this:



Yes.  Neither one is a weapon or inherently military.  Obviously the machineguns dome come with the mil-surplus trucks that the police get.

There are even armored car services run by private companies like Guarda.  Maybe they will buy some too.\

Oh Noes! Banks are becoming militarized!

upload.wikimedia.org
 
2014-04-21 11:00:02 AM  
www.schlockmania.com
 
2014-04-21 11:05:29 AM  
Dancin_In_Anson:  So that means none of the raids he referenced happened. Thanks for clearing that up.

i0.kym-cdn.com
 
2014-04-21 11:07:00 AM  

Dancin_In_Anson: SWAT response is appropriate when dealing with people like this.


OK, so you agree that there is a level at which SWAT is needed. Is dealing with an SLA-type organization the floor, or are there "lesser" scenarios which would warrant it?

Dancin_In_Anson: Maybe notsomuch when dealing with people like this.


Yeah, the cops should just roll up to a house where someone with "a long criminal record" including "two assault convictions...and a domestic assault conviction" and "very few violent arrests", not to mention the dude who needs a sidearm to take a dump, reside and just politely knock on the door and ask them to come out with their hands up. Having a camera in every frickin' room also says something about what may be going on in the house, too. I don't begrudge the cops taking the cameras out. Assuming that their suspicions were warranted, I wouldn't want someone to know where me and my team were either.

You're going to need to some up with something a bit better as evidecne.
 
2014-04-21 11:07:50 AM  

vpb: There are even armored car services run by private companies like Guarda


Give me a holler when Guarda starts kicking in doors and holding people at gunpoint mmkay?
 
2014-04-21 11:08:01 AM  

Gecko Gingrich: evidecne


evidence
 
2014-04-21 11:08:50 AM  
Its simple.  Any countries Army is very hard to get to shoot their own people.  For that you need a militarized police force.  They are taking every logical option to get a large enough federal police force.  For our safety.
 
2014-04-21 11:10:05 AM  
All it took was some teabagger farmer to get democrats and "liberals" to love the militarization of the police. That was easy.
 
2014-04-21 11:10:32 AM  
It seems reasonable to be armed when going to confiscate a scofflaw's livelihood.  Maybe the next time a guy is considering ignoring the law he'll think twice
 
2014-04-21 11:12:12 AM  

Gecko Gingrich: Somacandra: But the DOE does say in the referenced statement it has a law enforcement arm. That's different from a SWAT team to be sure.

Yes?


I think there is legitimate concern over DOE/OIG has federally empowered search warrant and raid powers. Not Infowars-level, but some concern.
 
2014-04-21 11:13:06 AM  

Dancin_In_Anson: enry: I was assured by Those That Know that we already have enough laws and we just need to start enforcing them. How do those agencies expect to do so?

How was it done prior to the advent of a militarized branch of the goddamn Department of Education?


The only way for a department to get funded is to tie it to the military.
 
2014-04-21 11:13:08 AM  

Gecko Gingrich: "two assault convictions


From 14 years ago

Gecko Gingrich: and a domestic assault conviction"


From 2002

Gecko Gingrich: "very few violent arrests"


None of which were the subject of the warrant.

Gecko Gingrich: Is dealing with an SLA-type organization the floor, or are there "lesser" scenarios which would warrant it?


I'd say when chances of an armed confrontation are likely. Credit card theft ranks pretty low on the scale. Your mileage may differ. Guess you think they should have shot the family dog for good measure as well.
 
2014-04-21 11:14:49 AM  

vpb: Oh Noes! Banks are becoming militarized!


Do they have a dozen officers in the back in full body armor armed to the teeth with automatic weapons? Are they kicking in doors in the middle of the night, often the wrong house, and shooting anything that moves? No? Then quit trying to deflect from the fact that at least parts of law enforcement are, in fact, militarized.
 
2014-04-21 11:15:15 AM  
Conservatives become very concerned about paramilitaries when their guy isn't the President.

This feels like the 90s again.  Even the black helicopters are back.
 
2014-04-21 11:15:21 AM  

Somacandra: I think there is legitimate concern over DOE/OIG has federally empowered search warrant and raid powers. Not Infowars-level, but some concern.


I agree with that, all of that, but that's hardly germane.
 
2014-04-21 11:15:58 AM  

Gecko Gingrich: Personally, I think that we could get away with having a separate "SWAT" department that each of those other departments call upon when they think it will be needed.


You mean only have ONE budget? Nonsense! Every department needs to have a bigger Budge--- i mean SWAT team.

I mean, if the boys down in at the EPA cant place yearly orders for their own vests and AR15s, thats just not fair!
 
2014-04-21 11:17:09 AM  
So, NRO wants to go take their guns away?
 
2014-04-21 11:17:47 AM  

Dancin_In_Anson: vpb: With criminals like Bundy running loose, I can see the reason pretty easily.

[i1123.photobucket.com image 150x329]
Show us where the bad man touched you.


Always wondered what Homestar looked like naked.

nttiatwwt
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2014-04-21 11:18:06 AM  

Dancin_In_Anson: vpb: There are even armored car services run by private companies like Guarda

Give me a holler when Guarda starts kicking in doors and holding people at gunpoint mmkay?


So isn't OK as long as it's not legitimate police officers?  That makes total sense.
 
2014-04-21 11:18:13 AM  

Gecko Gingrich: And the answer is: As more and more "Patriots" arm themselves to the teeth and continue to view any gubmint official as "corrupt" and any law they are charged with enforcing as "Unconstitutional", we will have to have a militarized response plan for each of those departments.

Personally, I think that we could get away with having a separate "SWAT" department that each of those other departments call upon when they think it will be needed.


Actually, there's a sure fire way to deter these defenders of freedom:  Elect a Republican President.

/Frankly, I'd rather have the SWAT team.
 
2014-04-21 11:18:58 AM  
Ennuipoet:
The Department of Education? What kind of nation has a SWAT team in their Department of Education?
This one, apparently.


Gecko Gingrich:
No. It doesn't.

It doesn't have a SWAT team, because they don't call it that.

Neither do a lot of the other Federal and local agencies that have teams that train like, look like, and act like Special Weapons and Tactics teams.

The reason so many agencies have these nowadays is that it's harder to convince local or "real" Federal law enforcement to conduct SWAT-style raids at 2 AM on people's homes than it is to just bring in a dozen of their own to roust someone during the middle of the night.
 
2014-04-21 11:19:04 AM  
I can see the need for US FIsh and WIldlife to need to have a SWAT team. I wouldn't want to be a ranger patrolling the remote forest, finding a marijuana grow operation, and having to do something about it all by my lonesome.
 
2014-04-21 11:19:35 AM  
 
Displayed 50 of 311 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report