|
Post by Gingerbread Man on Nov 13, 2013 11:48:45 GMT
www.wvoc.com/articles/wvoc-news-146213/columbia-pd-adds-military-armored-vehicle-11821914/"COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP/WVOC) - Columbia police now have a bullet-proof armored vehicle once owned by the military. Police Chief Ruben Santiago says the $658,000 vehicle was donated through the Defense Department's excess property program. The vehicle seats nine, including one officer in the turret. Its official name is a "Mine-Resistant Ambush Protected" vehicle. Santiago says it can be used in hostage situations where someone is barricaded with weapons. The vehicle made its debut Monday in Columbia's Veterans Day parade." I guess they had to one up the Richland County Sheriff dept's M113 with M2 machinegun. I'm still trying to figure out why a police dept needs a M2. Things to ponder.
|
|
|
Post by NamelessStain on Nov 13, 2013 12:22:19 GMT
Apparently Mines are a big issue in Columbia.
|
|
|
Post by omegaman on Nov 13, 2013 12:57:26 GMT
The para-militarization of our nation's police forces is a disgusting and perverse abuse of power. Furthermore, there has been alot of controversy over armored vehicles showing up in police departments all over the country. From a freedom point of view, the Department of Homeland Security poses the biggest threat, essentially adorning themselves to be the jackbooted enforcers for an overzealous government currently in the process of eroding our rights. From a military point of view, all of these armored vehicles popping up around the country (not to mention the police armories full of .mil grade weaponry due to DHS funding via post 9-11 anti-terrorism paranoia)is a classic example of pre-positioning supplies and logistics. Everything is conveniently in place to control and disperse non-compliant citizens. And what police chief would say "no" to this awesome stuff? I mean, it is awesome stuff. It's amazing what we let officials get away with under the guise of "public safety". Multicam-clad police officers toting assault rifles and cruising around in armored vehicles does not make me feel safer. This all draws one more big line between Us and those we've entrusted with power and authority to protect and serve us--not rule and intimidate us. [breath/end rant]
|
|
|
Post by Ten Eight on Nov 13, 2013 21:40:00 GMT
Thanks for typing my thoughts, Omega Man.
If they're allowed to have MRAPs, we should be allowed to have M2 SLAMs.
|
|
|
Post by omegaman on Nov 14, 2013 0:05:38 GMT
Thanks for typing my thoughts, Omega Man. If they're allowed to have MRAPs, we should be allowed to have M2 SLAMs.
Here here, my man. And LAWS
|
|
|
Post by Browning35 on Nov 14, 2013 0:48:06 GMT
In 2002 our police dept received an armored car. It was a commercial type that armed guards from companies like Brinks that pick up cash and receipts in. The bank received some type of tax write-off for donating it. The thing had 350,000+ miles on it and was due to get replaced anyway. It was kind of a hunk of crap.
At any rate the police dept got it and the first thing they did was paint it black and slap their shield design on it. The fire dept shares a parking lot with the cop-shop and when they got it back we went to take a look at the thing with them. They thought it was the coolest thing ever even though the armor rating in the door said it wasn't even up to the task of stopping most of the common rifles used to take deer.
I asked them what they were going to do with it and they said that they were going to use it to serve high risk warrants in if they knew that the subject was particularly dangerous. To my knowledge they never served a single warrant in it. It just stayed darkening the parking lot in the center spot by the fence collecting dust. It never moved once that I could tell. You could tell from the dirt on top and the leaves underneath that it didn't move much. It finally disappeared one day and that was that.
My point with this story is just to wonder out loud how much of this is just shiny toy syndrome or how many of them would actually oppress other Americans if so ordered and now they're getting the tools to do it.
I'm sure some would, but I don't think most would. Maybe much of it depends on how they view their duty as Americans.
Would it be enough?
I can't see the cops around here jacking with other Americans to enforce some blatantly unconstitutional order.
Maybe I'm mistaken though or maybe much of it depends on regional attitudes.
I've seen the police depts around here get increasingly militarized, but it seems like only the really big depts that work the inner city get the really bad attitude of an occupying force. In a manner of speaking they kind of are in a way.
|
|
|
Post by nxp on Nov 14, 2013 2:54:35 GMT
Meh. More DHS money squandered. We ended up with a version of that around here (which was like bring your own turd to the party punch bowl, IMO), something called an Armadillo or some other fierce animal. They also doubled down on chem gear and masks for the combined valley PD's, which again (now that they've closed Kewaunee Nuc Plant) was another waste of money IMO. They could have easily taken the money and put it into something useful, like a new airboat or some updated equipment for the dive teams in the area - but practical things aren't cool like in COD.
Meh. More show and less go.
|
|
|
Post by Gingerbread Man on Nov 14, 2013 11:35:13 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Browning35 on Nov 14, 2013 13:47:30 GMT
Cool pics.
That is true. When the LAPD took down the SLA in that house in LA the news reporters noted that they used tactics used in Vietnam when hosing the house down.
|
|
|
Post by Ten Eight on Nov 16, 2013 1:00:15 GMT
All those $200 Chicago typewriters. Do want. Isn't that why the main NFA stamp is $200?
I'm against militarization of police. To a degree. Granted, I'm on the enforcement side of the fence, but militarization is maybe the wrong word. Kind of like calling all .mil- looking weapons "assault" weapons. I don't know what word I would use instead though. Anyways, I think people get hung up on the uniforms, tac vests, etc. Most agencies are switching to these uniforms because they are vastly more functional, safer, and efficient than the polyester crap of the '70s. Times and gear change.
Armored vehicles. I feel they have a place in certain high gang infested metro areas like south Florida, L.A, New York, etc. You can come up against some serious gang firepower when conducting various high-risk functions. It's better to roll up to the crack house that's filled with smuggled Venezuelan .mil hardware in something with a bit of armor, versus an E-150 potential cheese box.
However, what I don't like is that DHS is GIVING these vehicles away and ENCOURAGING their usage for everything and anything. I agree with Omega man. It's a guise for pre positioning gear, and softening up the populace to become accustomed to them.
DHS Federal police coming soon.
|
|
|
Post by RTF Squared on Nov 21, 2013 20:11:58 GMT
I heard reports of some 500+ gun owning vegetarian nutjob known on the streets only as the "Gingerbread Man," crying "you can't stop me" as he tooled up for apocalypse being the sole reason for Columbia's MRAP.
In all seriousness.....
I would estimate "Protect and Serve" policeman became "police state enforcer" roughly around Prohibition times, when it became really popular to enforce unpopular morality.
I'm with Mr. Eight here, they do have their place. They need armored vehicles for the same reason I need a Glock: Methies. Methies should be shown no quarter at all, they are not only mentally deranged and extremely unpredictable/volatile but also can take some serious punishment before they stop what they're doing.
I was 18 and lived in a real bad part of town and woke up to the sound "This is the Longmont Police, exit the dwelling with hands up" repeatedly one morning. Knowing it wasn't my sardine can being raided, I did what any respectable 18-year old idjit would do, lit a cig and went to check it out. Looked across the apartment complex and into the adjacent cul-de-sac to see this crazy tank looking thing parked on a duplexes lawn, bullhorning the hell out of the house. Can't remember if it had treads or wheels (ten years.... pre-cameraphone) but it had a big ass battering ram in place of a cannon.
Considering the crap that went down in that area when I lived there (probably still does) it seemed appropriate. Was not the first or last house raid I ever witnessed but the only involving an armored vehicle. Even had a mobile meth lab pulled over, which resulted in the block being closed up, dudes in a hazmat suits tearing apart a Honda Accord and a young and nosy RTF being told to "go home quickly, and not to use meth."
None of these required an M2. I think that's when the line in the sand should be drawn. Even if it truly was needed, the risk of collateral damage is so high I would not consider it appropriate. That's not what I consider needed to raid a house or protect officers, that's a "Level the whole block, consequences be damned" type weapon to me.
|
|
|
Post by NamelessStain on Feb 26, 2014 12:25:33 GMT
|
|