It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Trump expected to lift ban on military gear to local police forces

page: 6
13
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 28 2017 @ 02:33 PM
link   
What's odd to me here is that I DO remember obama saying he was going to stop selling military gear to local PD, but I also seem to remember him turning around and letting them buy more.

Does anyone else have input on this?
This is the only article I can find that backs up my memory.
inthesetimes.com...


But an In These Times investigation provides evidence that, in practice, the president’s much-ballyhooed reforms to the 1033 program have done little to stem the flow of battlefield gear to cops. In fact, the total value of equipment distributed through the program actually increased in the year following the ban, according to figures provided to In These Times by Michelle McCaskill, media relations chief for the DOD's Defense Logistics Agency (DLA), which oversees the shipments. So far in fiscal year 2016, (Oct. 1, 2015 - September 13), the DLA has transferred $494 million worth of gear to local police departments, In These Times learned from McCaskill. That far exceeds the $418 million of equipment sent to police in FY 2015 (Oct. 1, 2014 - Sept. 30, 2015). According to an analysis published in May by the transparency organization Open the Books, 2015 was already a peak year for such shipments within the past decade, exceeded only by 2014's $787 million. Since 2006, more than $2.2 billion of hardware has found its way into the hands of police, according to the report. Many police accountability advocates warned from the outset that last year’s reforms were too limited in scope. Of seven items on the list of prohibited equipment, only one had actually been given to police departments in recent years, noted a May 2015 article in the Guardian. While the Obama administration placed additional requirements on the transfer of certain aircraft, armored vehicles and riot gear considered especially intimidating to civilians, hundreds of pieces of such equipment are still finding their way into the hands of local police. So far this year, for example, cops have acquired more than 80 mine-resistant ambush protected vehicles (MRAPs)—15-ton vehicles that were originally designed to withstand roadside bombs in war zones.



Now we have trump supposedly removing this bill, but from memory and this one source the bill actually didn't do anything it was intended to do....
....so what *did* it do?

Might have to go back and read the actual bill. Seems they have nothing to do with their titles or summaries these days.




posted on Aug, 28 2017 @ 02:40 PM
link   
A few pages later, another...

www.thenewa... merican.com/usnews/constitution/item/17056-obama-flooding-u-s-streets-with-weapons-of-war-for-local-police


Of course, the federal programs distributing “surplus” military equipment to local law enforcement are not new. In fact, they go back decades. However, as The New American reported in 2011, the schemes are expanding at a record pace under the Obama administration. Ironically, perhaps, the federal flood of military hardware comes amid the executive branch’s fiendish assaults on the unalienable right of the people to keep and bear arms — often marketed by the current administration with claims that “weapons of war” do not belong on the streets of the “Homeland.”




So, he ramped up selling this stuff to local PDs, then the moment it turned into a PR problem he signs some bill that everyone screams stops the transfer of military equipment to PDs... while in reality does nothing to stop it?


Am I missing something?



posted on Aug, 28 2017 @ 02:42 PM
link   
a reply to: Arnie123

No, just asking a question that apparently you seem unable to answer.



posted on Aug, 28 2017 @ 02:59 PM
link   
a reply to: Wayfarer

Police aren't going to be military capable at all.



posted on Aug, 28 2017 @ 03:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: Wayfarer
a reply to: Arnie123

No, just asking a question that apparently you seem unable to answer.
Doesn't merit an answer, its a stupid question for a scenario that'll never happen. Especially with you starting off with "no".



posted on Aug, 28 2017 @ 03:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Arnie123

Hey, i'm not the super cool McBadass that isn't worried about deadly things because he can dodge them with his spiderman relfexes. If you make a machismo laden idiotic post like that, i'm going to treat you like someone who can't understand simple things. I suspect you won't understand this.



posted on Aug, 28 2017 @ 03:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: cavtrooper7
a reply to: Wayfarer

Police aren't going to be military capable at all.


I don't understand how that's the case. If you give the PD an up-armored humvee, how does that not make them militarily capable in some regard; they're literally using military equipment?



posted on Aug, 28 2017 @ 03:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Wayfarer

I wonder what you expect when WE are better armed small arms wise than our own military?
AREN'T they allowed to survive?
The armor is not a threat and there ARE no mounted cannon or machine guns,it's required against AK rounds,which more criminals are picking up to use.
CIVILIANS can buy mounted machineguns...for the price of a small house,otherwise the are all semi automatic,1 shot per trigger pull.
edit on 28-8-2017 by cavtrooper7 because: (no reason given)

edit on 28-8-2017 by cavtrooper7 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 28 2017 @ 03:23 PM
link   
a reply to: Arnie123

I seriously doubt Police don't have access to grenades to some extent already. They are pretty available on the black market, throwing one in an apartment is a called a 'ring trick' by gangs and all kinds of southern nuts are caught with worse every day.

To doubt the opposite is actually kind of naive. I know for a fact Police in some parts of New York had Gernades. I remember gawking at the idea of using one in a crowded area when I saw it on his belt.

My roommate also had a flash bang thrown at him by police. Tactical grenade isn't something equip wise much higher up if the 'suspect' is fully armed.



posted on Aug, 28 2017 @ 04:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: Wayfarer

originally posted by: kyleplatinum
ex]

Everybody against this, please elaborate a tad more why this is a bad idea?

Are you afraid it will be used on you?

A tactical Police team that uses some military equipment is not the same as our military.




I can totally sympathize with police officers wanting to be Robo-Cop: Impervious to all harm, with the capability of ending 100 lives in an instant if they feel threatened. Who wouldn't want to play god?


Well, I am grateful your perspective of police officers are not reality.

You are way over the top.



posted on Aug, 28 2017 @ 04:23 PM
link   
This is terrible and I hope the die-hard Tump folks take a deep look at this and ponder if they want an even more militarized police force.

I'd hope this is where both "sides" being played against the other would agree... cops should NOT be soldiers or shock troops.
This will decrease the peace, not increase it.

Epic suckage...



posted on Aug, 28 2017 @ 05:55 PM
link   
I agree with Trump on this one, but he should lift the same limitation for civilians to enforce the second amendment in the face of crazy lefties and EU-backed anti gun loonies.



posted on Aug, 29 2017 @ 10:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: CarlsBad
a reply to: Arnie123
To doubt the opposite is actually kind of naive. I know for a fact Police in some parts of New York had Gernades. I remember gawking at the idea of using one in a crowded area when I saw it on his belt.


Are you a trained explosives expert? Serious question, because I don't know who you are or what your background is. I can tell you when they gave us training on how to recognize different types of explosives when I was in the Air Force, I never realized how many different kind of grenades there are. Unless you're expertly trained, you really have no idea what that thing was on his belt. Just because it looks like a grenade you've seen in movies doesn't mean it's a fragmentation grenade. It could easily have been another type.
edit on 29 8 17 by face23785 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 29 2017 @ 10:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: Baddogma
This is terrible and I hope the die-hard Tump folks take a deep look at this and ponder if they want an even more militarized police force.

I'd hope this is where both "sides" being played against the other would agree... cops should NOT be soldiers or shock troops.
This will decrease the peace, not increase it.

Epic suckage...


Obama's "ban" didn't even really do much. Give this a read:
Guardian: Obama ban on police military gear falls short

Some highlights:


The list of prohibited equipment includes seven items: tracked armored vehicles; weaponized aircraft, vessels, and vehicles of any kind; firearms of .50‐caliber or higher; ammunition of .50‐caliber or higher; grenade launchers; bayonets; and camouflage uniforms.



Of the seven items on the “prohibited equipment list”, six have not been distributed to local law enforcement agencies by the Pentagon for years, according to defense department spokesman Mark Wright. “The only one that we were still issuing at this time were the bayonets,” said Wright, noting that the blades were not typically used as bayonets attached to rifles, that he knew of, but as “big, sturdy knives”.


The best part of the article, to me, is what this idiot thinks should have been banned:


Not on the list are some of the most intimidating items in police arsenals: modified M-16 assault rifles, Humvees, helicopters, night-vision goggles, mine-resistant ambush-protected vehicles (MRAPs), BearCat vehicles, military-style helmets, shin guards, shields – and on.


Shin guards? Shin guards??? I'm not gonna get into the armored vehicles, because it appears that's been discussed plenty already in this thread. NVGs? Does this idiot just want to make it harder for police to catch criminals on the run if it's dark? Helicopters? Same argument, police use helis to great effect to track down people on the run and recon dangerous situations. "Military-style helmets" is just a SJW euphemism for a helmet that can stop a rifle round. Apparently this guy doesn't think the police deserve half a chance of surviving if they're shot in the head.

This is from 2 years ago, but damn, people this misinformed should not be writing on this subject. These media outlets, in my opinion, need to have some standards about who they let write on which subjects.



posted on Aug, 29 2017 @ 10:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: norhoc
a reply to: seasonal


Sorry, I agree with Obama on this one. We don't need police armed and geared up like the military



If Occupy Wall Street,BLM and Antifa not pulled this snip they have been.

I'd agree.

But since they are acting like full metal tards.

I support Trump on this 100%.



posted on Aug, 29 2017 @ 10:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: starwarsisreal
a reply to: seasonal

Well this is another major proof Trump is nothing more than a stooge for TPTB.


I won't say we told them so but......

....ahh hell, screw it....

WE TOLD YOU SO!!!!!!!




posted on Aug, 29 2017 @ 11:00 AM
link   
a reply to: neo96

So let me get this right. In one breath you'll uphold the right to bear arms against "tyranny of the state" then in the next breath you allow the "state" to gain a massive advantage on you in terms of weaponry and armour but that's OK because it's against the "lefties"?

I can't WAIT until this comes back to bite you in the ass bigtime. I also can't wait to hear the hypocritical excuses you'll come up with to explain it.


edit on 29/8/2017 by Kryties because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 29 2017 @ 11:03 AM
link   
a reply to: Kryties




So let me get this right. In one breath you'll uphold the right to bear arms against "tyranny of the state" then in the next breath you allow the "state" to gain a massive advantage on you in terms of weaponry and armour but that's OK because it's against the "lefties"?


The only thing ANYONE needs to get straight is just EXACTLY what is currently going on.



Antifa is a radical political movement of autonomous, self-styled anti-fascist groups, including in the United States.[2][3][4] They have been described as being left wing to far-left.[5][6] The salient feature of self-described antifa groups is to oppose fascism by direct action, including violence if need be.[6] Antifa groups tend to be anti-government and anti-capitalist;[7] its adherentsare mostly socialists, anarchists, and communists who, according to Mark Bray, a historian at Dartmouth College and author of Antifa: The Anti-Fascist Handbook, “reject turning to the police or the state to halt the advance of white supremacy. Instead they advocate popular opposition to fascism as we witnessed in Charlottesville.”[8]


en.wikipedia.org...(United_States)

I don't want to witness a Che style 'revolution' in the streets of America.



posted on Aug, 29 2017 @ 11:04 AM
link   
a reply to: neo96

That rant was all very well and good but what's that got to do with my post?

Your obvious attempt to deflect won't work.


edit on 29/8/2017 by Kryties because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 29 2017 @ 11:07 AM
link   
a reply to: Kryties

Gee I wonder WHAT a bunch of street thugs(communists) waging WAR in the streets of the us have to do with anything what so ever.



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join