but for video...

[Gulo Blue]

How does what equipment is needed to fight terrorism justify what's used to police protesting?

I don't get that line of thinking and I expect it more from freedom-hating communists and totalitarians.

 

[Gulo Blue]

How many protesters were harmed by the presence of that equipment? The answer of course, is zero.

I don't think it is zero. You can quibble over people not being directly harmed by using the actual equipment, but as I've already said, it changes behavior, and I fully believe the complaints about excessive force in response to protests we've seen in recent years has to do with how quick we are to break out riot gear.

Edit: are you not glad that the SB area cops had those vehicles? Before you answer, here's a quote from that former FBI profiler (Jim Clemente) in the Erin Burnett interview I referenced above:

You already asked that and I already answered.

It seems clear that the police were under attack and fired upon by someone with significant training and pretty powerful weapons. Your argument that the fact the assault wasn't stopped by cops in ordinary cruisers indicates we can't prove the armored vehicles saved lives is just ridiculous.

Have there been any where police were shot? Perhaps you recall this one...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Hollywood_shootout

No military vehicles, 11 cops and 7 civilians shot. Cops had to commandeer an armored car to evacuate the wounded because 2 guys had them pinned down. They were unable to do anything against superior fire power despite having significantly outnumbered the perpetrators.

Is the number police killed or wounded too low to justify having armored vehicles to protect them? Should we tell the spouses and children of police officers that cops can't have unarmed armored vehicles or as some mistakenly call them "tanks" because not enough cops die in shootouts to justify the added protection? Your arguments are getting better and better.

Again. I think it's wrong to point to the worst things that happen and rework the whole country to try (and probably fail) to avoid these things completely. It's not black and white, there's a balance between liberty and security your "what about the families of the people that might benefit from military equipment?" question ignores.

 

[Spartanmack]

that's not what I'm saying at all, dumbfuck.

also, at least now you apparently concede the point on page 1 of this thread, since youre just arguing this one (bullshit) point about the militarization of police. that's progress.

Actually, that's exactly what you're saying dumbfuck. Your post was total nonsense and a completely incoherent attempt to spin my argument into a justification of police brutality which is of course totally off base, dumbfuck.

not sure when the idea that policework should be a risk-free occupation arose.

Clearly that's in response me justifying the use of armored vehicles to reduce risk to officers, unless you were just blurting random nonsense into the thread.

And I've conceded nothing about whatever you said on page 1 but I like that you take the fact that I didn't respond to it as a concession. Shows what a hack you are. Dumbfuck.

 

[Spartanmack]

How does what equipment is needed to fight terrorism justify what's used to police protesting?

I don't get that line of thinking and I expect it more from freedom-hating communists and totalitarians.

I would say the fact that protests of all sorts (political, social, even sports related) so easily turn into riots justify the use of armored vehicles for police protection. Even michturd concedes that police work is risky business. I believe those people who protect citizens as well as public and private property from violent rioters and looters deserve maximum protection. And I think anyone who believes the presence of such equipment incites the violence is way off base. It's the crowd mentality and misguided, false rhetoric from social justice warriors and probably a lot of alcohol in the case of sporting event related riots that are to blame, not cops or their gear.

 

[sggatecl]

Another reason we NEED cameras:

lol...Awesome.

 

[Michchamp]

now see there! if I was a good cop who did cool stuff like that, I'd def have no problem with cameras.