• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is All This Really Necessary?

Is All This Necessary?


  • Total voters
    44
One could have been VERY useful during the "Rodney King" riots....

Nonsense, they don't need a 30 ton war machine that they aren't trained for. Come on man. It's overkill. It's like the military using nukes during every war.
 
Yeah, we need to give criminals the upper hand, keep the semi auto weapons in the hands of criminals, and just issue the cops .38 revolvers. </sarcasm off>

I could tell a story about a Chicago cop and his partner going on a domestic call in Cabrini Green in the 1960's, but I'll spare people the drivel.

Whatever the cops get, the People should get.
 
If the Police get to be militarized

Police have got more heavy firepower because criminals have.

You need only look at Mexico to see this point, the cartels are capable of defying the ****ing Army of Mexico.

Yes there are more swat units, but regular police haven't changed much.

It isn't about power (although like anything it has the potential to be used by nefarious powers) it's to minimize casualties, between heavily armed criminals and spree shooters cops job has become extremely hazardous.

Just last week 5 RCMP armed only with pistols and shotguns were ambushed by a single guy with high powered rifle that killed 3 of them and injured the other two.

Official recomendations state that RCMP are woefully under armed to deal with modern threats.

So while I usually respect your viewpoints Ikari, I feel like you really do see boogiemen everywhere when it comes to Police.
 
Police have got more heavy firepower because criminals have.

Really? So I can buy some of this BS too? Or no?

It's not "boogiemen everywhere", it's proper tools of the People and growing force of government against our rights. How are you supposed to defend yourself when they take all your tools? Or is it when it's Criminal vs. Society, only the police matter?
 
Really? So I can buy some of this BS too? Or no?

It's not "boogiemen everywhere", it's proper tools of the People and growing force of government against our rights. How are you supposed to defend yourself when they take all your tools? Or is it when it's Criminal vs. Society, only the police matter?

You only view it through your Libertarian glasses, I can't really help you with that.

Personally, the better way to stop tyranny is to have a healthy, well educated population.

It stops extremism, which leads to tyranny.

You believe guns in the hands of the people prevents tyranny and I disagree.

Japan for example, has virtually 0% gun ownership, while I was surprised to find all police officers have a service pistol in case of run ins with Yakuza.

And they do not have any tyranny because they have one of the most well educated populations in the world which staves off extremism (although like everywhere it does exist to a degree).

In fact the Japanese are pretty libertarian on many issues, you can drink as a passenger in a car... which was surprising.

My point is that it takes far more than guns to win freedom, it takes better governance and before you focus too much on what police have and you don't, focus on outlawing gerrymandering and unlimited donations and SuperPACS and you'll see far better results.
 
Personally, the better way to stop tyranny is to have a healthy, well educated population.

This is the BEST way to do so. But you see the state of education in this country.

Still, while it is best to have a well educated populace to control the government, that is still no garuantee against government tyranny. At the very least, that which the police can have the People too should have access to.
 
At the very least, that which the police can have the People too should have access to.

To me the whole point of government is to have a monopoly on force when needed.

I support the second amendment purely from a legal perspective when it comes to American law.

But for me, while I do support a certain amount of gun ownership which I am allowed to in Canada, I don't believe my next door neighbour should have weaponry necessary to take on the RCMP if he ever felt like doing so like the gentleman in Moncton last week.
 
To me the whole point of government is to have a monopoly on force when needed.

I support the second amendment purely from a legal perspective when it comes to American law.

But for me, while I do support a certain amount of gun ownership which I am allowed to in Canada, I don't believe my next door neighbour should have weaponry necessary to take on the RCMP if he ever felt like doing so like the gentleman in Moncton last week.

I believe that my neighbor and myself should have the firepower to take on the Government if the Government tried to overstep the bounds of the Constitution.
 
To me the whole point of government is to have a monopoly on force when needed.

If that were true, we'd never have had the second amendment.
 
I believe that my neighbor and myself should have the firepower to take on the Government if the Government tried to overstep the bounds of the Constitution.

Who do you shoot first?

The father of two who's just doing his job because your INTERPRETATION of the constitution is different from the courts or the government?

While I'm definitely of the opinion the current US government and pretty much every executive has been in violation of the constitution, it's up to a strong electorate and institutions to hold it accountable, not automatic weapons.

From there you create your own tyranny for those who did not want a civil war in their town due to political disagreements.
 
It would not be me firing the first shot. I just want my own protection firepower. The Constitution has ONE purpose and ONE purpose only, personal freedoms. When and if we ever lose those personal freedoms afforded us by the Constitution it will be a hard cold world, at that point, what difference does it make?
 
I swear, we're descending into an arms race, with the police on one side and the anarchist-libertarians on the other. God help us.
 
I swear, we're descending into an arms race, with the police on one side and the anarchist-libertarians on the other. God help us.

A Liberal saying "God help us" w/o booing after he mentioned God. Will miracles ever cease?
 
A Liberal saying "God help us" w/o booing after he mentioned God. Will miracles ever cease?

iu
 
If they need to deal with increasingly well-armed criminals, of course they have to become increasingly militarized. If we want to reverse the trend, we have to get the heavy duty arms out of the hands of the criminals. One causes the other.

and with the 24/7/365 news cycle as it is, and the agendas set as they are, why aren't we hearing about these increasingly well armed bandits?

Oh, because it's a contrived threat.

Got it! :thumbs:
 
Speaking from a policing perspective, I would much rather have too much equipment that I am not going to use than too little. It's not about what you need, it's about what you may need.

I carry a gun, Tazer, pepper spray, a baton, 4 extra magazines, and two hidden revolvers, a Kevlar vest. tactical hand cuffs, and several hidden hand cuff keys on my person at work every day, I have never needed any of it. I hope I never do need any of it. But having it means it's there in the case that I may actually need it. It's all over kill, but that is the purpose. This has cost the tax payer a lot of money, much much more than some military junk.
 
If they need to deal with increasingly well-armed criminals, of course they have to become increasingly militarized. If we want to reverse the trend, we have to get the heavy duty arms out of the hands of the criminals. One causes the other.

And what exactly are these criminals using now that they haven't had for decades. The answer absolutely nothing. That is just a BS excuse.
 
Back
Top Bottom