How America’s Police Became An Army

north-hollywood-shootout

I just saw the headline to an article that read “How America’s Police Became An Army”. The answer is obvious but since it’s popular to hate cops these days no one dares say it. The criminals became armies first. Does no one remember the North Hollywood Shootout? In a nutshell back in 1997 two men attempted to rob a Bank of America branch in North Hollywood, California and outgunned the LAPD and SWAT for 44 minutes.

After that the nation was aghast that a large metropolitan police department could be overpowered like that by only two men and most communities sought to have their police departments with the ordinance they needed to fight crime. Yet when the police use that ordinance every one gets their panties in a bunch and cries ‘police state’ while most of you wouldn’t know a police state if it put a black bag over your head.

  • Zappa rappa

    It isn’t often, but I strongly disagree with you on this one.

  • DMaria Faraj

    More and more forces are having officers have those camera on them 24/7. I think this is good. Proof both ways. Hey I did the right thing or hey this officer did the wrong thing. There are good cops out there, but wow are there some shitty ones too.

    • http://trenchreynolds.me/ Trench Reynolds

      The shitty cops get more attention because it drives up traffic on websites.

      • Denise

        That’s exactly right, Trench. Whatever increases the ka-ching in someone’s wallet is what gets reported. No, police aren’t 100% perfect, but the vast majority are heroes every day that they get up and decide to go to work keeping us all safe. Most people who bitch about cops wouildn’t walk a block in their shoes, wouldn’t make it through an 8-hour shift and would probably piss themselves in the kinds of dangerous situations cops face every day. To those assholes, I say STFU. Keep up the GREAT work, Trench!

  • edrebber

    The outrage against the so called militarization of the police is essentially the same argument used to try to prevent the average citizen from carrying a weapon and thus creates a paradox.

    The anti gun crowd claims the average citizen does not need a weapon because it’s intimidating and frightens citizen, The average citizen can simply call 911 and hide in a corner in case of an emergency. Meanwhile the anti police militarization crowd wants to limit the fire power that the police can posses, because it’s not needed and scares citizens. As you mentioned, the criminals are already militarized, so the average citizen will be left unprotected.

    To make matters worse there is the hypocrisy of the elitists, celebrities and politicians. These hypocrites will continue to employ their own highly militarized security forces and they will claim moral superiority because they are not the ones who actually posses the weapons.

    Laws that restrict the right to bear arms are unconstitutional and even if the constitution allowed these laws, they would be useless. The crimes a criminal hopes to commit with an illegal weapon carry a far worse penalty than the penalty for possessing an illegal weapon.

    For example, the penalty for murder might be life in prison or even the death penalty, while the penalty for the illegal weapon might be 5 years. The extra 5 years is meaningless to a murderer and is not deterring a criminal from committing a crime. At the same time the 5 year penalty would deter the average law abiding citizen from possessing the illegal weapon and render them unable to protect themselves from a criminal.

    Both the Police and the average law abiding citizen need equal or grater firepower to what the criminal will possess to effectively defend themselves.

    • http://trenchreynolds.me/ Trench Reynolds

      Great comment Ed on the conundrum of police and gun rights.