4 ms·

You use Uvalde as an example, where the police infamously did not do anything to save the kids and in fact prevented parents from saving their own kids.

by mmiyer 3y ago

Der_Einzige 3y ago
Having the police be militarized makes it far easier to convict them when they don't do their jobs. The parkland resource officer just got acquitted, partly because he wasn't equipped to rush the attacker. Militarized police would have no excuse, and would be easy to convict for cowardness.
- YawningAngel 3y ago
  Is cowardice a crime?
  - qawwads 3y ago
    I found this: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/899 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/899
- adhesive_wombat 3y ago
  > Militarized police would have no excuse They'd have the same excuse they have now: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Town_of_Castle_Rock_v._Gonzales https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Town_of_Castle_Rock_v._Gonza... Then again, if they did change that and use military-style regulations, complete with desertion and cowardice rules, maybe the equivalent of military police (police police?) can stamp out corruption and violence against the public, in the same way that a soldier stealing supplies or deliberately harming civilians would be (should be) punished harshly by a military court.
  - qawwads 3y ago
    I think what you want is a gendarmerie. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gendarmerie https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gendarmerie
- smcl 3y ago
  So as usual, more guns. Brilliant, decades of school shootings and your solution is to throw more guns at the problem. Honestly if you like guns, you should really hope you don't get what you're asking for. Because once the inevitable happens and it becomes clear that more guns isn't helping there's only one direction that can go - gun control.
  - benburleson 3y ago
    But haven’t we been there for years…and nothing is changing? Or at least not in the direction you’re suggesting. Seems obvious to me as well: we tried normalizing gun culture and this is what we got. Maybe we should try something else?
    - smcl 3y ago
      What I mean is that at a certain point they can't keep up the "if only X could have had a gun" line, because at that point they will have had a gun and the conclusion that guns aren't helping will be unavoidable.
  - willcipriano 3y ago
    The left will never have the votes to pass a constitutional amendment and the supreme court is no longer full of activists, good luck. How about you all first try to enforce the existing laws around prohibited persons owning firearms, like Hunter Biden.
    - smcl 3y ago
      If school shootings continue and there are no options, it's not "the left" you'll have to worry about. It's everyone. You needn't wish me good luck. I live in a country where guns are already legal, available and even relatively widespread but controlled. We don't have these shootings. edit: ahhh you came back and edited in a little Hunter Biden joke! I have some bad news for you, "the left" doesn't like Joe or Hunter Biden. They'll tolerate Joe as an alternative to a Trump or DeSantis, and they'll probably concede that Hunter is probably less irritating than the Trump boys. If you want to take a swing at a leftie you need to target someone they actually like - Bernie Sanders or someone like that. If Hunter Biden has broken some firearms law, throw the book at him.
- lost_tourist 3y ago
  I am pretty sure the Supreme Court has held up that cops have no inherent need "to protect" citizens and you can't sue them for that. Qualified immunity covers this. Castle Rock v. Gonzalez. Essentially the only thing that gets them in trouble is flat out breaking the law. (Robbery, gross assault, laundering, etc)
- Shawnj2 3y ago
  Lol they will find some excuse like “the officers feared for their lives and acted in the best interests of the community” or something regardless of how many guns they have. Militarization of the police has nothing to do with it

You use Uvalde as an example, where the police infamously did not do anything to save the kids and in fact prevented parents from saving their own kids.

by mmiyer 3y ago

You use Uvalde as an example, where the police infamously did not do anything to save the kids and in fact prevented parents from saving their own kids.

Der_Einzige 3y ago

Having the police be militarized makes it far easier to convict them when they don't do their jobs. The parkland resource officer just got acquitted, partly because he wasn't equipped to rush the attacker. Militarized police would have no excuse, and would be easy to convict for cowardness.

YawningAngel 3y ago
Is cowardice a crime?
- qawwads 3y ago
  I found this: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/899 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/899
adhesive_wombat 3y ago
> Militarized police would have no excuse They'd have the same excuse they have now: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Town_of_Castle_Rock_v._Gonzales https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Town_of_Castle_Rock_v._Gonza... Then again, if they did change that and use military-style regulations, complete with desertion and cowardice rules, maybe the equivalent of military police (police police?) can stamp out corruption and violence against the public, in the same way that a soldier stealing supplies or deliberately harming civilians would be (should be) punished harshly by a military court.
- qawwads 3y ago
  I think what you want is a gendarmerie. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gendarmerie https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gendarmerie
smcl 3y ago
So as usual, more guns. Brilliant, decades of school shootings and your solution is to throw more guns at the problem. Honestly if you like guns, you should really hope you don't get what you're asking for. Because once the inevitable happens and it becomes clear that more guns isn't helping there's only one direction that can go - gun control.
- benburleson 3y ago
  But haven’t we been there for years…and nothing is changing? Or at least not in the direction you’re suggesting. Seems obvious to me as well: we tried normalizing gun culture and this is what we got. Maybe we should try something else?
  - smcl 3y ago
    What I mean is that at a certain point they can't keep up the "if only X could have had a gun" line, because at that point they will have had a gun and the conclusion that guns aren't helping will be unavoidable.
- willcipriano 3y ago
  The left will never have the votes to pass a constitutional amendment and the supreme court is no longer full of activists, good luck. How about you all first try to enforce the existing laws around prohibited persons owning firearms, like Hunter Biden.
  - smcl 3y ago
    If school shootings continue and there are no options, it's not "the left" you'll have to worry about. It's everyone. You needn't wish me good luck. I live in a country where guns are already legal, available and even relatively widespread but controlled. We don't have these shootings. edit: ahhh you came back and edited in a little Hunter Biden joke! I have some bad news for you, "the left" doesn't like Joe or Hunter Biden. They'll tolerate Joe as an alternative to a Trump or DeSantis, and they'll probably concede that Hunter is probably less irritating than the Trump boys. If you want to take a swing at a leftie you need to target someone they actually like - Bernie Sanders or someone like that. If Hunter Biden has broken some firearms law, throw the book at him.
lost_tourist 3y ago
I am pretty sure the Supreme Court has held up that cops have no inherent need "to protect" citizens and you can't sue them for that. Qualified immunity covers this. Castle Rock v. Gonzalez. Essentially the only thing that gets them in trouble is flat out breaking the law. (Robbery, gross assault, laundering, etc)
Shawnj2 3y ago
Lol they will find some excuse like “the officers feared for their lives and acted in the best interests of the community” or something regardless of how many guns they have. Militarization of the police has nothing to do with it