Cleveland police to stop hitting people on heads with guns

[bucs90]

Wait, so this was a thing? Holy ******* Christ, let's just bring back the gulags while we're at it.

Cleveland police to stop hitting people on heads with guns as part of Justice Department agreement cleveland.com

They shoot the criminals you idiots *****.
The hit them instead you still *****.

Idiot

Hitting somebody with the butt of a gun can kill them

So can pepper spraying and tazing. So can handcuffing if they are obese and asphyxia occurs. They can die from being simply punched. Not like one of your punches....I mean a hard one.

Resisting arrest is a hazardous hobby.

 

[Ravi]

So wait, Bucky thinks cops hitting people in the head with a gun is cool?

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

So wait, Bucky thinks cops hitting people in the head with a gun is cool?

Much more effective at stopping all attempts to resist, better that pepper spray, better than tasers. Every police department should be trained in the judicial use of pistol whipping techniques.

Oh yeah!

 

[bucs90]

So wait, Bucky thinks cops hitting people in the head with a gun is cool?

No. But if you send 1000000 men out with guns and task them with apprehension of criminals...inevitability its gonna happen a few times. Men have hit other men with weapons for...what...10, 000 years?

 

[hipeter924]

Wait, so this was a thing? Holy ******* Christ, let's just bring back the gulags while we're at it.

Cleveland police to stop hitting people on heads with guns as part of Justice Department agreement cleveland.com

Some police think they are the National Guard, or some military unit, so this is the Justice Department bringing them down a notch.

If they want to practice using guns as batons, then they can do it in their own time, or join the military and learn discipline.

Whatever rocks their boat, so long as the rest of the country doesn't have their tax dollars spent on a self-recognized military unit - instead of a civilian police force.

People are getting pistol whipped instead of killed. You demons don't get the fact that police are trying to do their job WITHOUT killing anyone. It's like you all just don't want them enforcing the law at all....

Until it's you who needs them, then you want them to pistol whip some noggins to keep you safe.

No. The governor brings in the National Guard, just as he did in Baltimore. That's how people are kept safe, and that is how states should respond to civil disturbance that exceeds police capability and training.

It is people like you that want the police to walk all over the constution, and violate their lawful authority - with military methods of enforcing order. That might be how it is done in authoritarian countries, but not in America.

Please look up Posse Comitatus and get back to me. I've been trained in the military and I can tell you the National Guard is neither equipped nor trained for law enforcement. Plus it's illegal. Posse Comitatus. Learn it, understand it.

All of which is nothing to do with what I have said. I didn't say that the National Guard should take over police roles.

I said that the police shouldn't use military methods or act like it is a military unit, as that in itself breaks the boundaries of a civilian police force.

The National Guard is trained to use military equipment and are given basic military training, which is my point.

It is also meant to be used for emergencies, but it has been abused in the past as well - like during the civil rights era.

But one thing they are trained in is crowd control, because of the possibility of looting and chaos after natural disasters.

If you want a military police force, try China.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

Wait, so this was a thing? Holy ******* Christ, let's just bring back the gulags while we're at it.

Cleveland police to stop hitting people on heads with guns as part of Justice Department agreement cleveland.com

Some police think they are the National Guard, or some military unit, so this is the Justice Department bringing them down a notch.

If they want to practice using guns as batons, then they can do it in their own time, or join the military and learn discipline.

Whatever rocks their boat, so long as the rest of the country doesn't have their tax dollars spent on a self-recognized military unit - instead of a civilian police force.

People are getting pistol whipped instead of killed. You demons don't get the fact that police are trying to do their job WITHOUT killing anyone. It's like you all just don't want them enforcing the law at all....

Until it's you who needs them, then you want them to pistol whip some noggins to keep you safe.

No. The governor brings in the National Guard, just as he did in Baltimore. That's how people are kept safe, and that is how states should respond to civil disturbance that exceeds police capability and training.

It is people like you that want the police to walk all over the constution, and violate their lawful authority - with military methods of enforcing order. That might be how it is done in authoritarian countries, but not in America.

Please look up Posse Comitatus and get back to me. I've been trained in the military and I can tell you the National Guard is neither equipped nor trained for law enforcement. Plus it's illegal. Posse Comitatus. Learn it, understand it.

All of which is nothing to do with what I have said. I didn't say that the National Guard should take over police roles.

I said that the police shouldn't use military methods or act like it is a military unit, as that in itself breaks the boundaries of a civilian police force.

The National Guard is trained to use military equipment and are given basic military training, which is my point.

It is also meant to be used for emergencies, but it has been abused in the past as well - like during the civil rights era.

But one thing they are trained in is crowd control, because of the possibility of looting and chaos after natural disasters.

If you want a military police force, try China.

I don't want a military police force, you do.

 

[jon_berzerk]

Wait, so this was a thing? Holy ******* Christ, let's just bring back the gulags while we're at it.

Cleveland police to stop hitting people on heads with guns as part of Justice Department agreement cleveland.com

Apparently out of a tens of thousands of cops who over the years wore the Cleveland PD uniform....the DOJ was able to provide a whole 2 examples of this pistol whipping technique.

DontTazeMeBro. ..you just get more pathetic and angry by the day. You do know that these DOJ "investigations" under Obama are 90% just a political hitjob right??

well put

the leftists can never accept a fair verdict now a daze

 

[bucs90]

Wait, so this was a thing? Holy ******* Christ, let's just bring back the gulags while we're at it.

Cleveland police to stop hitting people on heads with guns as part of Justice Department agreement cleveland.com

Some police think they are the National Guard, or some military unit, so this is the Justice Department bringing them down a notch.

If they want to practice using guns as batons, then they can do it in their own time, or join the military and learn discipline.

Whatever rocks their boat, so long as the rest of the country doesn't have their tax dollars spent on a self-recognized military unit - instead of a civilian police force.

People are getting pistol whipped instead of killed. You demons don't get the fact that police are trying to do their job WITHOUT killing anyone. It's like you all just don't want them enforcing the law at all....

Until it's you who needs them, then you want them to pistol whip some noggins to keep you safe.

No. The governor brings in the National Guard, just as he did in Baltimore. That's how people are kept safe, and that is how states should respond to civil disturbance that exceeds police capability and training.

It is people like you that want the police to walk all over the constution, and violate their lawful authority - with military methods of enforcing order. That might be how it is done in authoritarian countries, but not in America.

Please look up Posse Comitatus and get back to me. I've been trained in the military and I can tell you the National Guard is neither equipped nor trained for law enforcement. Plus it's illegal. Posse Comitatus. Learn it, understand it.

All of which is nothing to do with what I have said. I didn't say that the National Guard should take over police roles.

I said that the police shouldn't use military methods or act like it is a military unit, as that in itself breaks the boundaries of a civilian police force.

The National Guard is trained to use military equipment and are given basic military training, which is my point.

It is also meant to be used for emergencies, but it has been abused in the past as well - like during the civil rights era.

But one thing they are trained in is crowd control, because of the possibility of looting and chaos after natural disasters.

If you want a military police force, try China.

Police ARENT trained in "military tactics". Cops dont have bomber planes. Or battleships. They dont deploy massive armored divisions. Or dig trenches and sent hundreds of infantry to storm a beach.

BUT...they do deal with aggressive human conflict. Often involving weapons.

So cops DO train in tactics of how to survive and win a gunfigh and hand to hand fight.

Guess who also trains in those skills? The military. They happen to overlap on some topics.

 

[hipeter924]

Some police think they are the National Guard, or some military unit, so this is the Justice Department bringing them down a notch.

If they want to practice using guns as batons, then they can do it in their own time, or join the military and learn discipline.

Whatever rocks their boat, so long as the rest of the country doesn't have their tax dollars spent on a self-recognized military unit - instead of a civilian police force.

People are getting pistol whipped instead of killed. You demons don't get the fact that police are trying to do their job WITHOUT killing anyone. It's like you all just don't want them enforcing the law at all....

Until it's you who needs them, then you want them to pistol whip some noggins to keep you safe.

No. The governor brings in the National Guard, just as he did in Baltimore. That's how people are kept safe, and that is how states should respond to civil disturbance that exceeds police capability and training.

It is people like you that want the police to walk all over the constution, and violate their lawful authority - with military methods of enforcing order. That might be how it is done in authoritarian countries, but not in America.

Please look up Posse Comitatus and get back to me. I've been trained in the military and I can tell you the National Guard is neither equipped nor trained for law enforcement. Plus it's illegal. Posse Comitatus. Learn it, understand it.

All of which is nothing to do with what I have said. I didn't say that the National Guard should take over police roles.

I said that the police shouldn't use military methods or act like it is a military unit, as that in itself breaks the boundaries of a civilian police force.

The National Guard is trained to use military equipment and are given basic military training, which is my point.

It is also meant to be used for emergencies, but it has been abused in the past as well - like during the civil rights era.

But one thing they are trained in is crowd control, because of the possibility of looting and chaos after natural disasters.

If you want a military police force, try China.

I don't want a military police force, you do.

Says the guy that wants police head butting people with their guns, might as well hand them bayonets.

 

[hipeter924]

Some police think they are the National Guard, or some military unit, so this is the Justice Department bringing them down a notch.

If they want to practice using guns as batons, then they can do it in their own time, or join the military and learn discipline.

Whatever rocks their boat, so long as the rest of the country doesn't have their tax dollars spent on a self-recognized military unit - instead of a civilian police force.

People are getting pistol whipped instead of killed. You demons don't get the fact that police are trying to do their job WITHOUT killing anyone. It's like you all just don't want them enforcing the law at all....

Until it's you who needs them, then you want them to pistol whip some noggins to keep you safe.

No. The governor brings in the National Guard, just as he did in Baltimore. That's how people are kept safe, and that is how states should respond to civil disturbance that exceeds police capability and training.

It is people like you that want the police to walk all over the constution, and violate their lawful authority - with military methods of enforcing order. That might be how it is done in authoritarian countries, but not in America.

Please look up Posse Comitatus and get back to me. I've been trained in the military and I can tell you the National Guard is neither equipped nor trained for law enforcement. Plus it's illegal. Posse Comitatus. Learn it, understand it.

All of which is nothing to do with what I have said. I didn't say that the National Guard should take over police roles.

I said that the police shouldn't use military methods or act like it is a military unit, as that in itself breaks the boundaries of a civilian police force.

The National Guard is trained to use military equipment and are given basic military training, which is my point.

It is also meant to be used for emergencies, but it has been abused in the past as well - like during the civil rights era.

But one thing they are trained in is crowd control, because of the possibility of looting and chaos after natural disasters.

If you want a military police force, try China.

Police ARENT trained in "military tactics". Cops dont have bomber planes. Or battleships. They dont deploy massive armored divisions. Or dig trenches and sent hundreds of infantry to storm a beach.

BUT...they do deal with aggressive human conflict. Often involving weapons.

So cops DO train in tactics of how to survive and win a gunfigh and hand to hand fight.

Guess who also trains in those skills? The military. They happen to overlap on some topics.

True. But as I said, some skills aren't necessary for the job, and are kind of an extreme response for a civilian police force, unless the suspect is a member of a drug cartel.

There are exceptions though, like SWAT teams, and counter-terrorism units, but it would be extreme to deploy that sort of equipment, and use those skills, to patrol a quiet neighborhood - as there are still places in America that aren't Baltimore.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

People are getting pistol whipped instead of killed. You demons don't get the fact that police are trying to do their job WITHOUT killing anyone. It's like you all just don't want them enforcing the law at all....

Until it's you who needs them, then you want them to pistol whip some noggins to keep you safe.

No. The governor brings in the National Guard, just as he did in Baltimore. That's how people are kept safe, and that is how states should respond to civil disturbance that exceeds police capability and training.

It is people like you that want the police to walk all over the constution, and violate their lawful authority - with military methods of enforcing order. That might be how it is done in authoritarian countries, but not in America.

Please look up Posse Comitatus and get back to me. I've been trained in the military and I can tell you the National Guard is neither equipped nor trained for law enforcement. Plus it's illegal. Posse Comitatus. Learn it, understand it.

All of which is nothing to do with what I have said. I didn't say that the National Guard should take over police roles.

I said that the police shouldn't use military methods or act like it is a military unit, as that in itself breaks the boundaries of a civilian police force.

The National Guard is trained to use military equipment and are given basic military training, which is my point.

It is also meant to be used for emergencies, but it has been abused in the past as well - like during the civil rights era.

But one thing they are trained in is crowd control, because of the possibility of looting and chaos after natural disasters.

If you want a military police force, try China.

I don't want a military police force, you do.

Says the guy that wants police head butting people with their guns, might as well hand them bayonets.

Pistol whipping is a non lethal submission tactic. I know you can't tell the difference between that and stabbing someone in the spleen with a bayonet affixed to an M-16 so I won't even try to explain it.

Idiot.

 

[bucs90]

People are getting pistol whipped instead of killed. You demons don't get the fact that police are trying to do their job WITHOUT killing anyone. It's like you all just don't want them enforcing the law at all....

Until it's you who needs them, then you want them to pistol whip some noggins to keep you safe.

No. The governor brings in the National Guard, just as he did in Baltimore. That's how people are kept safe, and that is how states should respond to civil disturbance that exceeds police capability and training.

It is people like you that want the police to walk all over the constution, and violate their lawful authority - with military methods of enforcing order. That might be how it is done in authoritarian countries, but not in America.

Please look up Posse Comitatus and get back to me. I've been trained in the military and I can tell you the National Guard is neither equipped nor trained for law enforcement. Plus it's illegal. Posse Comitatus. Learn it, understand it.

All of which is nothing to do with what I have said. I didn't say that the National Guard should take over police roles.

I said that the police shouldn't use military methods or act like it is a military unit, as that in itself breaks the boundaries of a civilian police force.

The National Guard is trained to use military equipment and are given basic military training, which is my point.

It is also meant to be used for emergencies, but it has been abused in the past as well - like during the civil rights era.

But one thing they are trained in is crowd control, because of the possibility of looting and chaos after natural disasters.

If you want a military police force, try China.

Police ARENT trained in "military tactics". Cops dont have bomber planes. Or battleships. They dont deploy massive armored divisions. Or dig trenches and sent hundreds of infantry to storm a beach.

BUT...they do deal with aggressive human conflict. Often involving weapons.

So cops DO train in tactics of how to survive and win a gunfigh and hand to hand fight.

Guess who also trains in those skills? The military. They happen to overlap on some topics.

True. But as I said, some skills aren't necessary for the job, and are kind of an extreme response for a civilian police force, unless the suspect is a member of a drug cartel.

There are exceptions though, like SWAT teams, and counter-terrorism units, but it would be extreme to deploy that sort of equipment, and use those skills, to patrol a quiet neighborhood - as there are still places in America that aren't Baltimore.

Ok. So what skills are "inappropriate" for a basic patrol officer? Lets say a father is kissing his daughter goodbye as she leaves for Police Academy.

As a police chief....what would you tell him when he asks you..."Sir...im proud of her. But will she be getting the best available self defense training she can from your academy?"

So...what say you? Do you teach them the BEST possible way to survive and win a violent fight hand to hand or with weapons? Or.....do you tone it down and teach mediocre stuff because...well...they arent military and we wouldnt wanna offend anyone.

What would you tell him? Afterall...she may never need it. OR...she may encounter AK47 wielding terrorists on Day 1.

 

[hipeter924]

No. The governor brings in the National Guard, just as he did in Baltimore. That's how people are kept safe, and that is how states should respond to civil disturbance that exceeds police capability and training.

It is people like you that want the police to walk all over the constution, and violate their lawful authority - with military methods of enforcing order. That might be how it is done in authoritarian countries, but not in America.

Please look up Posse Comitatus and get back to me. I've been trained in the military and I can tell you the National Guard is neither equipped nor trained for law enforcement. Plus it's illegal. Posse Comitatus. Learn it, understand it.

All of which is nothing to do with what I have said. I didn't say that the National Guard should take over police roles.

I said that the police shouldn't use military methods or act like it is a military unit, as that in itself breaks the boundaries of a civilian police force.

The National Guard is trained to use military equipment and are given basic military training, which is my point.

It is also meant to be used for emergencies, but it has been abused in the past as well - like during the civil rights era.

But one thing they are trained in is crowd control, because of the possibility of looting and chaos after natural disasters.

If you want a military police force, try China.

I don't want a military police force, you do.

Says the guy that wants police head butting people with their guns, might as well hand them bayonets.

Pistol whipping is a non lethal submission tactic. I know you can't tell the difference between that and stabbing someone in the spleen with a bayonet affixed to an M-16 so I won't even try to explain it.

Idiot.

So you think that police should go around hitting people with their guns, because they don't have a baton - even though they do?

What about another alleged 'non-lethal tactic'? Like choke holding (kills people), slapping hard (severely injures people), using tasers (known to kill people with heart conditions), and attacking non-violent protesters with heavy crowd control gear and tear gas (which can cause deaths, amputations, and miscarriages). Just because a tactic is declared 'non-lethal' doesn't mean it isn't extreme or heavy handed. So you still don't get the point.

You can't tell the difference between a military police force, like that deployed by an authoritarian government, or a civilian police force.

So, what is the difference? A bayonet*, is the next step, after all, if you think that using one military method doesn't justify another, then you haven't paid attention in history class.

Russia Today would have a field day with people like you, and they already get enough propaganda ammunition from what US police do already - in violating civil liberties and humans rights to 'keep the peace'.

Thankfully the Justice Department doesn't think that hitting people with guns is a good tactic of keeping the peace, in fact it puts police in disrepute as it emphasizes police brutality and makes people lose faith in the police force.

*Link to Chinese Security forces training with bayonets: Meanwhile In China Bayonets At The Ready Zero Hedge

 

[bucs90]

Please look up Posse Comitatus and get back to me. I've been trained in the military and I can tell you the National Guard is neither equipped nor trained for law enforcement. Plus it's illegal. Posse Comitatus. Learn it, understand it.

All of which is nothing to do with what I have said. I didn't say that the National Guard should take over police roles.

I said that the police shouldn't use military methods or act like it is a military unit, as that in itself breaks the boundaries of a civilian police force.

The National Guard is trained to use military equipment and are given basic military training, which is my point.

It is also meant to be used for emergencies, but it has been abused in the past as well - like during the civil rights era.

But one thing they are trained in is crowd control, because of the possibility of looting and chaos after natural disasters.

If you want a military police force, try China.

I don't want a military police force, you do.

Says the guy that wants police head butting people with their guns, might as well hand them bayonets.

Pistol whipping is a non lethal submission tactic. I know you can't tell the difference between that and stabbing someone in the spleen with a bayonet affixed to an M-16 so I won't even try to explain it.

Idiot.

So you think that police should go around hitting people with their guns, because they don't have a baton - even though they do?

What about another alleged 'non-lethal tactic'? Like choke holding (kills people), slapping hard (severely injures people), using tasers (known to kill people with heart conditions), and attacking non-violent protesters with heavy crowd control gear and tear gas (which can cause deaths, amputations, and miscarriages). Just because a tactic is declared 'non-lethal' doesn't mean it isn't extreme or heavy handed. So you still don't get the point.

You can't tell the difference between a military police force, like that deployed by an authoritarian government, or a civilian police force.

So, what is the difference? A bayonet*, is the next step, after all, if you think that using one military method doesn't justify another, then you haven't paid attention in history class.

Russia Today would have a field day with people like you, and they already get enough propaganda ammunition from what US police do already - in violating civil liberties and humans rights to 'keep the peace'.

Thankfully the Justice Department doesn't think that hitting people with guns is a good tactic of keeping the peace, in fact it puts police in disrepute as it emphasizes police brutality and makes people lose faith in the police force.

*Link to Chinese Security forces training with bayonets: Meanwhile In China Bayonets At The Ready Zero Hedge

Again...what would you tell a Dad sending his 21 year old daughter to Police Academy? Is she going to get the best possible hand to hand and gunfighting training they can offer? Or not?

 

[hipeter924]

No. The governor brings in the National Guard, just as he did in Baltimore. That's how people are kept safe, and that is how states should respond to civil disturbance that exceeds police capability and training.

It is people like you that want the police to walk all over the constution, and violate their lawful authority - with military methods of enforcing order. That might be how it is done in authoritarian countries, but not in America.

Please look up Posse Comitatus and get back to me. I've been trained in the military and I can tell you the National Guard is neither equipped nor trained for law enforcement. Plus it's illegal. Posse Comitatus. Learn it, understand it.

All of which is nothing to do with what I have said. I didn't say that the National Guard should take over police roles.

I said that the police shouldn't use military methods or act like it is a military unit, as that in itself breaks the boundaries of a civilian police force.

The National Guard is trained to use military equipment and are given basic military training, which is my point.

It is also meant to be used for emergencies, but it has been abused in the past as well - like during the civil rights era.

But one thing they are trained in is crowd control, because of the possibility of looting and chaos after natural disasters.

If you want a military police force, try China.

Police ARENT trained in "military tactics". Cops dont have bomber planes. Or battleships. They dont deploy massive armored divisions. Or dig trenches and sent hundreds of infantry to storm a beach.

BUT...they do deal with aggressive human conflict. Often involving weapons.

So cops DO train in tactics of how to survive and win a gunfigh and hand to hand fight.

Guess who also trains in those skills? The military. They happen to overlap on some topics.

True. But as I said, some skills aren't necessary for the job, and are kind of an extreme response for a civilian police force, unless the suspect is a member of a drug cartel.

There are exceptions though, like SWAT teams, and counter-terrorism units, but it would be extreme to deploy that sort of equipment, and use those skills, to patrol a quiet neighborhood - as there are still places in America that aren't Baltimore.

Ok. So what skills are "inappropriate" for a basic patrol officer? Lets say a father is kissing his daughter goodbye as she leaves for Police Academy.

As a police chief....what would you tell him when he asks you..."Sir...im proud of her. But will she be getting the best available self defense training she can from your academy?"

So...what say you? Do you teach them the BEST possible way to survive and win a violent fight hand to hand or with weapons? Or.....do you tone it down and teach mediocre stuff because...well...they arent military and we wouldnt wanna offend anyone.

What would you tell him? Afterall...she may never need it. OR...she may encounter AK47 wielding terrorists on Day 1.

Sort of begging the question.

Is the basic patrol officer a member of a SWAT team or an anti-terrorism unit, the obvious answer is no.

So no, they shouldn't receive training on how to use the butt of their gun as a battering implement, if they want to learn about that - then that is for specialist squads, and not the regular police force.

 

[hipeter924]

All of which is nothing to do with what I have said. I didn't say that the National Guard should take over police roles.

I said that the police shouldn't use military methods or act like it is a military unit, as that in itself breaks the boundaries of a civilian police force.

The National Guard is trained to use military equipment and are given basic military training, which is my point.

It is also meant to be used for emergencies, but it has been abused in the past as well - like during the civil rights era.

But one thing they are trained in is crowd control, because of the possibility of looting and chaos after natural disasters.

If you want a military police force, try China.

I don't want a military police force, you do.

Says the guy that wants police head butting people with their guns, might as well hand them bayonets.

Pistol whipping is a non lethal submission tactic. I know you can't tell the difference between that and stabbing someone in the spleen with a bayonet affixed to an M-16 so I won't even try to explain it.

Idiot.

So you think that police should go around hitting people with their guns, because they don't have a baton - even though they do?

What about another alleged 'non-lethal tactic'? Like choke holding (kills people), slapping hard (severely injures people), using tasers (known to kill people with heart conditions), and attacking non-violent protesters with heavy crowd control gear and tear gas (which can cause deaths, amputations, and miscarriages). Just because a tactic is declared 'non-lethal' doesn't mean it isn't extreme or heavy handed. So you still don't get the point.

You can't tell the difference between a military police force, like that deployed by an authoritarian government, or a civilian police force.

So, what is the difference? A bayonet*, is the next step, after all, if you think that using one military method doesn't justify another, then you haven't paid attention in history class.

Russia Today would have a field day with people like you, and they already get enough propaganda ammunition from what US police do already - in violating civil liberties and humans rights to 'keep the peace'.

Thankfully the Justice Department doesn't think that hitting people with guns is a good tactic of keeping the peace, in fact it puts police in disrepute as it emphasizes police brutality and makes people lose faith in the police force.

*Link to Chinese Security forces training with bayonets: Meanwhile In China Bayonets At The Ready Zero Hedge

Again...what would you tell a Dad sending his 21 year old daughter to Police Academy? Is she going to get the best possible hand to hand and gunfighting training they can offer? Or not?

You want to turn every patrol officer into a member of a SWAT or an anti-terrorism squad?

As the 'best training available' is not on offer, for obvious reasons - most American neighborhoods are not full of terrorists and heavily violent criminals, in fact crime is on the decline in most towns and cities, and Baltimore is the exception rather than the rule: Crime Rates in U.S. Drop to 1970s levels

Violent crime in the U.S. fell 4.4 percent last year to the lowest level in decades, the FBI announced Monday.

In 2013, there were 1.16 million violent crimes, the lowest amount since the 1978’s 1.09 million violent crimes, Reuters reports.

All types of violent crimes experienced decline last year, with rape dropping 6.3 percent, murder and non-negligent manslaughter dropping 4.4 percent and robbery dropping 2.8 percent.

The rate of violent crime is 367.9 crimes for every 100,000 people, which marked a 5.1 percent decline since 2012. The rate has fallen each year since at least 1994.

 

[bucs90]

Please look up Posse Comitatus and get back to me. I've been trained in the military and I can tell you the National Guard is neither equipped nor trained for law enforcement. Plus it's illegal. Posse Comitatus. Learn it, understand it.

All of which is nothing to do with what I have said. I didn't say that the National Guard should take over police roles.

I said that the police shouldn't use military methods or act like it is a military unit, as that in itself breaks the boundaries of a civilian police force.

The National Guard is trained to use military equipment and are given basic military training, which is my point.

It is also meant to be used for emergencies, but it has been abused in the past as well - like during the civil rights era.

But one thing they are trained in is crowd control, because of the possibility of looting and chaos after natural disasters.

If you want a military police force, try China.

Police ARENT trained in "military tactics". Cops dont have bomber planes. Or battleships. They dont deploy massive armored divisions. Or dig trenches and sent hundreds of infantry to storm a beach.

BUT...they do deal with aggressive human conflict. Often involving weapons.

So cops DO train in tactics of how to survive and win a gunfigh and hand to hand fight.

Guess who also trains in those skills? The military. They happen to overlap on some topics.

True. But as I said, some skills aren't necessary for the job, and are kind of an extreme response for a civilian police force, unless the suspect is a member of a drug cartel.

There are exceptions though, like SWAT teams, and counter-terrorism units, but it would be extreme to deploy that sort of equipment, and use those skills, to patrol a quiet neighborhood - as there are still places in America that aren't Baltimore.

Ok. So what skills are "inappropriate" for a basic patrol officer? Lets say a father is kissing his daughter goodbye as she leaves for Police Academy.

As a police chief....what would you tell him when he asks you..."Sir...im proud of her. But will she be getting the best available self defense training she can from your academy?"

So...what say you? Do you teach them the BEST possible way to survive and win a violent fight hand to hand or with weapons? Or.....do you tone it down and teach mediocre stuff because...well...they arent military and we wouldnt wanna offend anyone.

What would you tell him? Afterall...she may never need it. OR...she may encounter AK47 wielding terrorists on Day 1.

Sort of begging the question.

Is the basic patrol officer a member of a SWAT team or an anti-terrorism unit, the obvious answer is no.

So no, they shouldn't receive training on how to use the butt of their gun as a battering implement, if they want to learn about that - then that is for specialist squads, and not the regular police force.

But they are the FIRST responders. SWAT gets called AFTER patrol shows up and cant handle the situation.

Patrolmen are almost always the first to encounter the most violent situations.

So you're saying you would NOT teach police recruits the best hand to hand and firearms training they could get in that 20 weeks....FOR WHAT REASON? Fairness? To be sure theg arent trained TOO WELL to survive an encounter?

What possible justification would you give a father to say "Sir...we will NOT be training your daughter the best self defense we could teach...because well sir...we sure dont wanna offend folks."

 

[bucs90]

I don't want a military police force, you do.

Says the guy that wants police head butting people with their guns, might as well hand them bayonets.

Pistol whipping is a non lethal submission tactic. I know you can't tell the difference between that and stabbing someone in the spleen with a bayonet affixed to an M-16 so I won't even try to explain it.

Idiot.

So you think that police should go around hitting people with their guns, because they don't have a baton - even though they do?

What about another alleged 'non-lethal tactic'? Like choke holding (kills people), slapping hard (severely injures people), using tasers (known to kill people with heart conditions), and attacking non-violent protesters with heavy crowd control gear and tear gas (which can cause deaths, amputations, and miscarriages). Just because a tactic is declared 'non-lethal' doesn't mean it isn't extreme or heavy handed. So you still don't get the point.

You can't tell the difference between a military police force, like that deployed by an authoritarian government, or a civilian police force.

So, what is the difference? A bayonet*, is the next step, after all, if you think that using one military method doesn't justify another, then you haven't paid attention in history class.

Russia Today would have a field day with people like you, and they already get enough propaganda ammunition from what US police do already - in violating civil liberties and humans rights to 'keep the peace'.

Thankfully the Justice Department doesn't think that hitting people with guns is a good tactic of keeping the peace, in fact it puts police in disrepute as it emphasizes police brutality and makes people lose faith in the police force.

*Link to Chinese Security forces training with bayonets: Meanwhile In China Bayonets At The Ready Zero Hedge

Again...what would you tell a Dad sending his 21 year old daughter to Police Academy? Is she going to get the best possible hand to hand and gunfighting training they can offer? Or not?

You want to turn every patrol officer into a member of a SWAT or an anti-terrorism squad?

As the 'best training available' is not on offer, for obvious reasons - most American neighborhoods are not full of terrorists and heavily violent criminals, in fact crime is on the decline in most towns and cities, and Baltimore is the exception rather than the rule: Crime Rates in U.S. Drop to 1970s levels

Violent crime in the U.S. fell 4.4 percent last year to the lowest level in decades, the FBI announced Monday.

In 2013, there were 1.16 million violent crimes, the lowest amount since the 1978’s 1.09 million violent crimes, Reuters reports.

All types of violent crimes experienced decline last year, with rape dropping 6.3 percent, murder and non-negligent manslaughter dropping 4.4 percent and robbery dropping 2.8 percent.

The rate of violent crime is 367.9 crimes for every 100,000 people, which marked a 5.1 percent decline since 2012. The rate has fallen each year since at least 1994.

But any cop on any day could. Garland TX? Fort Hood...that terrorist was dropped by a female civilian cop.

Patrol cops are the first to encounter violence. SWAT shows up 30 minutes later.

 

[hipeter924]

All of which is nothing to do with what I have said. I didn't say that the National Guard should take over police roles.

I said that the police shouldn't use military methods or act like it is a military unit, as that in itself breaks the boundaries of a civilian police force.

The National Guard is trained to use military equipment and are given basic military training, which is my point.

It is also meant to be used for emergencies, but it has been abused in the past as well - like during the civil rights era.

But one thing they are trained in is crowd control, because of the possibility of looting and chaos after natural disasters.

If you want a military police force, try China.

Police ARENT trained in "military tactics". Cops dont have bomber planes. Or battleships. They dont deploy massive armored divisions. Or dig trenches and sent hundreds of infantry to storm a beach.

BUT...they do deal with aggressive human conflict. Often involving weapons.

So cops DO train in tactics of how to survive and win a gunfigh and hand to hand fight.

Guess who also trains in those skills? The military. They happen to overlap on some topics.

True. But as I said, some skills aren't necessary for the job, and are kind of an extreme response for a civilian police force, unless the suspect is a member of a drug cartel.

There are exceptions though, like SWAT teams, and counter-terrorism units, but it would be extreme to deploy that sort of equipment, and use those skills, to patrol a quiet neighborhood - as there are still places in America that aren't Baltimore.

Ok. So what skills are "inappropriate" for a basic patrol officer? Lets say a father is kissing his daughter goodbye as she leaves for Police Academy.

As a police chief....what would you tell him when he asks you..."Sir...im proud of her. But will she be getting the best available self defense training she can from your academy?"

So...what say you? Do you teach them the BEST possible way to survive and win a violent fight hand to hand or with weapons? Or.....do you tone it down and teach mediocre stuff because...well...they arent military and we wouldnt wanna offend anyone.

What would you tell him? Afterall...she may never need it. OR...she may encounter AK47 wielding terrorists on Day 1.

Sort of begging the question.

Is the basic patrol officer a member of a SWAT team or an anti-terrorism unit, the obvious answer is no.

So no, they shouldn't receive training on how to use the butt of their gun as a battering implement, if they want to learn about that - then that is for specialist squads, and not the regular police force.

But they are the FIRST responders. SWAT gets called AFTER patrol shows up and cant handle the situation.

Patrolmen are almost always the first to encounter the most violent situations.

So you're saying you would NOT teach police recruits the best hand to hand and firearms training they could get in that 20 weeks....FOR WHAT REASON? Fairness? To be sure theg arent trained TOO WELL to survive an encounter?

What possible justification would you give a father to say "Sir...we will NOT be training your daughter the best self defense we could teach...because well sir...we sure dont wanna offend folks."

Not allowing police to [use] the butt of a gun to hit people with, when they can do just as well with a baton, bat, or similar weapon, does not in any way stop them defending themselves or the public.

 

[hipeter924]

Says the guy that wants police head butting people with their guns, might as well hand them bayonets.

Pistol whipping is a non lethal submission tactic. I know you can't tell the difference between that and stabbing someone in the spleen with a bayonet affixed to an M-16 so I won't even try to explain it.

Idiot.

So you think that police should go around hitting people with their guns, because they don't have a baton - even though they do?

What about another alleged 'non-lethal tactic'? Like choke holding (kills people), slapping hard (severely injures people), using tasers (known to kill people with heart conditions), and attacking non-violent protesters with heavy crowd control gear and tear gas (which can cause deaths, amputations, and miscarriages). Just because a tactic is declared 'non-lethal' doesn't mean it isn't extreme or heavy handed. So you still don't get the point.

You can't tell the difference between a military police force, like that deployed by an authoritarian government, or a civilian police force.

So, what is the difference? A bayonet*, is the next step, after all, if you think that using one military method doesn't justify another, then you haven't paid attention in history class.

Russia Today would have a field day with people like you, and they already get enough propaganda ammunition from what US police do already - in violating civil liberties and humans rights to 'keep the peace'.

Thankfully the Justice Department doesn't think that hitting people with guns is a good tactic of keeping the peace, in fact it puts police in disrepute as it emphasizes police brutality and makes people lose faith in the police force.

*Link to Chinese Security forces training with bayonets: Meanwhile In China Bayonets At The Ready Zero Hedge

Again...what would you tell a Dad sending his 21 year old daughter to Police Academy? Is she going to get the best possible hand to hand and gunfighting training they can offer? Or not?

You want to turn every patrol officer into a member of a SWAT or an anti-terrorism squad?

As the 'best training available' is not on offer, for obvious reasons - most American neighborhoods are not full of terrorists and heavily violent criminals, in fact crime is on the decline in most towns and cities, and Baltimore is the exception rather than the rule: Crime Rates in U.S. Drop to 1970s levels

Violent crime in the U.S. fell 4.4 percent last year to the lowest level in decades, the FBI announced Monday.

In 2013, there were 1.16 million violent crimes, the lowest amount since the 1978’s 1.09 million violent crimes, Reuters reports.

All types of violent crimes experienced decline last year, with rape dropping 6.3 percent, murder and non-negligent manslaughter dropping 4.4 percent and robbery dropping 2.8 percent.

The rate of violent crime is 367.9 crimes for every 100,000 people, which marked a 5.1 percent decline since 2012. The rate has fallen each year since at least 1994.

But any cop on any day could. Garland TX? Fort Hood...that terrorist was dropped by a female civilian cop.

Patrol cops are the first to encounter violence. SWAT shows up 30 minutes later.

By using the butt of her gun to hit them with, or bullets?

At no point was it necessary for her to use the butt of her gun to hit someone with: Police officer who shot Fort Hood suspect says she s doing well - CNN.com

Once inside, Munley, who has been trained in active-response tactics, began exchanging fire with the alleged gunman, Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, a military psychiatrist, authorities said. They said her shots disabled Hasan and halted the attacks.