Annnnnnd Dallas County just got themselves an MRAP!

[CrazedJava]

Apples and oranges.

A better comparison would be taking military M4's, modifying them to be semiauto only, and then giving them to police departments.

Except there was a time when police departments were receiving full auto M16A1's that the military was not using. Also for free.

This is not about them using a civilian version of a military vehicle, but a military vehicle being put to civilian usage.

Is there NEVER a call for this type of vehicle in police work? I don't know, but I never said that either.

Does Dallas County actually have a need for one? Will it be abused? Did you read what I posted about the Arlington SWAT knocking over what appeared to be nothing more than a garden?

More and more the police seem to like breaking out the toys and playing soldier. This is not comforting.

They say it will be for serving "dangerous warrants" but is crime so out of control in the unincorporated areas that this is really necessary?

No one has answered that question yet.

I'm not saying this as someone who is anti-police. I'm saying this as former law enforcement who still has friends and colleagues serving in multiple departments. I'm well aware of the dangers they face everyday.

 

[Younggun]

So because Arlington swat did one thing Dallas SO can't be trusted. Interesting concept.


Law enforcement has always advanced behind the curve it seems. Something happens and a lot of cops get killed, then they get new equipment.

Why not let them have the equipment so if they do need it, they have it.


What's that saying about having a parachute?

 

[Shotgun Jeremy]

So because Arlington swat did one thing Dallas SO can't be trusted. Interesting concept.

Sounds like the anti gun concept.

 

[breakingcontact]

Protect, from what? IEDs? RPGs? Grenades?

Armored bulldozers would be great too.

 

[AMERICANTARGETS741776]

So because Arlington swat did one thing Dallas SO can't be trusted. Interesting concept.


Law enforcement has always advanced behind the curve it seems. Something happens and a lot of cops get killed, then they get new equipment.

Why not let them have the equipment so if they do need it, they have it.


What's that saying about having a parachute?

Arlington isn't the only one who gets it wrong, Look up the story of Aiyana Stanley- Jones Who was Killed by a SWAT team member for no logical reason( No Child should be the victim of such matter, let alone the parents), ANY SWAT team and or Police Officer can get Anything wrong, We are only Human...

 

[AMERICANTARGETS741776]

I understand those who believe this is a great "tool" for the cops to use to denture criminals and other organized crime, I just do not want to see ANY more senseless deaths in the Civilian population, especially our children, As a father myself, there is nothing that can be said to justify for a child's death. My heart and concerns go out to the brave Men and women who help protect our country everyday, but they know what they are signing up for, our children don't.

 

[mosin]

I guess you never thought about it too much, but sometimes bad people shoot bullets at police officers.....sometimes. Sometimes they even use rifles.

Oh my god the horror, people shoot at people who signed up to do a dangerous job and possibly be shot at. Stop the presses! Insanity! Next you are going to tell me secretaries get paper cuts. Guess what, I'd rather not walk into a situation where there is a high likelihood of getting shot. I chose my career path accordingly. Bringing up the danger aspect of their job while it does justify the garnering of respect for them, does not justify them to have a free pass for every decision. They know what they are signing up for and don't need apologists justifying stupid decisions.

No one is saying they want to see dead cops, just that there should be a serious re-evaluation of the equipment and tactics currently being used. So far one person has cited a story where an MRAP wouldve been of any use and frankly if a firetruck worked, why not use a firetruck again since it happens one ever 15 years. I don't go out and splurge on a personal autobody shop because I might need to fix my bumper in a decade.

Sources were already cited there is NO increase and infact a decline in officers being killed. A third of those last year were at traffic stops so unless every cop gets an armored car and a loud speaker an MRAP aint gonna help, most of the rest were domestic disturbance calls. It is a rare thing when a cop is killed serving a warrant, even rarer being shot in his car or taking cover behind it during a stand off.

There is no need for this garbage, the statistics don't warrant it neither does this "if it just saves one life" bs. I'm sorry but if you start using that as your argument you can justify anything from banning spoons to putting a missile through the house of anyone suspected of doing anything wrong without a trial. Either would save officer lives I'm sure.

 

[Younggun]

Oh my god the horror, people shoot at people who signed up to do a dangerous job and possibly be shot at. Stop the presses! Insanity! Next you are going to tell me secretaries get paper cuts. Guess what, I'd rather not walk into a situation where there is a high likelihood of getting shot. I chose my career path accordingly. Bringing up the danger aspect of their job while it does justify the garnering of respect for them, does not justify them to have a free pass for every decision. They know what they are signing up for and don't need apologists justifying stupid decisions.

No one is saying they want to see dead cops, just that there should be a serious re-evaluation of the equipment and tactics currently being used. So far one person has cited a story where an MRAP wouldve been of any use and frankly if a firetruck worked, why not use a firetruck again since it happens one ever 15 years. I don't go out and splurge on a personal autobody shop because I might need to fix my bumper in a decade.

Sources were already cited there is NO increase and infact a decline in officers being killed. A third of those last year were at traffic stops so unless every cop gets an armored car and a loud speaker an MRAP aint gonna help, most of the rest were domestic disturbance calls. It is a rare thing when a cop is killed serving a warrant, even rarer being shot in his car or taking cover behind it during a stand off.

There is no need for this garbage, the statistics don't warrant it neither does this "if it just saves one life" bs. I'm sorry but if you start using that as your argument you can justify anything from banning spoons to putting a missile through the house of anyone suspected of doing anything wrong without a trial. Either would save officer lives I'm sure.

Being in the military is dangerous, we still got armor.

Electrical work is dangerous, they get equipment to minimize that risk.

Why is it different for law enforcement.


Have you considered that the reason for the decline in officer deaths is , at least in part, due to the utilization of these "military style police tactics"(swat) and access to armor to protect them in high risk situations.

 

[Younggun]

I understand those who believe this is a great "tool" for the cops to use to denture criminals and other organized crime, I just do not want to see ANY more senseless deaths in the Civilian population, especially our children, As a father myself, there is nothing that can be said to justify for a child's death. My heart and concerns go out to the brave Men and women who help protect our country everyday, but they know what they are signing up for, our children don't.

What does that have to do with an MRAP. It's a truck with armor. No guns, no missile launchers, no plasma cannons or photon torpedoes. It is simply a means to safely transport officers and evacuate wounded if needed. Some are fitted with a means to deal with barricades. Usually by pulling them down.

 

[Younggun]

Arlington isn't the only one who gets it wrong, Look up the story of Aiyana Stanley- Jones Who was Killed by a SWAT team member for no logical reason( No Child should be the victim of such matter, let alone the parents), ANY SWAT team and or Police Officer can get Anything wrong, We are only Human...

Again, what does that have to do with an MRAP. Did they run over the kid?

 

[Younggun]

Protect, from what? IEDs? RPGs? Grenades?

Armored bulldozers would be great too.

Can't fit many people in an armored bulk dozer, only one seat.


And I'll answer again, it will likely be used to protect them from bullets.

 

[mosin]

Being in the military is dangerous, we still got armor.

Electrical work is dangerous, they get equipment to minimize that risk.

Why is it different for law enforcement.


Have you considered that the reason for the decline in officer deaths is , at least in part, due to the utilization of these "military style police tactics"(swat) and access to armor to protect them in high risk situations.

Have you considered there is a point of reasonableness and diminishing returns?

More died in 1915 than last year, and there are at least triple probably quadruple the number of LEOs. How about we just install kill switches in everyone at birth then no one has to arrest them. When do you call it quits? Honestly when do YOU say we've gone to far?

 

[CrazedJava]

I still have yet to see one reason why Dallas County SO thinks they need an MRAP. It seems like a big fat pile of what if without any demonstrable need while their primary mission continues to be more about running county jails than patrol work.

 

[AngeliaH]

Why do they "need" it? Why do you need a 30 round mag? I can see both points. If I have the mindset that its them against us then yes its bothersome. But is it them against us? What about how awesome it is that someone who is there to protect me has something that might be helpful? Just a few thoughts.

 

[Vaquero]

"Nice toy sheriff, keep it off my place. Thanks".

 

[TxBigfoot]

Armored vehicles used against civilians, what could possibly go wrong?

Nope, no militarization of police. Let's pretend it's normal to point an mp5 in the face of a gay guy holding a scared child lol.

 

[txbikerman]

If it helps them do their job of protecting the citizens then its a good thing. They need the tools to do the job.

 

[Texan2]

Always amazes me how rude people are when discussing this issue. It shouldnt but it does.

Lol....i was thinking the exact same thing.

 

[jordanmills]

It would be one thing if these were ONLY being used on dangerous criminals, but more and more we are hearing about SWAT teams being used to raid businesses or to serve standard search warrants. The story above comes from Arlington, practically next door. Not some blue nanny state with a Big Brother complex.

At some point, enough is enough.

I'd be a lot more okay with them blowing money on maintaining and driving this thing if they could be responsible with what they already have.

 

[Texan2]

Those who are against the police having tools sound like the anti gunners. Blaming the tool for the action of the person holding it. Saying that just in case it may get abused we shouldn't let them have it. I thought the liberals had copyrighted that tactic.