The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > Law and Civil Rights

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old August 14, 2014, 06:25 PM   #1
Mainah
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 9, 2007
Posts: 526
The Ferguson, MO Police Shooting

I'm prepared to be shut down by the mods, but... it does seem to me that the media reaction to the shooting and the following riots/peaceful protests is turning towards a focus on the militarization of the police. Does anyone think that this could lead to different public approach to gun control?

Personally I've been scoffed at by friends who support gun control for suggesting that armed citizens can serve as a means of controlling government abuse. However it seems like we're entering a climate where more people would be willing to ask why the police should be better armed than the rest of us. Why should the capacity of a magazine that I can own be smaller than the capacity of the local police?
Mainah is offline  
Old August 14, 2014, 06:44 PM   #2
lamarw
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 12, 2010
Location: Lake Martin, AL
Posts: 1,796
The following is not necessarily a response to your comments/questions. Many of us remember when law enforcement routinely patrolled in pairs with a partner.

It is no longer the norm and has not been so in years. I assume it is due to budget cuts or allowable budgets.

If the officer was in the wrong in this case, it might of been prevented if he had a partner with a cool head or who was calmer. If the officer was justified in the use deadly force, then there would of been an extra witness to the event that took place.

This is assuming the officer was on his on in this situation. I do not know whether this is true or not.
lamarw is offline  
Old August 14, 2014, 06:59 PM   #3
Mainah
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 9, 2007
Posts: 526
I am not trying to question the officers actions. I'm asking if images of police using military equipment and tactics in response to the response to the shootings could change the gun control debate.
Mainah is offline  
Old August 14, 2014, 07:02 PM   #4
zxcvbob
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 20, 2007
Location: S.E. Minnesota
Posts: 4,201
Quote:
However it seems like we're entering a climate where more people would be willing to ask why the police should be better armed than the rest of us. Why should the capacity of a magazine that I can own be smaller than the capacity of the local police?
So you will be at a disadvantage when the police declare war against you.

Re: the Ferguson occupation, I really hope things cool down there tonight with the governor relieving the St Louis County police and sending in the MO Highway Patrol.
__________________
"The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is with a good guy with a gun"

Last edited by Tom Servo; August 14, 2014 at 10:36 PM. Reason: Knock that off
zxcvbob is offline  
Old August 14, 2014, 07:19 PM   #5
Fishing_Cabin
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 10, 2010
Posts: 716
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mainah
I am not trying to question the officers actions. I'm asking if images of police using military equipment and tactics in response to the response to the shootings could change the gun control debate.
I am not sure, but doubtful though. While I have seen some pictures and news reports that showed a few armored vehicles, most of what I have seen has been officers in riot gear or similar PPE. Most places have (or should have) a policy in place stating that in order for workman's comp to pay a claim for injury that the officer is required to use the level of PPE for the situation. Like an officer putting on his vest, so he is within policy/insurance if he is shot and injured. Dealing with an accident victim that's bleeding? Use suitable PPE, such as disposable gloves, etc. Riot/crowd control? Suitable PPE, helmet, vest, face shield, and shin guards.

More than anything though I think there will be a review of policies and/or tactics, and perhaps some changes in that area.

Last edited by Fishing_Cabin; August 14, 2014 at 07:38 PM. Reason: spelling correction
Fishing_Cabin is offline  
Old August 14, 2014, 07:29 PM   #6
Pahoo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 16, 2006
Location: IOWA
Posts: 5,637
Be prepared !!

Quote:
I'm asking if images of police using military equipment and tactics in response to the response to the shootings could change the gun control debate.
I don't think so and I recall a police chief going on the news, after a past riot and use the following excuse; "We were just out-gunned by the rioters." Personally, I don't want my department to be outgunned or not trained and for sure, never use that lame excuse. ....

Be prepared and;
Be Safe !!!
__________________
'Fundamental truths' are easy to recognize because they are verified daily through simple observation and thus, require no testing.
Pahoo is offline  
Old August 14, 2014, 07:37 PM   #7
Mainah
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 9, 2007
Posts: 526
Excellent points, and thanks. But how do woods/jungle camo, or just plain black uniforms enhance officer safety? What is the point of that, beyond just intimidation? And to the point that this forum requires, why are "assault weapons" needed in response to bricks and rocks? If things can escalate so quickly that the police need those weapons, then why can't I have access to them too?
Mainah is offline  
Old August 14, 2014, 07:39 PM   #8
JD0x0
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 30, 2013
Posts: 916
What are the protesters using that the police can even attempt to use the excuse that they're 'out gunned' with their SBR (select fire?) AR-15's, shotguns, tear gas, full body armor and armored vehicles.

Do the protesters have backpack and Davy Crockett nukes that I don't know about?
JD0x0 is offline  
Old August 14, 2014, 07:46 PM   #9
Mainah
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 9, 2007
Posts: 526
Here's what I wonder, if I lived in the neighborhood that has been the focus of civil unrest in Ferguson would I be more afraid of the rioters or the police?
Mainah is offline  
Old August 14, 2014, 07:46 PM   #10
zxcvbob
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 20, 2007
Location: S.E. Minnesota
Posts: 4,201
Quote:
What are the protesters using that the police can even attempt to use the excuse that they're 'out gunned' with their SBR (select fire?) AR-15's, shotguns, tear gas, full body armor and armored vehicles.
They are raising their hands mockingly and saying "don't shoot". The sarcasm is very hurtful.
__________________
"The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is with a good guy with a gun"
zxcvbob is offline  
Old August 14, 2014, 08:03 PM   #11
JD0x0
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 30, 2013
Posts: 916
I'd be more worried about police than rioters. At least you could defend yourself against the rioters. If you sneeze too close to a cop, they'll shoot you 44 times and label you as a 'cop killer' for shooting snot at them.
JD0x0 is offline  
Old August 14, 2014, 08:13 PM   #12
bigleverman
Junior Member
 
Join Date: February 23, 2014
Posts: 4
Come on people. These people were rioting not protesting. Who cares what tactics are used if they are effective. Dont want to get hurt dont riot
bigleverman is offline  
Old August 14, 2014, 08:24 PM   #13
8MM Mauser
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 16, 2011
Location: Grand Rapids, Michigan
Posts: 510
Quote:
Come on people. These people were rioting not protesting. Who cares what tactics are used if they are effective. Dont want to get hurt dont riot
The first night they were rioting.

The second night they were peacefully standing with signs when the police used tear gas to disperse them.

I do not think that all police or bad; nor do I think it is "anti-police" to criticize the actions of one department, really a collection of individuals. The Ferguson PD messed up.

I do not think it will reframe the gun control debate however. I imagine and anti would declare that weapons in the hands of protesters would have made things worse (that this argument is not what it is about wouldn't bother them.) And if these folks did physically fight back they would all be killed or jailed and the FPD vindicated. This seems neutral to our cause.
__________________
See my writings:

http://benjaminraber.hubpages.com/
8MM Mauser is offline  
Old August 14, 2014, 09:00 PM   #14
Fisher
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 14, 1999
Location: Reynoldsburg, Ohio
Posts: 277
Quote by 8MM Mauser:
Quote:
The first night they were rioting.

The second night they were peacefully standing with signs when the police used tear gas to disperse them.
I believe there was more to it than just peacefully standing with signs. If the police asked them to disperse and they refused. Then the tear gas would have been warranted. It would not be the place to argue about free speech or the right to assemble. You can argue that later with an attorney in a court room.

When dealing with the police or the military there is just one thing to remember. If you do not do as you are asked or react with aggression. They will not respond in kind, but with enough force to subdue you. Like it or not, that is their job.

I do hope things calm down there and no one else is hurt, for everyone's sake. And to keep this on track to the OP's question. No, I don't believe this is another form of gun control. I believe it has more to do with not wanting to walk into a hell storm of fully automatic weapons with a shotgun and a 45 auto.

Jim
__________________
"Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and passed on ... or we will spend our sunset years telling our children's children what it was like in the United States when men were free."
~ Ronald Reagan
Fisher is offline  
Old August 14, 2014, 09:23 PM   #15
JD0x0
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 30, 2013
Posts: 916
Quote:
Come on people. These people were rioting not protesting. Who cares what tactics are used if they are effective. Dont want to get hurt dont riot
Quote:
I believe there was more to it than just peacefully standing with signs.
I take it you two haven't seen the reporters or the state senator who were tear gassed for no legitimate reason.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a51F...ature=youtu.be

http://youtu.be/720_l3dgbYA
JD0x0 is offline  
Old August 14, 2014, 09:31 PM   #16
gyvel
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 30, 2009
Location: Northern AZ
Posts: 5,229
I recently got an email link from a friend to a Glenn Beck video (of whom I'm not particularly a fan) in which Beck stated that we are in a "cold civil war." When I saw the first reports of the Ferguson, MO events, that is exactly what came to mind.
__________________
MIIAA
SIFE
gyvel is offline  
Old August 14, 2014, 10:11 PM   #17
jimbob86
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 4, 2007
Location: All the way to NEBRASKA
Posts: 6,898
Quote:
If the police asked them to disperse and they refused. Then the tear gas would have been warranted.
"Disperse, Ye Rebels."

Ferguson PD has lost their hold on the situation.

Doubt me? Go read up on Sir Robert Peel.

When the Public does not support the Police, then their job is hopeless- they are just percieved as just another gang, albeit better armed and trained.
__________________
TheGolden Rule of Tool Use: "If you don't know what you are doing, DON'T."

http://nefirearm.com/
jimbob86 is offline  
Old August 14, 2014, 10:20 PM   #18
Technosavant
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 29, 2007
Location: St. Louis, MO area
Posts: 3,903
The rioting came AFTER the protests. Rather later at night on Sunday and Monday nights.

The last two nights (Tues/Wed) were the nights where tear gas was used. Long before any actual unrest began, the police were arrayed in the street in full battle gear. Even pointing weapons at people who were visibly unarmed and nonthreatening. Yes, some troublemakers did start throwing things (and last night, that's when the tear gas came out), but the response by the police to what began as a protest was extremely heavy handed. The violence has been surprisingly limited... there has been some, but it isn't like hundreds of people were throwing things last night. More like a dozen or two among hundreds. Meanwhile, the police were lobbing tear gas everywhere- even at people standing in their own back yards. They used so much that people inside were affected.

Tonight, thankfully, the altered approach has resulted in a greater spirit of cooperation. The less confrontational style (regular uniforms, no full battle kit, being among the people instead of arrayed in front of them in a skirmish line) has paid huge dividends.

This may possibly be a big game changer as far as militarization of police goes- while I understand and appreciate the police officers value their own safety, it seems the feeling is becoming that their own safety does not trump the safety of the people they're supposed to protect. Protecting yourself is fine, protecting yourself by escalating situations, intimidating people, and causing indiscriminate harm (basically, what they did last night) isn't.

I hope police agencies will realize that "you catch more flies with honey" applies to them too. Sure, there's times to suit up and have the tactical teams on standby. But when that's the primary image you are giving to the people, you aren't helping or protecting anymore.
Technosavant is offline  
Old August 14, 2014, 10:23 PM   #19
Technosavant
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 29, 2007
Location: St. Louis, MO area
Posts: 3,903
Quote:
I do not think it will reframe the gun control debate however. I imagine and anti would declare that weapons in the hands of protesters would have made things worse (that this argument is not what it is about wouldn't bother them.) And if these folks did physically fight back they would all be killed or jailed and the FPD vindicated. This seems neutral to our cause.
I wouldn't say it's neutral. People are realizing that when there's possible danger about, the gun rights people have a darn good point.

Gun sales at several shops in the general vicinity are through the roof over the last several days. Many of the buyers are people who don't have one. Hopefully they will get training on how to store and use the firearm safely.
Technosavant is offline  
Old August 14, 2014, 10:45 PM   #20
Tom Servo
Staff
 
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 10,399
I don't see this relating to gun control, or guns in general.

However, it is a legitimate civil rights issue, so I'm moving it to L&CR. Before posting, please familiarize yourself with the rules specific to this subforum.

Also, bear in mind that we won't tolerate generalized bashing of law enforcement. The relevant issue is the mindset of policymakers and the top brass.

Those are the people who petitioned for all this milsurp equipment and ninja gear. Those are the people who responded to one night of looting by persecuting the people who didn't do it on subsequent nights, and who chose to do so with a hamhanded show of force.

Threatening and inflicting violence (yes, tear gas counts) on peaceful protesters is something that should set all our teeth on edge. The question is, how do we change that?
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change.
--Randall Munroe
Tom Servo is offline  
Old August 14, 2014, 11:32 PM   #21
gyvel
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 30, 2009
Location: Northern AZ
Posts: 5,229
Quote:
I don't see this relating to gun control, or guns in general.
I would tend to disagree with that point of view, as gun control and the emergence of a "police state" generally go hand-in-hand. When the general populace loses its ability to fight back, I think the cycle is completed.

I obey laws and avoid confrontations with LE (my adopted son is a county sheriff here), but there are lines that shouldn't be crossed and it seems that the officer in MO did just that.
__________________
MIIAA
SIFE
gyvel is offline  
Old August 15, 2014, 07:07 AM   #22
2ndsojourn
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 15, 2013
Location: South Jersey
Posts: 670
"Does anyone think that this could lead to different public approach to gun control?"

It will get some people to think about it for awhile, as long as the subject is repeated on lamestream media. But, it will peter out when the next airplane crashes, or another movie star commits suicide, or some other mass tragedy occurs. Then it'll be back to the same old 'why do ordinary citizens need....'.
2ndsojourn is offline  
Old August 15, 2014, 07:46 AM   #23
jimbob86
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 4, 2007
Location: All the way to NEBRASKA
Posts: 6,898
Quote:
"Does anyone think that this could lead to different public approach to gun control?"
Gun control has always been about control- keeping guns out of "The Wrong (People's) Hands" ...... those people considered "Wrong" can be shifted by fear mongering, and faster than you think ...... Germans were absolutely appalled by the Armenian Genocide in 1915, yet in less than 2 decades, embarked on their own, even larger systematic elimination of the "wrong" people .......

"Control" is the antithesis of "Freedom" ....... such a thing should leave a bad taste in the mouth any American. Sadly, Americans are afraid of that word.
__________________
TheGolden Rule of Tool Use: "If you don't know what you are doing, DON'T."

http://nefirearm.com/
jimbob86 is offline  
Old August 15, 2014, 09:23 AM   #24
BarryLee
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 29, 2010
Location: The ATL (OTP)
Posts: 2,759
I’ve never really felt like the militarization of the police was a result of the hardware they have, but how and when they use that hardware. There are times when many of these tactics are perfectly appropriate and times when they are not. The question is do we have the proper policies, training, oversight and accountability to assure they are used properly.

As for the OP’s question about how this might impact gun control I suspect this would actually embolden those who support more gun control. The perception of some is that the Police are committing violent acts, so we need to take their tools away. I believe the same attitude applies to gun control if they just restrict or eliminate guns from our society there will be no violence.
__________________
A major source of objection to a free economy is precisely that it ... gives people what they want instead of what a particular group thinks they ought to want. Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself.
- Milton Friedman
BarryLee is offline  
Old August 15, 2014, 09:39 AM   #25
kraigwy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 16, 2008
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 9,474
Looks like another ball game:

According to LE News conference Brown was a suspect in an strong armed robbery (photos showed him committing the robbery).

The LE officer was dispatched from another call to assist in the robbery investigation, and made contact with Brown.

And that's when the shooting occurred. Little was said in the news conference about the shooting itself except to say the officer was injured in the contact with Brown. Brown, at 6'4" 240 lbs. was much larger then the officer.

Now I wasn't there, I don't know the Dept. Policy of Ferguson PD, but I do know, on the dept. I worked for, after taking an A$$ whooping from a robbery suspect, deadly force would have been authorized to apprehend the suspect, even if he was un-armed.

Regardless; nothing wrong with peaceful protest, but there is no excuse for arson, looting, shucking bricks at police or tossing Molotov cocktails.

Having said that I'd rather wait until the investigation is complete before I make any judgments on the guilt or incidence of those involve.
__________________
Kraig Stuart
CPT USAR Ret
USAMU Sniper School Oct '78
Distinguished Rifle Badge 1071
kraigwy is online now  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:34 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.14031 seconds with 7 queries