Why do you dislike law enforcement?

[Anonymous]

The far left wants to defund the police.

MAGA wants to defund the FBI.

Two sides of the same coin.

[Anonymous]

1. Militarization of local law enforcement
2. Corruption of federal law enforcement

Steroid and HGH abuse. Systemic racism. Abnormally high rates of domestic violence. Excessive compensation and disability retirement tax evasion schemes. Few bad apples spoiling it for the majority who possess integrity and truly want to uphold the law and make the world more safe for everyone.

Not sure I’d go so far as to say dislike, but manhandling 1/2 of the dream team that brought us Cherry Garcia doesn’t help.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:When people look at a race, religion, or ethnic group, they often see a small percentage that they don’t like. When they generalize that feeling & condemn ALL members of that group, it is called bigotry. That is exactly what many of you are doing with police officers.

You’re correct. But it’s okay when that bigotry is directed toward police officers, apparently.

[Anonymous]

When people say the militarization of police what are they talking about? What specifically are they concerned with?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:When people say the militarization of police what are they talking about? What specifically are they concerned with?

Primarily, donation of military equipment to police forces. That equipment doesn't have a civilian purpose. It's use leads to abuse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, I love the Capitol Hill police -- or at least those who tried to protect Congress instead of opening the gates and looking the other way. I love my sweet, non-racist cousin who is a cop in Texas. There are probably many good people doing a job that, as another poster said, I don't want to do.

But I've twice had my credit cards stolen from me (in places where there were cameras) and then used to spend thousands of dollars (in places where there were cameras). Police took the reports and did nothing. I checked with the grocery store three days after the first incident and learned that the police even asked for the video footage.

Soon after the first incident, I went onto my neighborhood listserv in Great Falls. One of my neighbors was talking about what happened to me because I had just moved into the neighborhood and she felt sorry for me. A representative of the police department actually joined the chat to blame me for stepping away from my purse in my shopping cart. First of all, victim blaming. Second of all, BS because my baby was in that cart and I would never have walked away from him. Third of all, why are you commenting publicly about this to deflect responsibility -- maybe you had a personal interest? I found out there there was a rash of similar thefts in the area all within an hour of mine, so it was a coordinated effort. I think the local police were in on it because no arrests were ever made.

The second incident took place at a school very well respected on DCUM. Four of us (all employees) had our wallets stolen. There was a camera at the entrance to the building. Our credit cards were all used first at a gas station for $1 (to check that they were active) and then for huge amounts at Target. How hard would it have been to find the criminals?

So, yeah, I no longer donate when I get those fundraiser calls. I realized through these experiences that some of them are just as corrupt as the people that are being charged.

Texas cops? Now those are some cowboy SOBs. They can shoot people in the back.

Who gets their credit cards stolen once let alone twice! I love the anecdote about the police being involved in a coordinated credit card theft operation. That was the icing on this silly cake. Were the thieves wearing hoods and masks? If you can’t identify someone that makes them hard to arrest. Maybe you should switch to Apple Pay.

Wait a minute - are you blaming me for having my credit cards stolen? Like it's my fault somehow? Once my wallet was stolen from my purse in a grocery store. Once from my desk in an office in a school that charges $55K for your child to attend. So, you'd kind of think it was safe. And yes, stores in the same shopping area reported that there were multiple thefts within the same hour. And the police were publicly blaming the victims (as you're doing) instead of finding the thieves. What motive would they have for that? As for masks, what are you talking about? If the thieves had been wearing masks walking around a grocery store, someone would have noticed. Their faces would have been visible on the store's video if the police had just asked them for it. You may not find all that suspicious. But at the very least, it's lazy, incompetent police work. And at the most, they didn't find the thieves because they had some reason not to look.

If you left your credit cards unattended that’s your fault. My credit cards have been all over the world in my 60 years and they’ve never been stolen because I’m not an easy mark. Your fancy pants school apparently admits or employs thieves. Good luck with that. Please name the school so relatives can avoid it.

Someone who calls a school "fancy pants" because of the tuition doesn't have relatives who can afford it, much less be admitted. The thief walked in through the front door, and you're right, they certainly tightened up security after this. It doesn't absolve the police of having to do their jobs. Which they did not do. And that's my answer to the original quesiton about why I dislike law enforcement. This should have been an easy one for them. If they couldn't solve it with cameras everywhere, what good are they?

Someone who uses the term “fancy pants” must easily be in their 70s or 80s.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There appears to be a contingent of posters here that dislike federal and local law enforcement. I’m wondering if people’s reasoning is similar or if there are several distinct opinions. I’ve seen several “defund” posts and even one calling for the death penalty for ICE agents. Maybe it’s only one or two posters. I’ll be interested to see your replies.

The job tends to attract dumb people. It doesn’t take a lot of intelligence or training to be a cop.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When people say the militarization of police what are they talking about? What specifically are they concerned with?

Primarily, donation of military equipment to police forces. That equipment doesn't have a civilian purpose. It's use leads to abuse.

This is absolutely false. The program, known as DRMO, only transfers equipment which has a dual-application.

Examples might be protective gas-masks, which our officers need during riot control situations.

Another, less-obvious item would be what police use as tear-gas launchers. The military uses these as grenade launchers but they NEVER transfer grenades to police! Ever. Why would they? And police could not use grenades anyway.

But these launchers in police hands can be used to safely deposit crowd-dispersal agents from a safe distance. This allows police to keep everybody safe using tested, safe, non-lethal technology (thanks to a military donation).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When people say the militarization of police what are they talking about? What specifically are they concerned with?

Primarily, donation of military equipment to police forces. That equipment doesn't have a civilian purpose. It's use leads to abuse.

This is absolutely false. The program, known as DRMO, only transfers equipment which has a dual-application.

Examples might be protective gas-masks, which our officers need during riot control situations.

Another, less-obvious item would be what police use as tear-gas launchers. The military uses these as grenade launchers but they NEVER transfer grenades to police! Ever. Why would they? And police could not use grenades anyway.

But these launchers in police hands can be used to safely deposit crowd-dispersal agents from a safe distance. This allows police to keep everybody safe using tested, safe, non-lethal technology (thanks to a military donation).

The military also donates used bullet-proof vests to our officers.

How does such safety equipment NOT have a civilian police purpose? The person up-thread was lying when she said it “has no civilian purpose.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When people say the militarization of police what are they talking about? What specifically are they concerned with?

Primarily, donation of military equipment to police forces. That equipment doesn't have a civilian purpose. It's use leads to abuse.

This is absolutely false. The program, known as DRMO, only transfers equipment which has a dual-application.

Examples might be protective gas-masks, which our officers need during riot control situations.

Another, less-obvious item would be what police use as tear-gas launchers. The military uses these as grenade launchers but they NEVER transfer grenades to police! Ever. Why would they? And police could not use grenades anyway.

But these launchers in police hands can be used to safely deposit crowd-dispersal agents from a safe distance. This allows police to keep everybody safe using tested, safe, non-lethal technology (thanks to a military donation).

They also donate military vehicles. Explanation for that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When people say the militarization of police what are they talking about? What specifically are they concerned with?

Primarily, donation of military equipment to police forces. That equipment doesn't have a civilian purpose. It's use leads to abuse.

This is absolutely false. The program, known as DRMO, only transfers equipment which has a dual-application.

Examples might be protective gas-masks, which our officers need during riot control situations.

Another, less-obvious item would be what police use as tear-gas launchers. The military uses these as grenade launchers but they NEVER transfer grenades to police! Ever. Why would they? And police could not use grenades anyway.

But these launchers in police hands can be used to safely deposit crowd-dispersal agents from a safe distance. This allows police to keep everybody safe using tested, safe, non-lethal technology (thanks to a military donation).

They also donate military vehicles. Explanation for that?

OMG you are dumb.

Many military vehicles are built to be bullet-proof. Police cars are not (they are just cars).

In barricade situations, specialized units like S.W.A.T., use these repurposed vehicles to safely evacuate people trapped in danger in the line of fire. These vehicles can also safely get the officers closer to where they need to be, without risk of harm.

[Anonymous]

Police are not getting tanks. The PP up thread was spreading misinformation about the so-called “militarization of police.”

Police special-units sometimes get a surplus MRAP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When people say the militarization of police what are they talking about? What specifically are they concerned with?

Primarily, donation of military equipment to police forces. That equipment doesn't have a civilian purpose. It's use leads to abuse.

This is absolutely false. The program, known as DRMO, only transfers equipment which has a dual-application.

Examples might be protective gas-masks, which our officers need during riot control situations.

Another, less-obvious item would be what police use as tear-gas launchers. The military uses these as grenade launchers but they NEVER transfer grenades to police! Ever. Why would they? And police could not use grenades anyway.

But these launchers in police hands can be used to safely deposit crowd-dispersal agents from a safe distance. This allows police to keep everybody safe using tested, safe, non-lethal technology (thanks to a military donation).

The military also donates used bullet-proof vests to our officers.

How does such safety equipment NOT have a civilian police purpose? The person up-thread was lying when she said it “has no civilian purpose.”

Used bulletproof vests are a huge liability. If this is happening, you are asking for a lawsuit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Police are not getting tanks. The PP up thread was spreading misinformation about the so-called “militarization of police.”

Police special-units sometimes get a surplus MRAP.

Are there a lot of mines in Arlington?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Police are not getting tanks. The PP up thread was spreading misinformation about the so-called “militarization of police.”

Police special-units sometimes get a surplus MRAP.

Are there a lot of mines in Arlington?

it’s just a truck. An unarmed, bulletproof, rescue vehicle