itsrequired
New Member
John Stossel ~ Police Militarization - YouTube
I saw this in another thread but can't find that thread.
So this guy, from the CATO institute, a libertarian organization, which does studies that imply police are doing things wrong, just because of accusations, is trying to sell a book. He doesn’t like the fact that police are wearing equipment which makes them safer, or that the most tactically trained officers are conducting raids. Boo hoo, too bad.
First, let’s go to the CATO institute’s study. They present a study which says there is this rampant police misconduct. Then when you read the study, it reveals that in most of these instances, there is simply an allegation of misconduct with no finding of such. In many of these instances, the officers were acquitted of misconduct or a prosecutor, declined to move forward because there was not sufficient evidence.
If this were any other person but a cop, and the cops were writing this study, the CATO institute and its followers, would be jumping up and down saying how evil the cops are to be presenting this information as factual, without due process.
Then the CATO institute’s followers say the flaw in the system is the thin blue line. Prosecutors and JUDGES are reluctant to charge of convict cops. That theory is also debunked because bad cops are charged and convicted every single day!
So on to SWAT teams. I can only speak of my experience but the truth of the matter is swat teams are used on search warrants where there is a more than normal propensity for violence. What is often not shared with the media is information the cops had about the subject of the search warrant. It could be a history of arrests for violence but no convictions. It could be informant information about threats the subject has made towards the authority. It could by a myriad of other things, but that information is evaluated and then the determination to use swat is concluded. Using swat teams is not a bad thing. They are the generally the most highly trained, disciplined, people on a police agency.
No knock warrants. CATO would have you believe that No Knock warrants are the norm. They are not. There has to be circumstances present for a judge to authorize no knock warrants and most judges are not exactly from the depths of the conservative ranks.
So I am sure this guy will sell Chris and Freedom some books; go on some talk shows, and stir up some people, but that is about it. His idea that swat should be something different doesn’t hold much weight. He is dishonest in his argument. He actually made the statement that when he worked for the CATO institute in “all these raids, they ALWAYS killed the dog”. Do you think he has an agenda? Is that proper journalism?
I saw this in another thread but can't find that thread.
So this guy, from the CATO institute, a libertarian organization, which does studies that imply police are doing things wrong, just because of accusations, is trying to sell a book. He doesn’t like the fact that police are wearing equipment which makes them safer, or that the most tactically trained officers are conducting raids. Boo hoo, too bad.
First, let’s go to the CATO institute’s study. They present a study which says there is this rampant police misconduct. Then when you read the study, it reveals that in most of these instances, there is simply an allegation of misconduct with no finding of such. In many of these instances, the officers were acquitted of misconduct or a prosecutor, declined to move forward because there was not sufficient evidence.
If this were any other person but a cop, and the cops were writing this study, the CATO institute and its followers, would be jumping up and down saying how evil the cops are to be presenting this information as factual, without due process.
Then the CATO institute’s followers say the flaw in the system is the thin blue line. Prosecutors and JUDGES are reluctant to charge of convict cops. That theory is also debunked because bad cops are charged and convicted every single day!
So on to SWAT teams. I can only speak of my experience but the truth of the matter is swat teams are used on search warrants where there is a more than normal propensity for violence. What is often not shared with the media is information the cops had about the subject of the search warrant. It could be a history of arrests for violence but no convictions. It could be informant information about threats the subject has made towards the authority. It could by a myriad of other things, but that information is evaluated and then the determination to use swat is concluded. Using swat teams is not a bad thing. They are the generally the most highly trained, disciplined, people on a police agency.
No knock warrants. CATO would have you believe that No Knock warrants are the norm. They are not. There has to be circumstances present for a judge to authorize no knock warrants and most judges are not exactly from the depths of the conservative ranks.
So I am sure this guy will sell Chris and Freedom some books; go on some talk shows, and stir up some people, but that is about it. His idea that swat should be something different doesn’t hold much weight. He is dishonest in his argument. He actually made the statement that when he worked for the CATO institute in “all these raids, they ALWAYS killed the dog”. Do you think he has an agenda? Is that proper journalism?
