American Civil Unrest

[Goat]

Not entirely - Brevard County Aviation Unit LINK.

Loads of Google results too.

A small number of surveilance aircraft, not dissimilar to many other police departments across the world.

Nothing there to indicate that they could and would arm themselves with multi-million dollar anti tank weapon systems.

[1929crash]

A small number of surveilance aircraft, not dissimilar to many other police departments across the world.

Nothing there to indicate that they could and would arm themselves with multi-million dollar anti tank weapon systems.

You're not paying attention, Goat. This sort of thing is happening all over the United States but you just keep on watching the British State Broadcasting Corporation.

[Steppenpig]

1929crash, on 22 Aug 2014 - 8:31 PM, said:

Police in Brevard County, Florida have bought eight Apache attack helicopters.

Goat, on 23 Aug 2014 - 4:52 PM, said:

Even by your standards that is ridiculous.

Not entirely -

Are you implying that the comment is not ridiculous, or that it is the normal standard of ridiculousness for 1929crash's comments?

Loads of Google results too.

which all link back to one guy on facebook. he is a pirate party member, so he may be a tiny bit more plausible than your average blogger, but doesn't seem to provide any evidence or source.

It seems pretty obvious that Brevan County Sherrif's department is not in a position to operate Black Hawks, but given that Cape Canaveral is part of the region, it wouldn't surprise me if there were some police/military unit there to protect it from attack.

[1929crash]

Here's an article with a link to a search engine for finding out what county police departments in the various states of the US have purchased under the Federal government's 1033 programme.

http://www.shtfplan.com/militarization-by-county-via-the-law-enforcement-support-office

You can do this for any county in any state in the USA.

[1929crash]

I don't believe the site linked is legitimate, anyone can put up a website with a database created themselves and put all sorts of rubbish on it. If it was hosted on an official .gov website, they had a letterheaded response giving the information they asked for, etc, etc it would have some credibility.

What about the specific claim about the Apaches? Evidence please.

When you say you don't believe this, can you elaborate? Are you saying that there is no Federal government program to transfer military assets to local police departments? Are you saying that there is no 1033 Program? Are you saying that the police in Ferguson, Missouri were not tooled up to resemble an invading army rather than a civilian police force?

Please enlighten us so that we may know why you cannot believe anything that challenges your TV/Hollywood crafted image of american 'law enforcement?'

The 1033 Program

The 1033 Program (formerly the 1208 Program) permits the Secretary of Defense to transfer, without charge, excess U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) personal property (supplies and equipment) to state and local law enforcement agencies (LEAs).

The 1033 Program has allowed law enforcement agencies to acquire vehicles (land, air and sea), weapons, computer equipment, fingerprint equipment, night vision equipment, radios and televisions, first aid equipment, tents and sleeping bags, photographic equipment and more.

Rules and Restrictions

• The requesting agency must be a government agency that has a primary function of enforcing laws and with officers who are compensated and have powers of arrest and apprehension.
• The property must be drawn from existing DoD stocks.
• The receiving agency is responsible for all costs associated with the property after it is transferred, as well as for all shipping or federal repossession costs.
• The recipient must accept the property on an as-is, where-is basis.
• All property is transferred on a first-come, first-served basis.
• Property may not be sold, leased, rented, exchanged, bartered, used to secure a loan, used to supplement the agency's budget or stockpiled for possible future use.

Application Procedures

• A state or local law enforcement or corrections official begins the process by completing a "Law Enforcement Agency (LEA) Application for Participation in the 1033 Program." This application can be found here.
• After the application is completed, the agency official sends the application to the State Point of Contact (SPOC) for the respective state in which the applicant is located.
• On approval by the SPOC, the application is sent to the U.S. Department of Defense Law Enforcement Support Office (LESO) in Battle Creek, Mich.
• The LESO responds by sending a letter to the SPOC, who sends it on to the agency. This letter provides the agency with a unique number allowing the agency to access the LESO database and also identifies the law enforcement officers authorized to screen and receive property at all Defense Reutilization and Marketing Offices (DRMOs). In some states, all screening and acquisition of property is performed at the state level.

How to Find Available Items

There are two methods of screening excess property. The first is physically visiting DRMOs and looking over the excess property displayed. The second method would be reviewing the inventory listings of the Defense Reutilization and Marketing Service (DRMS) through their website: http://www.dispositionservices.dla.mil/leso/Pages/default.aspx.

For instructions on how to navigate the DRMS website, please contact your State Coordinator , call (800) 248-2742, Email asknlectc@justnet.org or contact Charlie Brune, Law Enforcement Project Manager, Federal Excess Property Programs, cell phone (512) 517-8064; Email cbrune@srtbrc.org.

Charlie Brune joined the staff of the Small, Rural, Tribal and Border Regional Center (SRTB-RC) on Sept. 1, 2009, as the law enforcement liaison for the Federal Surplus Property Program. SRTB-RC is one of centers in the National Law Enforcement Corrections and Technology Center (NLECTC) System, a program of the National Institute of Justice. SRTB-RC is a public safety program of The Center for Rural Development (CRD), based out of Somerset, Ky. Before joining NLECTC, Mr. Brune retired from the Texas Department of Public Safety as a captain with the Texas Rangers. Mr. Brune has more than 40 years of experience in state law enforcement involving several different state agencies. He has conducted numerous investigations into public corruption, money laundering, fraud and homicides. Mr. Brune has also served in the U.S. Army, obtaining the rank of staff sergeant. Mr. Brune graduated from Schreiner College in Kerrville, Texas.

https://www.justnet.org/other/1033_program.html

[anonguest]

All this is apparently spurious, because it is reported that the policeman who shot the alleged robber was unaware, at the time, that there had been a robbery.

So the issue is not that the man was shot (summarily executed) for robbery, but that a cop decided that an unarmed man should be shot dead on the streets, having been stopped for jaywalking (which isn't even a crime in the UK, for comparison).

Even if the man was threatening, it defies credibility that it was necessary to fell him with about half a dozen shots, especially as witnesses claim that he had his hands up.

One or two shots should have been sufficient to immobilise him.

What the USA has is an out-of-control police force in some areas, that executes people summarily and unnecessarily.

To those who cry "don't criticise the cops, we don't know all the facts yet!", well we don't know if the shot man was the robber either. But minds have been made up there too...

A trial would sort things out. But the execution has taken place, so there will be no trial.

To those idiots who would like to see this sort of police action in the UK, for God's sake don't step on a crack in the pavement. A cop might kill you.

I used to think that too. Perhaps due to my 'education' of all things ballistic/firearms being solely via TV/hollywood. Apparently, however, from what I have read relatively recently it is not so often the case in reality? How many shots were fired/did it take by the armed response PC that felled/dropped the killer of that Woolwich soldier? More than just one or two I seem to recall. In the case of someone genuinely enraged/hyped up it could take more?

All that said it is, of course, irrelevant to the case here as to whether this bloke was justifiably shot or not.

[Goat]

I used to think that too. Perhaps due to my 'education' of all things ballistic/firearms being solely via TV/hollywood. Apparently, however, from what I have read relatively recently it is not so often the case in reality? How many shots were fired/did it take by the armed response PC that felled/dropped the killer of that Woolwich soldier? More than just one or two I seem to recall. In the case of someone genuinely enraged/hyped up it could take more?

All that said it is, of course, irrelevant to the case here as to whether this bloke was justifiably shot or not.

The classic case was the 1986 Miami shootout where it took 12 rounds to stop one of the attackers.

The question I have is why was a handgun drawn by the officer? In the circumstances would a non-lethal option such as mace, tazer or a baton have been more appropriate?