Big Government

[uncle bernard]

Where does this rank?

 

[Ohio Elite]

Where do I get one? Looks wicked...

[Scouts Honor]

maybe they are preparing for the future...

when they turn into california?

[mspart]

UB, Since you bring this up, you should easily be able to find the justification for spending that kind of money on that tank.   Please share.

mspart

[braves121]

5 minutes ago, mspart said:

UB, Since you bring this up, you should easily be able to find the justification for spending that kind of money on that tank.   Please share.

mspart

lmao a tank for a city with 0 murders isn't the gop supposed to advocate for less government spending on useless things?

[Bigbrog]

1 minute ago, braves121 said:

lmao a tank for a city with 0 murders isn't the gop supposed to advocate for less government spending on useless things?

It's funny that the local people of that city felt like they wanted to spend the money on the vehicle??  And that somehow in your head equates to this being about the GOP overall??  Not to mention how does spending the money on the vehicle equate to wanting more government and more spending?   Do you think maybe the purchase was proposed, and it fit within the current budget??

Man that is some messed up mental gymnastics you are doing.  Not to mention you clearly have no freaking clue how things work.

[braves121]

2 minutes ago, Bigbrog said:

It's funny that the local people of that city felt like they wanted to spend the money on the vehicle??  And that somehow in your head equates to this being about the GOP overall??  Not to mention how does spending the money on the vehicle equate to wanting more government and more spending?   Do you think maybe the purchase was proposed, and it fit within the current budget??

Man that is some messed up mental gymnastics you are doing.  Not to mention you clearly have no freaking clue how things work.

did the taxpayers really want the money spent on a tank in an obvious low crime area? high government spending is out of control no local police force needs this lmao. I thought everyone was defunding the police and thats why crime is crazy but this town has enough for a tank lmao give me a break.

Edited June 6 by braves121

[WrestlingRasta]

People  getting so upset in here and making it obvious they didn't take five minutes to read up on it before responding.   The town didn't pay a dollar for the vehicle.  It was obtained by a fedreal program on a year to year usage agreement.  The number one use for it in that area is high water rescues (look up floods in the area), and use in neighboring communities.   It may be in Prosper next year, it may be somewhere else.

Edited June 6 by WrestlingRasta

[Bigbrog]

1 minute ago, braves121 said:

did the taxpayers really want the money spent on a tank in an obvious low crime area? high government spending is out of control no local police force needs this lmao. I thought everyone was defunding the police and thats why crime is crazy but this town has enough for a tank lmao give me a break.

Again, do you know how local governments work?  Like in city and towns?  Do you know if this city has "high government spending"?  Man, you're making HUGE leaps in terms of your conclusions and assertations without knowing anything about how things work, or even the specifics of the situation you are commenting on.  Did you ever think that because of HOW they are financing their police force, that is the REASON the city has such a low crime rate??  SMH

[braves121]

Just now, Bigbrog said:

Again, do you know how local governments work?  Like in city and towns?  Do you know if this city has "high government spending"?  Man, you're making HUGE leaps in terms of your conclusions and assertations without knowing anything about how things work, or even the specifics of the situation you are commenting on.  Did you ever think that because of HOW they are financing their police force, that is the REASON the city has such a low crime rate??  SMH

police budgets increase every single year, so the argument that that reason crime is low because of financing is mute because they ask for more money every yeay

[Bigbrog]

1 minute ago, braves121 said:

police budgets increase every single year, so the argument that that reason crime is low because of financing is mute because they ask for more money every yeay

How do you say you have no clue without saying you have no clue.....

[braves121]

The right when the FBI takes back classified documents: DEFUND THE POLICE 

the right when local police get militarized equipment and increased budgets:

[Bigbrog]

2 minutes ago, braves121 said:

The right when the FBI takes back classified documents: DEFUND THE POLICE 

the right when local police get militarized equipment and increased budgets:

What???  Seriously, how old are you??

[uncle bernard]

15 minutes ago, WrestlingRasta said:

People  getting so upset in here and making it obvious they didn't take five minutes to read up on it before responding.   The town didn't pay a dollar for the vehicle.  It was obtained by a fedreal program on a year to year usage agreement.  The number one use for it in that area is high water rescues (look up floods in the area), and use in neighboring communities.   It may be in Prosper next year, it may be somewhere else.

Thank you for this info.

The larger example still stands. Our police departments are armed better than most militaries and that's not necessary. When you give them cool toys, they're gonna want to use them, and that makes us all less safe.

When I was growing up, there was a fight at a party in my neighborhood involving a knife. The entire police department showed up in armored vehicles and assault weapons with attack dogs to "locate" the perpetrator. Totally unnecessary but my town hadn't had a murder in 20 years so they jump at every chance to play with their toys. It was ridiculous.

[WrestlingRasta]

3 minutes ago, uncle bernard said:

Thank you for this info.

We don't have to always, by any means necessary, find something to bitch about.  Especially when it involves very quickly moving off your own topic when you come to the understanding your original topic was in fact nothing to bitch about.  

 

Just saying, it's okay to relax.  It's even healthy. 

[uncle bernard]

4 minutes ago, WrestlingRasta said:

We don't have to always, by any means necessary, find something to bitch about.  Especially when it involves very quickly moving off your own topic when you come to the understanding your original topic was in fact nothing to bitch about.  

 

Just saying, it's okay to relax.  It's even healthy. 

You're confusing one example I used with the overall point. My original topic - the point that conservatives don't care about big government when it comes to the militarization of the police - very much still stands.

[Bigbrog]

11 minutes ago, uncle bernard said:

Thank you for this info.

The larger example still stands. Our police departments are armed better than most militaries and that's not necessary. When you give them cool toys, they're gonna want to use them, and that makes us all less safe.

When I was growing up, there was a fight at a party in my neighborhood involving a knife. The entire police department showed up in armored vehicles and assault weapons with attack dogs to "locate" the perpetrator. Totally unnecessary but my town hadn't had a murder in 20 years so they jump at every chance to play with their toys. It was ridiculous.

Have you ever been a police officer?  Have you ever done ride alongs?  Have you ever sat down and spoken with police officers to understand what they have to do and what they have to deal with??  How do you know what each city/town needs in terms of police force and their equipment?  If you were a police chief and you got a call come across the radio that said fight with deadly weapons involved, what would your reaction be?  How many police would you send?  

[Bigbrog]

1 minute ago, uncle bernard said:

You're confusing one example I used with the overall point. My original topic - the point that conservatives don't care about big government when it comes to the militarization of the police - very much still stands.

You are conflating two issues in your point that aren't necessarily related...you wanting them to be to show how "bad" conservative thinking is doesn't make it so...i.e., wanting there to be money spent on local police to ensure safety does not equal support for big government.  You trying to make that connection is both naive and well, stupid.

[uncle bernard]

9 minutes ago, Bigbrog said:

Have you ever been a police officer?  Have you ever done ride alongs?  Have you ever sat down and spoken with police officers to understand what they have to do and what they have to deal with??  How do you know what each city/town needs in terms of police force and their equipment?  If you were a police chief and you got a call come across the radio that said fight with deadly weapons involved, what would your reaction be?  How many police would you send?  

If I got a call that a high schooler pulled a knife at a house party, I would not send the entire department with SWAT equipment and attack dogs, no. If 2-4 officers armed with their gun, tasers, batons, and body armor can't subdue a teenager with a knife, we've got a larger problem with my department.

And I know we don't need all that equipment because the rest of the developed world doesn't use it and they're safer than we are. I wonder if this military-mindset approach to law enforcement has anything to do with our cops killing 30x more people than European countries? (by rate, not total number, before you come back with that)

Edited June 6 by uncle bernard

[mspart]

Again UB, Since you brought this up, you should easily be able to find the justification for spending that kind of money on that tank.   Please share.

mspart

[uncle bernard]

2 minutes ago, Bigbrog said:

You are conflating two issues in your point that aren't necessarily related...you wanting them to be to show how "bad" conservative thinking is doesn't make it so...i.e., wanting there to be money spent on local police to ensure safety does not equal support for big government.  You trying to make that connection is both naive and well, stupid.

Sure as long as you can acknowledge wanting there to be money spent on local families to reduce poverty or provide healthcare doesn't equal support for big government either.

Can we agree?

[uncle bernard]

Just now, mspart said:

Again UB, Since you brought this up, you should easily be able to find the justification for spending that kind of money on that tank.   Please share.

mspart

rasta already posted the department's justification (though I suspect it will be used for more than water rescues). what do you want from me?

have you answered my question from yesterday yet? it feels unfair that I always answer yours and you always dodge mine.

[braves121]

8 minutes ago, Bigbrog said:

Have you ever been a police officer?  Have you ever done ride alongs?  Have you ever sat down and spoken with police officers to understand what they have to do and what they have to deal with??  How do you know what each city/town needs in terms of police force and their equipment?  If you were a police chief and you got a call come across the radio that said fight with deadly weapons involved, what would your reaction be?  How many police would you send?  

not the best argument when there are examples of places like the town of Uvalde's police department being armed to the teeth and having an astronomical budget and look how they reacted. Maybe high budgets and military equipment is not a blanket solution for policing in this country lol

[mspart]

mspart

[Bigbrog]

1 minute ago, uncle bernard said:

If I got a call that a high schooler pulled a knife at a house party, I would not send the entire department with SWAT equipment and attack dogs, no. If 2-4 officers armed with their gun, tasers, batons, and body armor can't subdue a teenager with a knife, we've got a larger problem with my department.

And I know we don't need all that equipment because the rest of the developed world doesn't use it and they're safer than we are. I wonder if this military-mindset approach to law enforcement has anything to do with our cops killing 30x more people than European countries?

Thank God you are not a police chief...sending 2-4 officers to a house party fight with deadly weapons is completely asinine and totally unsafe.  2-4 police could EASILY get over and thus would cause the police to use deadly force in order to not have that happen...it actually increases the chance of very bad things from happening.  However, if you show up in force it would instantly stop the fight, and the kid with the knife would be subdued rather quickly and in a non-violent way.  You would be fired very quickly if you were chief.