Appropriate gear and weaponry for cops....

[Glenn E. Meyer]

That historical perspective will have little persuasive on the current debate. It's a matter of commonly perceived features. Look at a soldier, look at a police officer standing side by side and geared up. It would be hard to differentiate them. It's the infantry!

Also heavily arming police that are in common contact with the public is pretty new. It wasn't till the 1890s that NYPD issued a standard 32 revolver and started some firearms training. The Model 10 took over for a long time.

The current appearance profile is more towards equipment and more weaponry. That's what's operative.

[KevinB]

The current appearance profile is more towards equipment and more weaponry. That's what's operative.

Todays media and the ability of any idiot with net access to rant about it.

I'm guessing the "Wild West" would still be a nightmare if LE had to deal with today's media...

[John Hearne]

Also heavily arming police that are in common contact with the public is pretty new. It wasn't till the 1890s that NYPD issued a standard 32 revolver and started some firearms training. The Model 10 took over for a long time. ... The current appearance profile is more towards equipment and more weaponry. That's what's operative.

Yes and no. First, a dedicated police force is itself a fairly new thing. Remember the police were originally formed because cavalry charges killed way too many rioters. Talk about bad press.

There is a long tradition of law enforcement using guns, including long guns, you just have to look to the West to see it more. LE has always "gunned up" when facing credible threats and as already noted, for most of American history, the police had more modern firearms than the U.S. military.

[DocGKR]

"It's a matter of commonly perceived features. Look at a soldier, look at a police officer standing side by side and geared up. It would be hard to differentiate them. It's the infantry!"

Look at the Soldier:


Look at the police officer:


It is hard to differentiate them via their commonly perceived features...




Policing is regional. Heavily armed police has periodically been very common in many parts of the U.S. over the past two centuries:

[John Hearne]

Let's not forget these:

[jlw]

That historical perspective will have little persuasive on the current debate. It's a matter of commonly perceived features. Look at a soldier, look at a police officer standing side by side and geared up. It would be hard to differentiate them. It's the infantry!

Also heavily arming police that are in common contact with the public is pretty new. It wasn't till the 1890s that NYPD issued a standard 32 revolver and started some firearms training. The Model 10 took over for a long time.

The current appearance profile is more towards equipment and more weaponry. That's what's operative.

Commissioner Theodore Roosevelt issued the first standard firearm. That does not mean that NYPD officers were not armed. It just means that there wasn't a standard issued firearm. TR also instituted civil service boards and promotional testing. Prior to that, at one time there were actually two groups actually claiming to be "the" NYPD. The NY Municipal Police were founded in 1845. They were replaced in 1857 by the Metropolitan Police in a political coup.

The first full fledged police agency in the U.S. started in 1828 (Philly). The LAPD was founded in 1853. The Chicago PD was founded in 1837.

We were still adding states well into the 1900s. There are "major" agencies in the U.S. The Phoenix PD was founded until 1881.

Law enforcement in the U.S. is all fairly new.

[Shellback]

My wife works in Strategic Communications - and she points out that most times LE Agencies fail miserably at PR, other than fluff pieces many departments do not attempt to engage the population on the what why where's of their acquisitions and tactics.

I think that's foolish on their part. Public perception, like it or not, is very important. Police derive their power through the consent of the governed, and if they perceive a problem, such as "militarization", then it becomes an issue for LE and the public. In fact, I heard Obama blathering on about it while driving in my car today...

I understand that law enforcement forum members get tired of people criticizing the actions of people in their profession. Sometimes it's warranted, other times it's not. I think when people use the "stay in your lane", "were you there?" and "how long have you been in LE? Then STFU!" type comments it does nothing but drive a wedge between citizens and the police. Typically it takes a few minutes to spell it out to people and if you don't have the time then why bother commenting? (Just a general comment, not directed at anyone) Or, if they're only seeking an argument then explain things nicely and carry on. Cops are used to people talking shit to them in person, get over it, use the ignore feature.

Personally, I enjoy debating things and am open to learning new things. I've had my mind changed on many occasions due to people who've taken the time to open my mind to a different point of view that I hadn't considered. I think it's worthwhile to put forth a little bit of effort to convert people into being pro-LE rather than having them think they're a badge heavy prick.

It's a discussion forum, not an echo chamber, so discuss things and help educate those who are ignorant of what it takes, how hard it is and what really happens on the job. Anyhow, I'm just running on.... I think you get the idea and none of this is directed at you or anyone lee specifically, mostly random thoughts on the topic.

[jlw]

My wife works in Strategic Communications - and she points out that most times LE Agencies fail miserably at PR, other than fluff pieces many departments do not attempt to engage the population on the what why where's of their acquisitions and tactics.

That is a very accurate assessment.

[GardoneVT]

I think that's foolish on their part. Public perception, like it or not, is very important. Police derive their power through the consent of the governed, and if they perceive a problem, such as "militarization", then it becomes an issue for LE and the public. In fact, I heard Obama blathering on about it while driving in my car today...

I understand that law enforcement forum members get tired of people criticizing the actions of people in their profession. Sometimes it's warranted, other times it's not. I think when people use the "stay in your lane", "were you there?" and "how long have you been in LE? Then STFU!" type comments it does nothing but drive a wedge between citizens and the police. Typically it takes a few minutes to spell it out to people and if you don't have the time then why bother commenting? (Just a general comment, not directed at anyone) Or, if they're only seeking an argument then explain things nicely and carry on. Cops are used to people talking shit to them in person, get over it, use the ignore feature.

Personally, I enjoy debating things and am open to learning new things. I've had my mind changed on many occasions due to people who've taken the time to open my mind to a different point of view that I hadn't considered. I think it's worthwhile to put forth a little bit of effort to convert people into being pro-LE rather than having them think they're a badge heavy prick.

It's a discussion forum, not an echo chamber, so discuss things and help educate those who are ignorant of what it takes, how hard it is and what really happens on the job. Anyhow, I'm just running on.... I think you get the idea and none of this is directed at you or anyone lee specifically, mostly random thoughts on the topic.

What's funny to me is how people didn't seem to care about "police militarization" when Eliot Ness and Co. were out and about with Thompsons intended for WWI trench use.

[Shellback]

What's funny to me is how people didn't seem to care about "police militarization" when Eliot Ness and Co. were out and about with Thompsons intended for WWI trench use.

I have no idea... No internet, no 24 hour news, and I think (keyword) that the police were more glamorized chasing and fighting the bad guys in the media, comic books, etc.

Back then little boys could have a .22 rifle running around, play cops and robbers, etc. Different times, different people, different culture.

To clarify, I'm all for the good guys possessing, training with and utilizing the equipment they need to get the job done catching hardcore bad dudes.

ETA - Guns are "evil" now and our boys are neutered in public schools and a million other things but it's time for BJJ with my boys

My 3 year old wants to be just like his Uncle Paul, one of my best friends. This is him jumping on the couch, playing policeman a few weeks ago, with his badge and cuffs.