Have you heard of the Ludlow Massacre?
Sometimes militia's are needed to protect workers from Pinkerton's and malicious Nat Guard actions.
Gun Political Issues Megathread. (Control for or Against?)
- Thread starter Free-Stater 101
- Start date
Sometimes militia's are needed to protect workers from Pinkerton's and malicious Nat Guard actions.
This book right here does a pretty good job of explaining it:
Some of it stems from the Watts Riots, which was the initial justification for SWAT teams to exist, and yet you hardly ever see them used for such a purpose anymore. Instead they tend to get used to serve warrants, particularly for drug busts, because the other aspect of it is the "War on Drugs." There was a real "get tough on crime" attitude in the '60s and '70s, but the Fed could only had jurisdiction over certain crimes, like drugs. The local departments got in on it thanks to the Fed being there with all manner of free shit for them.
Some of it stems from the Watts Riots, which was the initial justification for SWAT teams to exist, and yet you hardly ever see them used for such a purpose anymore. Instead they tend to get used to serve warrants, particularly for drug busts, because the other aspect of it is the "War on Drugs." There was a real "get tough on crime" attitude in the '60s and '70s, but the Fed could only had jurisdiction over certain crimes, like drugs. The local departments got in on it thanks to the Fed being there with all manner of free shit for them.
the rise of the warrior cop ideal was a horrific mistake.
What a cop does and what a soldier does are two completely different things and skill sets.
Aldarion
Neoreactionary Monarchist
Wonders of diversity. I have some relatives in the US, and from what I hear the big cities are basically war zones compared to situation in Croatia.
So if cities are war zones, it is only logical for police to become an army.
I'm unclear on what replacing SWAT teams with national guard will do.
Leaving aside that it's bizzare to complain that the police are too heavily militarized, and then suggest the answer is to replace them with the actual military, and that actually trying this would be logistically impossible (NG can only be deployed by the governor, not local police or mayors), or that NG are not trained for police work, and like a dozen other issues that I don't know about but that assuredly exist:
What problem is replacing one group of heavily armed guys loaded with military equipment with a different group of heavily armed guys loaded with military equipment going to solve, exactly?
Leaving aside that it's bizzare to complain that the police are too heavily militarized, and then suggest the answer is to replace them with the actual military, and that actually trying this would be logistically impossible (NG can only be deployed by the governor, not local police or mayors), or that NG are not trained for police work, and like a dozen other issues that I don't know about but that assuredly exist:
What problem is replacing one group of heavily armed guys loaded with military equipment with a different group of heavily armed guys loaded with military equipment going to solve, exactly?
Doomsought
Well-known member
Place far more restrictions on how they are deployed. Unlike SWAT the National Guard have a proper level of restraints on how they get deployed. To send in the National Guard requires things to escalate to the governor of the state involved.
Last edited:
No Thin Blue Line mentality with the NG.
Because the problem is a lot of US policing treats civies as either potential suspects or potential victims, and cops as both soldiers and investigators. Particulalry since the 'War on Drugs' took off.
That's a stupid idea that will get people killed. SWAT teams exist in the first place because some situations require an immediate, forceful response where waiting for the national guard will take too long.
It's particularly ill conceived because any proposal to eliminate SWAT and replace it with NG units would have to be a state level law, not a local one. And so if you're going to be addressing this with state level legislation anyway, you could instead just ban/limit no knock warrants or whatever your problem is, rather than some bad thought out workaround (a workaround that wouldn't actually work, as in many states no knock raid are expressly authorized by state law, state laws that signed by the very person you're proposing should try and limit thier use).
Define "thin blue line mentality". Because you're talking about replacing cops, who interact with innocent civilians on duty all the time and think of themselves as soldiers and investigators, with national guard troops that would only interact with civilians as suspects and think of themselves only as soldiers.
That sounds like it would only make this alleged mentality even worse.
Eh, Nat Guard are civies when out of uniform, cops are never civies again once they take a badge.
Nat Guard also don't get paid overtime to make court appearances, or get 'speeding ticket quotas' or the like from shift supervisors. Nat Guard also don't have Police Unions keeping bad apples on the force.
So yes, in most modern circumstances I think a lot of people would trust their local Nat Guard forces more than local cops.
Plus that means the you would have people on full kit having to train more putting more money on the states.
As well as one needs to realize, you would basically be making sure that soldiers have to obey the standard RoE.
Wait until shot at to fire.
And then you lose soldiers because if that...
Soldiers get shot and die because they can not fire unless fire upon Ed.
I would trust copsnover NG.
Because majority of NG probably barley passed thier shooting.
And you want them to be ones responding to shootings?
Unless you mean a specific team, in which case would be impossible to have in large states.
As well as one needs to realize, you would basically be making sure that soldiers have to obey the standard RoE.
Wait until shot at to fire.
And then you lose soldiers because if that...
Soldiers get shot and die because they can not fire unless fire upon Ed.
I would trust copsnover NG.
Because majority of NG probably barley passed thier shooting.
And you want them to be ones responding to shootings?
Unless you mean a specific team, in which case would be impossible to have in large states.
Look at Uvalde, and tell me the NG would have fucked that up worse than the local PD did.
By the time the NG got there it would have been around the same time.
And yes potentially because you have a bunch of weekend warriors who got the call and had to get kit on, go to the armory, grab thier weapon then head over to the school.
I'm OK with reserve/NG members being responsible for their kit (arms included) and maintaining them in their home.
I don't think that's even remotely close to being true. "Once a marine, always a marine" comes to mind as the obvious rebuttal. An extreme example perhaps, given marines are infamous for esprit de corps, but they're merely the most extreme example of a very well known trend. Military training comes with a military mindset, and that does not just switch off when you take off the uniform.
That's completely irrelevant to the issue in question here, which is "what should we do to resolve what are currently the situations we solve with SWAT teams", because the issue with SWAT team over-deployment has nothing to do with community trust.
I don't.
Most never train with thier weapons outside of deployments or mandatory army training
Ehhh....not really, especially when it come to the National Guard. 1st, there are no Marines in the National Guard. They only operate as active or Reserve status. Now, some Marines WILL transfer to NG if they want to go that route.
The NG is typically referred to as Weekend Warriors for a reason. They get much less training, and therefore have a lot less of the 'military mindset'.
To be fair things we're much better before we decided single moms were the best thing ever.
Delaware goes even more insane than California doxxing CCW holders:
