Guest Post: Weapons of War On Our Streets- A Guide to the Militarization of America’s Police- Part 1

This article was originally published on

The claim often heard from those attempting to pass more gun control legislation is that all they’re trying to do is get the “weapons of war off our streets,” but it’s simply untrue that “weapons of war” are available to the general public. You’d last about three minutes in a real war with an AR-15, even with one of the most aggressive builds you can get your hands on. The truth is that the only people with “weapons of war” on America’s streets are, increasingly, the police.

Thanks primarily to the Pentagon’s 1033 program which allows law enforcement agencies to get their hands on Department of Defense technology and the Bush-era War on Terror, American police have received a startling amount of heavy-duty, military-grade hardware. Between 1998 and 2014, the dollar value of military hardware sent to police departments skyrocketed from $9.4 million to $796.8 million.

And just as when “all you’ve got is a hammer, then everything looks like a nail”, militarized police have become more willing to use their new weapons when carrying out law enforcement tasks. For example, the number of SWAT raids in the United States grew dramatically from about 3,000 in 1980, to a whopping 50,000 SWAT raids in 2014, according to The New Jim Crow by Michelle Alexander.

To say that the militarization of the police is nothing new is to ignore America’s recent history as well as the long-standing model of a peace officer. As the police have militarized and the Pentagon backs major players in Hollywood, the focus has shifted from one who keeps the peace to one who enforces the law – and that’s an important difference.

What Is the Difference Between a Law Enforcement Officer and a Peace Officer?

The model for police, and the constables and sheriffs before them prior to the late 20th Century, was that of a peace officer. In many states, it’s not even true that police are law enforcement officers – even though it’s a term frequently used by the police and their fans in the “Blue Lives Matter,” “Thin Blue Line,” and “Back the Blue” movements.

It’s a subtle, but important, distinction: Is the role of the police to enforce the law or to keep the peace? Consider the difference between the police force of a typical American city and the fictional Andy Taylor of The Andy Griffith Show. The former is concerned primarily with enforcing the law for its own sake and catching as many “lawbreakers” as possible. The latter, on the other hand, is primarily concerned with keeping the peace. Sometimes that means looking the other way when laws get broken.

This isn’t simply a matter of how pleasant or unpleasant it is to deal with the police. Law enforcement officers might be writing parking tickets in the middle of a burglary epidemic due to their need to enforce all the laws all the time. Conversely, a peace officer is going to ignore a lot of low-level, habitual crime – even when there are clear victims (for example, vandalism or loitering) – because he emphasizes going out and catching violent and dangerous criminals. There’s no impulse to arrest a guy who habitually smokes weed on a street corner if he’s providing the police with valuable information leading to the arrest of violent criminals.

Peace officers might have the need for a sidearm and a shotgun, but they have little or no need for, say, a tank, to say nothing of the variety of nasty DARPA weapons police departments are increasingly wanting and getting.

The Origins of Militarized Police

Before we begin talking about the militarized American police, it’s worth mentioning that United States law specifically prohibits the military from enforcing the laws in the U.S. That’s why we don’t have the Army enforcing the law, and also why we don’t have a military-style gendarmerie as is common in Europe. This law, the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, was passed after the removal of federal troops from the Southern states following the end of Reconstruction. With rare exception, the federal government is not allowed to use the Army or the Air Force to enforce the law and the Navy has strict regulations for both the Navy and Marine Corps regarding the use of either for domestic law enforcement.

However, this law has been somewhat undermined due to police forces becoming so much like the military, which began during Prohibition in the 1920s. Organized crime got its first foothold in American life thanks to the lucrative black market in liquor. This was also the golden age of bank robbery with figures like Bonnie and Clyde, Pretty Boy Floyd and John Dillinger becoming folk heroes. The Thompson submachine gun and the Browning Automatic Rifle were increasingly used by organized crime and the “stars” of bank robbery.

The Prohibition Era saw domestic police departments wielding automatic weapons for the first time. There was nothing nefarious about this from the perspective of local police departments. In fact, it was the police departments most regularly in contact with vicious organized crime, such as Chicago and Kansas City, who led the way in arming their officers with automatic weapons and armored vehicles. At least two rounds of ammunition, the .38 Super and the .357 Magnum, were developed with the express purpose of being able to penetrate the early bulletproof vests worn by gangsters in the Prohibition Era.

Overall crime increased by 24 percent during the first two years of Prohibition. This included a nine-percent increase in theft and burglary, a 13-percent increase in homicides, and a 13-percent increase in assault and battery. Overall, police department costs increased by 11.4 percent. However, because the police were busy fighting the scourge of demon alcohol, it was difficult for them to target crimes unrelated to this. In fact, a study of South Carolina counties that enforced Prohibition versus those who didn’t found a whopping 30- to 60-percent increase in homicides in the counties who enforced the law. All of this is according to Charles Hanson Towne in The Rise and Fall of Prohibition: The Human Side of What the Eighteenth Amendment Has Done to the United States.

This era of militarization drew to a close with the end of Prohibition itself. However, the militarization of police would resume again a few decades down the line.

The Second Wave of Militarized Police

The second wave of police militarization begins with the race riots in the 1950s and 1960s, with the Watts Riots in 1965 gaining a sort of gravitas. The LAPD used military-style weapons and tactics to end the riots. What’s more, an increasingly militant civil rights movement was seen by the CIA as an arm of international Communism. While there is some merit to this view, it’s certainly true that it led to a philosophy of increasingly militarized police.

The militarization of police is not by any means based on manufactured and artificial paranoia. Even in the case of Prohibition, it’s a simple fact that organized crime used weapons with firepower far in excess of what the police had access to. Similarly, the second wave of militarized police was partly in response to an increasingly militarized organized crime thanks in part to the beginnings of the War on Drugs.

On one hand, the police were encountering more and more dangerous organized crime syndicates, such as the Medellin Cartel and street gangs like the Gangster Disciples. Urban unrest included not just race riots like the aforementioned Watts Riots and the 1967 riots in Detroit, but also the riot outside of the 1968 Democratic Party Convention. Domestic terrorist organizations like the Weather Underground, the Symbionese Liberation Army, and the Earth Liberation Front likewise offered increased challenges to law enforcement.

Unrelated to the War on Drugs, the 1986 FBI Miami shootout was a game-changer for law enforcement budgets. Police outnumbered suspects by a factor of four. Despite this, they were pinned down by suppressive gunfire. The incident lasted five minutes and 145 rounds were fired. The suspects were hit multiple times, but continued to fight in part because the officers’ and agents’ service revolvers did not have sufficient stopping power. In response, there was a movement to increase the firepower of service revolvers. This is when semi-automatic pistols began to replace the revolver and larger magazines became the rule. Rifles, shotguns, and heavier body armor also saw increased adoption after this shootout.

Another incident accelerating the militarization of police is the North Hollywood shootout of 1997. This bank robbery left two dead (the perps) and 20 wounded – 12 police officers and eight civilians. It lasted 44 minutes, an eternity in terms of police shootouts, with approximately 2,000 rounds fired. The perps got off approximately twice as many rounds as the police officers on the scene, but the game-changer was the arrival of the SWAT team, who had much more appropriate weaponry. This led to everyday police officers getting equipment that was customary for SWAT teams in the 1990s.

The 1033 Program

The 1033 Program was enacted in the wake of the 1997 North Hollywood shootout. Created by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997, it allowed law enforcement agencies to get their hands on military hardware. Unsurprisingly, the preference was given to law enforcement engaged in anti-drug and counter-terror activity, underscoring the vital role of wars on abstract concepts in increasing the militarization of the police force. Bill Clinton – he of the massacres at Waco and Ruby Ridge – signed the bill into law.

$5.1 billion in material was transferred from the Department of Defense to local law enforcement between 1997 and 2014, with ammunition being the most common requisition. 8,000 law enforcement offices participate as of 2014.

Also included in this total are 20 different school law enforcement agencies. The Los Angeles School Police Department has requisitioned 61 assault rifles and three grenade launchers. Ten school police departments in the State of Texas and have requisitioned 25 automatic pistols, 64 M16s, 18 M14s, and tactical vests.

The program has come under bipartisan criticism lead by Rand Paul. Senator Paul stated that the program has “incentivized the militarization of local police precincts and helped municipal governments build what are essentially small armies.” Senator Claire McCaskill led the first investigation of the program starting in September 2014. At least one study found a correlation between the 1033 program and increased fatalities at the hands of law enforcement.

21st-Century Police Militarization

One of the big game-changers for militarization of police was the 9/11 attacks. This greatly eroded the Fourth Amendment protections against unlawful search and seizure. Now police – local, state and federal – need to suspect “terrorism.” This provides the same convenient cover for police overreach that was previously offered by the War on Drugs.

President Obama gave new directives for the 1033 program that forbade police from acquiring certain weapons from the military. These include weaponized vehicles, grenade launchers and bayonets. Attorney General Jeff Sessions ended these restrictions upon assuming office in 2017.

The propaganda war for militarization often comes under the rubric of a “war on police.” However, there is no factual basis for the idea that police officers are under some kind of unprecedented siege. The year 2015 had one of the lowest levels of police murders on record. Not only were fewer police officers being killed on the job, far fewer people were attempting to hurt police officers.

The weapons that come to local police departments through the 1033 pipeline are direct from the military and, by extension, the War on Terror.

Training with military units is also increasingly common according to a report from the Cato Institute. The training generally takes place not with regular infantry units, but with specialized and elite groupings within the United States military – such as the Navy SEALs and the Army Rangers.

See also:



  1. A solid overview of insecurity requiring a militarized response.

    How do “we the people” come to support this type of militarization? Is it the proper response? Looking forward to part 2.

    1. Actually both were. Waco started when President H W Bush 41 was in office and then as his term ended, President Clinton 42 came in to office and was in power when His AG Janet Reno shoot & burned them out. The Blame for how this action ended lay’s with President Clinton’s administration. And the Buck Stops with Bill Clinton!

      1. BS ! The Waco seige started on Feb. 23rd 1993 and the massacre was on April 19th 1993. Look it up ! Get your facts straight before spouting inaccurate BS.

  2. I do find it quite comical in the aftermath of shooting events that draw a heavy LE response…there’s always a handful of morbidly obese cops wearing military gear who it appears can barely walk much less participate in anything shown in televised news of the event.

  3. “President Obama gave new directives for the 1033 program that forbade police from acquiring certain weapons from the military. These include weaponized vehicles, grenade launchers and bayonets. Attorney General Jeff Sessions ended these restrictions upon assuming office in 2017.”
    MAGA, right?? Those that continue to sow the seeds of the fallacious left-right paradigm will eventually reap the whirlwind. Once again, Rand Paul is the sole voice of reason in any branch of the US government.
    While I understand the intent of this article and the hundreds like it, reading them has become akin to perusing the old family photo album of the executioner as you are being led to the gallows. “And this picture shows Little Bobby performing his first civil asset forfeiture…” Just another reminder of the freedoms we let slip away. The pot continues at a slow boil and the main course is blissfully medium-rare. Ribbit…Ribbit…

    1. I agree. No indictments. No real trials. For no real criminals. Trump has not spoke out against the “Patriot Act” “Indefinite detention” “Nice tragedy before vote on mufflers/suppressors. Not to mention the normalized 24/7 record keeping of all transactions, communications. “wiretapping” used to be a topic. Now it is a figment of a 1950’s film. If there were 60,000 indictments they are not for the real criminals, they are for 60,000 waco’s on their timeline at 3:00 a.m. with a banner of busting a child trafficking ring. Who should question that kind of label? Perfect. Now lets turn the heat just a little higher… because heck its for the children right? If a real story is made we won’t know anything about it. So much can be done without a whimper. See it already has. It sucks to be nibbled upon in darkness. There is ALWAYS deniability by the criminals. We just keep swimming in the fish bowl with blurred vision, trying for a little more time waiting for our turn for the big hand.

    2. D.D. +1 Rand Paul for supporting liberty. Out of 535 I can not think of a 2nd in Congress.

      Failure to understand that Republicans are the enemy of liberty is to have missed the whole lesson of America’s slide into tyranny.

  4. The US police go to israel to learn how to treat fellow citizens like Palestinian terrorists

    And locally, to shoot first, never hesitate, say the magic incantations “quit resisting” while beating a handcuffed suspect, or “I was in fear of my life” if an innocent is killed.

  5. An old article that has not been updated. For the section about police not being targeted, note the absence of mention of attacks by BLM (Black Lives Matter) and others.
    Also worth noting, the laws being enforced, whether drug or alcohol prohibition, or others, were enacted by public representatives, not by the police.
    Militarization of the police was raised as a political issue by the Democrats initially when riot control moved from Roman era (stick and shield) to modern era.
    As for the Andy Griffith Show, that was a TV show, not real life. Sheriff Andy didn’t deal with Alvin Karpis, Clyde Barrow, and others of the like. Nor did he face modern sociopaths.
    Control your police departments locally through being involved locally. You get what you wish for. Many inhabitants of crime-ridden neighborhoods rejoice quietly when the SWAT team hits the neighborhood crack house.

    1. Retired, right on. the laws that police enforce were passed by our political representatives who claim to have our best interests at stake. Sure there might be excesses in places. Tell me of one facet of society where excesses have not occurred. Finance, law, religion, and the list goes on and on. If a person wants to know what the police deal with just look at some videos of the cartels beheading people down across the border. Those same people doing those acts are often times caught right here in the good old US of A illegally of course. I don’t see a reason for an officer to point a full auto M16 at a person when giving them a J-walking ticket but when going into a drug house with known hardened criminals-absolutely.

    2. @ Retired Cop.

      Cops only speak out against the force after they’ve safely secured pension status, not before. Active duty cops who exhibit moral conscience get “Serpicoed”.

      Cops are paramilitary, and like those in the military, aren’t paid to think. They are paid to enforce, or threaten to use force for violation of law. That’s all there is to it. There are over 2.2 Million laws on the books in the USA. Americans are guilty of 3 felonies a day, unknowingly. Laws have become a jobs project for the fat blue line, for government coffers and the prison system.

      “Crime” is good for business. More laws = more crime. More crime means more cops. More cops means more revenue collection agents. More cops mean more votes for politicians who kiss cop union ass. And the cycle continues. Where is someone else with an IQ of 90 going to make $110k+ per annum plus incredible benefits.

      Fire all cops. Outlaw unions whose membership involves public money. Hire cops back selectively. […] Make them pay – hard, for transgressions against the public and rewarded well for proven protection of person and property of same.

  6. Not only are the police not “under siege”, but quite the opposite, with civilian deaths by police still averaging about 1,000 per year. The doctrine of “officer safety” has given many cops the mindset that it’s “us versus them and I’m going home tonight no matter what”, and so they are more likely to shoot an unarmed civilian out of the fear of the public that they are supposed to serve and protect, that has been instilled in them by their training.

  7. I had a friend who was a retired city cop, his mantra was ” Better judged by 12 than carried by 6 “. I think, when facing criminals with high powered weapons, a police officer should have a fighting chance, but applying that amount of force against common civilians should be tempered.The problem lies in telling the diffrince, and when the day comes that they are there to take our guns, we will be numbered with the former.

  8. I find this to be a very difficult subject that fills me with ambivalence.

    On the one hand, I support police. My uncle was a county
    Sherrif in a moderately large urban county. His career included patrol, riot squad (during some of the Viet Nam War campus riots), sniper, and detective. I found his stories and perspectives interesting. On the one hand he was very law and order. On the other hand, although 6’5″, martial arts trained, able to bench press 495# at his peak and regularly placing 1st or 2nd in department shooting competitions, he was afraid of a few of those he worked with. He was afraid of a few who in his eyes were simply violent people and knew no restraint.

    I have watched some videos of police shootings and other police encounters that make it to video. Very mixed bag. I have have watched non lethal encounters where you could see fellow officers watching one out of control officer and clearly wondering what is this idiot doing and what do I do to stop this? I have watched shootings where the officer is clearly terrified and out of control and quite frankly aappears like they may not recover because they have taken a life. I have watched cold blooded murders caught on video where the officer looked like they were at the range shooting paper.

    All that said my last police encounters was outstanding. The transfer case in my pickup chose to dynamite itself mid span on a freeway suspension bridge leaving me blocking a !ane with high speed traffic going by. The State Patrolman who responded was fit, in a perfect uniform, calm, friendly. I was a bit agitated by the whole situation. He obviously picked up on this and looked out over the water and said “I never get tired of this view.” It was clearly a ploy to calm me down and reduce my blood pressure but I followed his lead and took in the view and felt much better while we waited for a tow. I felt he was a true Peace Officer and was thankful for him.

  9. 9/11 was a ‘game changer’ alright but ‘attacks’? This engineer and 3,000 other architects and engineers have proof that the 3 skyscrapers were taken down in a highly technical and complex controlled demolition. Who had the capability and access to pull those feats off? And no mention of the Republicans’ NDAA?

    9/11 bore evil fruit including the Warfare State, Police State, Security/Surveilance State and shredding of our Bill of Rights. Omission of the facts are not acceptable.

      1. Sure One Guy. Our govt’ would never do such evil to sway public opinion into continuous and planned wars for the seizure of resources and assets, aka robbery. Our govt’ is too principled and moral for such abhorrent behaviors.

      2. OneGuy, so 2 airplanes = 3 skyscrapers? Must have been a ‘Magic Ricochet’ like Oswald’s ‘Magic Ricochet.

        Not so fast. You used the term “conspiracy theory” to undercut my opinion. Isn’t it ironic that the term was developed by the CIA as a tool to dismiss critics of the Warren Commission’s report that President Kennedy was killed by Oswald’s Magic Ricochet.

        It didn’t work then and it didn’t work now.

    1. Don’t forget the militarys top expert on demolitions(Brig General) testified that only a controlled demolition could of brought those 3 buildings down(with 2 planes)

      1. Did you not see it on TV? Did it not make absolutely perfect common sense. I knew immediately that those buildings were coming down. Yet your “logic” seems to be that someone (god knows who) put explosives exactly where some 19 unrelated and un associated radical Muslims would fly a plane into those buildings and it would be the perfect ruse to bring down the buildings for some vague and unspecified reason that cannot be explained or even guessed about.

        Re: Ohio Guy. At least offer something, anything that makes sense. To simply make silly comments is useless. So if Bush or Clinton or both did this for some unknown reason help us understand who, what, when, why and how. I breathlessly await your brilliant rebuttal…

        1. Well, One Guy, I certainly can’t say that I got my info from the TV like you did but I can say that from the many resources on the interwebs, there is compelling evidence that demolitions were used. I wish that I had the time and energy to list my sources but I fear that it would be in vain. I will, however encourage you to seek as many sources as possible, weigh them, and come to a logical conclusion. I believe, if you do this, you might change your thinking on that matter. Many of us have been sleeping. Many are now in an awakened state. I hope you find the truth as well. Best wishes.

        2. Yes I watched it on tv and immediately knew something was wrong,when they were demolished I knew it wasn’t from some kerosene and paper(pressboard office furniture is basically paper) and anyone that took shop and welded,forged or cut metal knew it also. I am more than slightly familiar with explosives(USMC ammo chief) and demolitions and have seen enough building implosions and kinetic demolitions to know what it was. Next the entire story was so fake as to be incredulous(found a passport in the rubble),no plane parts;body,wings,tail,engines at the Pentagon,celebritys pulled off planes(James Woods),no criminal investigation just immediate site clearing,happened at start of work of a new security chief(FBI antiterror chief),plane “fell apart over 11 miles” over Pennsylvania without being shot down,Pres. Shrub just sat for 20 mins without Secret service reacting,the scene in NYC was full of molten metal(2500f+) for weeks with constant water dumped on it,3 buildings”pulled” from 2 planes,mossad had warned all observant jews not to go to work,dozens of foreign intelligence services had directly warned us about a airplane attack. I could go on but these a just a few things at the time and directly after that made it clear to be anything but the phony story put out. Since,about half of the “hijackers” have been located alive and been interviewed by international press,also revealed that the evidence in many criminal cases of powerful people was lost. To not understand this was a internal act and planned to accomplish multiple goals with one act;demolish obsolete buildings that were not being allowed to be taken down,insurance fraud(billions$$$),destroy evidence in hundreds or thousands of criminal cases,PM theft(only gold recovered was from a dump truck in a tunnel miles away),Patriot Act was compiled before(too big to put together after),blind false justification for endless wars-Afghanistan,Iraq,N.Africa and worldwide. Don’t forget the beams were cut to transport lenght by thermite(proven by chemical anaylsis).

  10. I’ve had that kind of great experience JBH had with most law enforcement. My latest was when I had to change a tire in a parking lot during a snowstorm. Police and a State Trooper had a woman there for a DUI. They took her inside the gas station to do the field sobriety test, as I was kneeling in 6″ of slush swearing away while trying to break the lug nuts loose. As they went by, I saw one officer take a quick look at all the preps under the spare tire cover, then he smiled and said, ” WOW, you’re prepped for everything, you even have flares.” Just that positive comment made me feel a lot better about my situation.

    As far as OPSEC goes, I’m not going to worry about an officer seeing that my vehicle has roadside safety equipment and things to get me out of trouble aboard. Think about it from his perspective. He doesn’t have to worry about me, and waste lots of time sitting on the side of a road while I’m trying to get underway again. Think of all the times he sees flat spares out there, and other unprepared people.

  11. Yes, policing has changed over the years. So has our society. Remember when people didn’t lock their doors at night, mass shootings weren’t the norm, and God was more prevalent in our daily public life? Like many things, our law enforcement is a reflection of our society. It doesn’t speak well for where we are headed but we all bear some responsibility. The police are us and we are the police.

      1. Less crime? Maybe per capita, but not in overall numbers. According to FBI UCS reports, violent crimes reported in 1960 were 288,460. Violent crimes in 2017 were 1,283,220. The U.S. Population in 1960 was 179,323,175 and in 2017 it was 325,719,178. Total crimes reported in 1960 were 3,384,200 and in 2017 there were 8,977,306. Not less crime in terms of sheer numbers but I agree, no excuse for bad officer behavior.

        1. True. But of course there’s more overall. The population has close to doubled. An interesting study would be the proportion of police to citizens. I’m sure it’s gone sky high.

          1. Hard to find numbers on that. The most recent study I could find looked at 1992 to recent showed the numbers were holding steady in the police to population ratio in the US with a trend toward a decline recently. In the state that I live in we have had a decline in police ( around 2,000 less) since the recession.

    1. @ET. The police are not us. Don’t lump the everyman in with them. Those drawn to power are the ones least qualified to hold it and those drawn to the power of the badge entice a certain type only.

      1. I have noticed several law enforcement commenting on this site. Who is the Everyman? Also, where do you propose we recruit from? We are all U.S citizens and part of the same society. As far as the power trip stereotype, the same can be done with any group but isn’t always accurate and diminishes from those that aren’t in it for “power”.

  12. In the 1950s the public school teachers complained about students running in the hallways and talking out of turn.

    Today the public school teachers complain about the students lying, cheating, stealing, being illegally drugged, legally drugged by the state, swearing, blasphemy, fornication, homosexual sex, abortion, stabbings, rape, gang rape, disrespect for elders, disrespect for students, shootings, mass shootings, bombings and oh yes also that the students run in the hallways and talk out of turn.

    In the 1950s the Christian creed was king in the public schools and the American home.
    Today the Liberal creed is king in the public schools and moving to take over the home.

    In the 1950s, there was no gun control and no school shootings! Students even brought their guns to school.
    Today, there is much gun control and many shootings/mass shootings/bombings of classmates!

    It’s time you Survival Blog readers get off your sofas and push Congress for Liberal Control because if Liberal creed is controlled then there’s no need for gun control.

    The police are just reacting to Liberal creed embracing society.
    When we had Christian creed embrace society–we had Don Knots in the town of Mayberry wearing a badge and being a real peace keeper!

    Stop complaining if you’re not part of the solution! Write letters even annonomously, show up at town halls, fight! Is it up to us old people to bring this country back around??????

    1. @ Ole Granny. Cops in the old days wouldn’t dream of getting a cat out of a tree with a taser. A modern cop wouldn’t bother with cats in trees. No money in it. They’d refer it over to animal control who’d ticket you for animal negligence or lack of animal on a leash.

      Forces are paramilitary; they follow orders. “Good” cops won’t turn in their own, even if dirty or immoral (note JBH’s comment above about how scared he was of the people he worked with).
      Cops are completely terrified of ostracism. I repeat; terrified. This fear could be used to advantage by creative civilians to (very) rapidly alter cop behavior patterns from the negative to the positive. This assumes the risk that cops will indeed frame, or kill, the citizen activist.

      The crack whore doesn’t get off junk addiction on their own. And from the public purse and addiction to power, neither will the cop.

  13. You cannot talk about the Miami shootout involving the FBI in the same breath. Those agents were shot up due to their own arrogance and stupidity. For the longest time, police trainers were unable to obtain any information from the Famous But Incompetent simply because the whole incident, from planning to execution, was riddled with mistakes which cost lives. When the truth did come out, those of us in local law enforcement agencies just shook our collective heads in disgust. The truth is out there.

  14. The Sheriff’s department where I live is well respected and does a good job. Granted, I live in a rural area in the midwest. but near me are several small towns with crooked police Departments. So it depends on where you live. If you live where the police are crooked, the best thing you can do is move. I have lived in the other kind of place. Take my word for it. Move. You cannot fight them, you cannot outlast them. Failing that, when the rule of law breaks down, the police have to go home after work, don’t they ? But that may be far in the future. Better to move to a better place now. Having law enforcement that you can trust is a very big factor in deciding where to live.

    1. @Nathan

      You can defeat any Police/Swat anywhere in the United States. They are out on patrol/serving warrants and you are an innocent bystander sitting in your pick-up truck with tinted windows. You have a supressed 5.56 bolt action rifle with sub-sonic ammunition. Enough said!

      1. WHY would you want to shoot a Police officer ? That is the height of STUPIDITY. And an excellent way of committing suicide. That is foolish talk. You are not being a patriot talking like that. Get out of your parents’ basement and look at the real world. You are in a dangerous place- a fantasy world where you think you can do anything you want. Take my word for it, the world is not like that.

        1. @ Nathan

          Either your a Federal Agent garnering information or new to the site. Let me do your thinking for you as an Attorney!

          In Nazi Germany, the Germans had the same spiel about not being a patriot to kill Nazis. The United States and Brittan dropped single shot handguns with instructions tied to them all over Germany telling the German Citizens to kill the Nazis. Some drops even instructed citizens to take the Nazis weapons and re-purpose them into a tactical resistance.

          How many Jews would’ve been saved… ????

          Making a single blanketed statement such as “Why would you want to kill Police Officers?” is the height of stupidity. Nazis were Police Officers and according to German law killing anyone not fitting Aryan.

          1. If you are an attorney, you surely neglected your high school and college English classes, as well as logic classes, if any were offered where you studied the law. Correspondence course, maybe ?
            Do not confuse American law enforcement workers with German Nazis during World War II. At least not yet. You will know the time has come when they come for our guns. Until the rule of law is absent, advocating violence against LEOs would be a crime, as any real lawyer would know. Or perhaps YOU are a government provocateur trying to entrap patriots into committing illegal acts.

          2. @ nathan

            Instead of giving you law terms or walking down a law matrix, let’s look at this a Patriotic way…

            Go back to the Founding Fathers…

            John Adams
            “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”

            George Washington
            “Do not let anyone claim tribute of American patriotism if they even attempt to remove religion from politics.”

            Both are referring to separating LEFTist from state! LEFTist are unGoldy people legislating unGodly laws on the books.

            Sir William Blackstone – Most famous Jurist Doctorate and Founding Father
            “If any law is contrary to God’s law it must be expunged from law books.”

            Serial Killing, theft, and lying are all against the law…. Man’s law
            Serial Killing, Homosexuality, lying, adultery, theft, blasphemy, thinking lustfully are all against the law… God’s law.

            There’s going to come a time when Christians will have to break man’s laws to uphold God’s law. What we are fighting for here is not to start a new country under Christian principles–God’s law. That has already been done by our Founding Fathers. What we are fighting for here is to uphold the US Constitution which is solely based on Islam–no wait a minute, it is solely based on Christian principles. Once the Constitution goes, there goes our safeguard to be benefactors of living life as Christians and not breaking man’s laws…

            To counter your next argument, is the LEO correct in serving court papers to the Baker whom refuses to bake a cake to celebrate the serial killer’s ninth murder or to celebrate that homosexual marriage. Remember the serial killer and the practicing homosexual are felons according to God’s law?

            The Book of Revelation stipulates LEFTist policy will come to a pinnacle, which the LEO will uphold unGodly laws forcing the Godly to bend their faith for the LEFTist law on the books…. OR the final straw is the Christian loosing their head on a guilloten by not bending to unGodlyness. Revelation 14-18. You will either loose your life someday or you will convert to upholding unGodliness–LEFTist law.

            There’s a lot in this post… But our Founding Fathers gave us a Republic built upon Christian principles….it currently is the LEOs who are enforcing the unGodly laws established by LEFTist politicians. Take your pick on whom you want to fight against, but do something to safeguard our Christian principled framed government.

            Writing letters or organizing peaceful marches is a good place to start to fight those folks [either LEOs or Politicians]…. not open fire in a public square.

            Thanks for reading and God Bless!

  15. My daughter is a federal agent and keeps a full auto M4 in her “company car”. I asked her “If you can have one why can’t I”. She said it was a good question considering the 2nd Amendment. I’m glad she has it as her AO is a drug riddled border town. But I want one! Most LEO’s are hardworking decent folk who will not bother you if you keep a low profile.

    1. Send more,the ATF sent a car loaded with automatic weapons to Chicago and it was immediately stolen. Cops are chosen by their psychological profile as sociopaths,they can murder or follow any order and never question. Have followed many individuals who were chosen,sent to academies and passed or failed by that determiner(knew several who should of been institutionalized as dangers to themselves and the public,noticed they were rapididly promoted)

  16. “Law enforcement officers might be writing parking tickets in the middle of a burglary epidemic due to their need to enforce all the laws all the time. Conversely, a peace officer is going to ignore a lot of low-level, habitual crime – even when there are clear victims (for example, vandalism or loitering) – because he emphasizes going out and catching violent and dangerous criminals.”

    I have worked for as a Deputy Sheriff for 5 years. I have yet to catch a burglar breaking into a house by driving around an area where there are lots of burglaries. I have yet to stumble upon an assault in progress by driving around where people have been mugged.

    Do I drive around in our high crime areas and hope to find those things? Heck yes that’s why I signed up, to catch real violent criminals! But the reality is LE doesn’t stop crime, it merely trys to hold people accountable after the crime has been commited (or maybe get lucky and interrupt it while it’s still occuring). We are second responders, citizens are the ones who have the opportunity to be first responders if they are prepared to defend themselves and others by carrying a weapon and training to use it.

    All of my “best catches” if you will have been off of the small stuff (but not writing parking tickets lol) I have gotten drugs, stolen guns, persons wanted for assault, rape, burglary off of traffic stops, county Park violation’s, and “loitering” persons.

    Though I respect the authors concerns and prospective, he doesn’t know what he is talking about in the quote I pasted above. I am not going to not investigate your property being vandalized, in order to drive around and hope I get lucky catching a violent criminal walking around.

  17. The FBI made a great effort to secretly provide arms to the Black Panthers in the 60s and 70s. They then informed local police that “those black activists” were arming themselves to kill cops. In so doing they set up both sides to lose. Cops raided local Panther headquarters buildings, in the process getting shot themselves and in some cases simply murdering Panther leaders. Look up the name Fred Hampton.

    You are welcome to your own opinion of the Black Panther Party. And, they were all citizens with the right to due process rather than summary execution.

    The FBI program to arm the Black Panthers included sowing fear of them in the minds of the cops. Granted, some members of the Panthers fed that fear by their own threatening behavior.

    The man who gave the Black Panther Party some of its first firearms and weapons training – which preceded fatal shootouts with Oakland police in the turbulent 1960s – was an undercover FBI informer, according to a former bureau agent and an FBI report.

    One of the Bay Area’s most prominent radical activists of the era, Richard Masato Aoki was known as a fierce militant who touted his street-fighting abilities. He was a member of several radical groups before joining and arming the Panthers, whose members received international notoriety for brandishing weapons during patrols of the Oakland police and a protest at the state Legislature.

    Aoki’s work for the FBI, which has never been reported, was uncovered and verified during research for the book, “Subversives: The FBI’s War on Student Radicals, and Reagan’s Rise to Power.” The book, based on research spanning three decades, offers a close look at a corrupt FBI campaign.

    Carry on.

  18. I’ve been a law enforcement officer and/or peace officer for almost 12 years now in western Montana. I fought in Iraq as a Infantry Team Leader and Designated Marksman. Overall, that’s 18 years of fighting for all the armchair quarterbacks to have a “safe place” to have their opinion. Reality Check, even way out in the “sticks” society has changed and policing has changed with it for better or worse. One month ago I went to arrest a male on a warrant. I had arrested same male previously without incident even though he was armed at the time. Unknown to me, the male was laid out to go out in a blaze of glory. Luckily, I didn’t approach his front door and instead surprised him at a window, where he immediately shot himself. The male had the door barricaded, was wearing body armor, and was wearing and had staged multiple firearms in the immediate area. ………..Luckily I still went home that day to my family. That’s a Tuesday at work for me………….how ’bout easing up a little bit on all the anti cop bias? BTW, in response to Randy, I still run three miles a day and box, what do you do?

    1. Some of those places are very rural. Talk about being your own backup. I find it amazing all the area the LEO’s have to cover in the western part of the state. Out in some of those places, if I was a LEO there, I would want (need) whatever I could have at my disposal so that I was sure to make it home. Because there are some people who do not want to be bothered or found. When I was out in that region, I had tons of respect for the officers who patrolled those areas and figured a person had to have some brass marbles to patrol a place 13 miles of the highway where the highway exit is 30 miles from town.

    2. Well when you went to arrest that guy who had barricaded himself inside his house, and you came up to a window and he shot himself, it is a good thing that his body armor wasn’t working that day ! LOL Goes to show you what many law officers are up against- unstable, insane, and not-too-smart individuals that can go off at any time- and not just at law officers, either. Glad you are safe.

  19. Retired from Law Enforcement in 2012 from a 60 man department. The only thing we were ever able to get our hands on were a few select fire M4’s that were about 20 years old. Our SWAT vehicle was a donated worn out van from a money transport company with very low level ballistic protection. The strong majority of departments do not have DARPA weapons or anything of the sort through the 1033 program. Many smaller departments still rely on community donations to purchase low level body armor. I am very anti jack-booted thug and I think many people would be surprised at the amount of officers that are the same way. I think many would also be surprised at the amount of preppers in the Law Endorcemnt community (depending on location).

  20. It was predicted long ago. When the NWO is in full swing, all the cops will morph into military. Why, because the control grid put in place will need to be ruled by force, not serve and protect. Those that won’t participate, will be thrown out..

    Those stand down orders like what happened in Ferguson were there to up the chaos factor. Once the grid is complete, there won’t be anymore of those…

  21. Not to nit-pick, but the idea that a semi-auto AR-15 is not a viable weapon is pure nonsense. Please note that the special operations community does not carry select-fire weapons. They carry off-the-shelf AR-15s of the kind you would find at any legitimate gun show table. Most operators prefer high-end models by Daniel Defense, Noveske, Yankee Hill Machine, etc. Here’s the deal. Small teams operating far from supply chains carry everything they require…including ammunition. Every ration counts. Every battery counts. Every round counts. When you run out of ammunition, you die. So full-auto fire is very much not in your best interest.
    A friend of mine works with an unmentionable unit out of Fort Campbell. Some of the men there were involved in the Somalia operation. During some testing involving communications equipment, he requested the operators fire some bursts of automatic fire to see if problems arose with the radios. Some semi-auto fire came forth. After another request for full-auto fire, an operator explained that they don’t carry select-fire rifles, and mentioned the reasons above.
    The best cinema demonstration of this is the motion picture, Lone Survivor. This is a pretty faithful re-creation of the events involving a special ops team in Afghanistan/Pakistan. The Americans carefully rationed every shot fired in the fight and exacted a heavy toll on the enemy. No chopper came flying in with a pallet of ammunition, and one isn’t coming to resupply most of us, either. Your best investment is training.
    Your mileage may vary, but I’ve never had my car searched, my home raided, my dogs shot dead. Of course, I don’t live in a dicey state, nor do I dabble in shady activities. I’m polite and courteous with my police and I’ve been treated fair and square. So far, I can’t complain.

  22. to survivalblog dot com- my apologies for my failure to find my earlier ost. I was looking for it on either Part one or Part two and was on the wrong one. I would, however, like to see my recent post defending my position after being called out by a so-called attorney who likened our police officers to the Nazis during Wor War II and my rebuttal to same. Thanks Nathan

    1. @ Nathan

      Attorneys are well trained especially in factual evidence. Let’s just say I already knew the counter argument when I presented my original arguments. That someone [possibly you] would take my statements and twist them into stating that I said, “American police officers are Nazis.” I never made that claim. Please reread the post and you will understand that what was stated, is that Nazis were police officers of their day.

      To clarify… Did you state, “WHY would you want to shoot a Police officer?”

      My rebuttal is that there are instances in human history when police officers were shot and killed and for good reason. The American GIs did it in Nazi Germany and the Founding Fathers did it to the British law enforcers of their day. I made no reference to police officers of today and in current America. I was simply answering the question posed.

      Thanks for reading!

Comments are closed.