Montana votes to Limit Federal Militarization of Police

[Rooster]

Go Montana!!!!



Montana Legislature Passes Bill to Limit Federal Militarization of Local Police

Section 1. Limitations on excess property provided to local law enforcement -- definitions. (1) A law enforcement agency may not receive the following property from a military equipment surplus program operated by the federal government:

(a) drones that are armored, weaponized, or both;

(b) aircraft that are combat configured or combat coded;

(c) grenades or similar explosives and grenade launchers;

(d) silencers; or

(e) militarized armored vehicles.

http://leg.mt.gov/bills/2015/billhtml/HB0330.htm

 

[Webster]

Sounds interesting...and reading it, one can almost see what law enforcement will argue in reverse: If you restrict our ability to stay in step with the latest threats, how'll we protect the public? What happens if there's a terrorist incident and we can't effectively deal with it; are you prepared to accept responsibility for not helping us?, etc...

It wouldn't surprise me if they try to guilt-trip the legislators into voting no...and for that, I hope the legislature tells them to go pound some sand.

 

[Rooster]

I doubt they will get much pushback by law enforcement.

And if the LEO's do make that argument, they will get laughed right out of the state. Pretty easy to spot an Islamic terrorist up that way. Believe me, guys running around their apartments with a towel on their head, screaming "Death to the Infidels"...

Up there, they stand out in the crowd!

But you know what the beauty of this law really is?

Up there, the citizens are now way better armed than the police!

 

[Rooster]

Go Montana!

 

[Sinon]

I get the aircraft, and I get the grenades. Not so sure on armoured vehicles though. I gather AP ammunition isn't exactly hard to find, but an armoured vehicle would probably take it better than a common-or-garden cop car. Especially when you account for SWAT as well (which I assume this does?) Same deal for silencers. They seem pretty low on the list compared to other equipment.

Also, can they receive this equipment from places aside from a 'military equipment surplus program operated by the federal government'?

 

[Rooster]

Sinon,

If I read the bill correctly, They can still get that equipment elsewhere, just not from any current or future federal military surplus programs, and not ever with federal money.

I think this part of the Bill is the key part-

"Funds obtained from the federal government may not be used to purchase property from a military equipment surplus program."

Montana does not have a great tax base. I doubt local law enforcement could ever raise the money for this stuff without federal funds. I think this pretty much gives control of this back to the local citizenry. And I find that to be a good thought...

 

[Rooster]

The Federal 1033 Program...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1033_program

The Homeland Security Grant Program...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeland_Security_Grant_Program

 

[Rooster]

And, if anybody really wants to have some fun...

http://www.freep.com/article/201408...gain=true&AppKey=36701000b255adcfe6ca4b13a8a4

You can check and see what your county has purchased with your tax dollars! :generic:

 

[WHO IS SERAFIN]

Go Montana!!!!



Montana Legislature Passes Bill to Limit Federal Militarization of Local Police

Ditto!

 

[Rooster]

Thanks to everybody who has responded to this thread.

I was a bit surprised more people didn't respond, but hey, that's America...

This is an important topic for discussion in this country, but I understand how easily it can "slip under the radar". Not glamorous, not sexy, doesn't catch much in the headlines and frankly, when you see stories like this, there appears to be no reason to even be concerned. Your Law Enforcement needs this stuff to be prepared for future events. And I get that, and it is true...

But hidden in these stories are things that should cause you concern (at least I would hope so). Those hidden things should cause you to start a thought process. Let me see if I can get that thought process started here...

So, that link I provided in post #8 shows us what the State of Michigan has purchased. "Buried" down in the bottom of the article, we see that Michigan now has "530 bayonets"...Really?

Now, what earthly reason would they have for "bayonets"? Why, gives a whole new meaning to the phrase "crowd control"!

And remember, somebody authorized that purchase. Who, in the State of Michigan, envisioning a terrorist threat, thought to themselves "Hey, bayonets would take care of that!"? Who? Why?

Any thoughts?

 

[WHO IS SERAFIN]

Thanks to everybody who has responded to this thread.

I was a bit surprised more people didn't respond, but hey, that's America...

This is an important topic for discussion in this country, but I understand how easily it can "slip under the radar". Not glamorous, not sexy, doesn't catch much in the headlines and frankly, when you see stories like this, there appears to be no reason to even be concerned. Your Law Enforcement needs this stuff to be prepared for future events. And I get that, and it is true...

But hidden in these stories are things that should cause you concern (at least I would hope so). Those hidden things should cause you to start a thought process. Let me see if I can get that thought process started here...

So, that link I provided in post #8 shows us what the State of Michigan has purchased. "Buried" down in the bottom of the article, we see that Michigan now has "530 bayonets"...Really?

Now, what earthly reason would they have for "bayonets"? Why, gives a whole new meaning to the phrase "crowd control"!

And remember, somebody authorized that purchase. Who, in the State of Michigan, envisioning a terrorist threat, thought to themselves "Hey, bayonets would take care of that!"? Who? Why?

Any thoughts?

Those people who ordered those items are not worried about terrorists but instead us for a possible uprising. We are just as divided now as we were during the civil war and the riots in the 1960s. Personally I believe we have not seen the riots of the 1960s now is because of the internet and the means to communicate and express our displeasure towards our own government. Otherwise I truly believe a lot of cities would be burning by now.

 

[Rooster]

Personally I believe we have not seen the riots of the 1960s now is because of the internet and the means to communicate and express our displeasure towards our own government. Otherwise I truly believe a lot of cities would be burning by now.

Maybe...

Personally, I think "they" have just gotten better at controlling the public. Do you know how to boil a frog? Same principal...

The American public has been conditioned. They are so concerned with things that do not really matter in life, while at the same time being bombarded by the News Channels that also give them nothing of substance (or worse yet, erroneous information). Then add a lack of critical thinking skills and a bare minimum of history, both courtesy of the American Educational system.

Then add what "the powers that be" are doing, which is to implement changes so gradually that a docile American public doesn't even notice...

And we get where we are right now.

 

[Rooster]

Oh, and come to think of it...

Ending the draft didn't hurt, either!

After that cluster in Iraq, if we had the draft, probably would have been rioting in the streets...

 

[DrLeftover]

... .... .... damned haters, don't they know that Our Dear Leader just wants to protect the polar bears?

 

[Rooster]

Haters gotta hate, Doc...

Still, I suppose I could get used to the yoke of tyranny...after all, it's for the polar bears.

 

[WHO IS SERAFIN]

Maybe...

Personally, I think "they" have just gotten better at controlling the public. Do you know how to boil a frog? Same principal...

The American public has been conditioned. They are so concerned with things that do not really matter in life, while at the same time being bombarded by the News Channels that also give them nothing of substance (or worse yet, erroneous information). Then add a lack of critical thinking skills and a bare minimum of history, both courtesy of the American Educational system.

Then add what "the powers that be" are doing, which is to implement changes so gradually that a docile American public doesn't even notice...

And we get where we are right now.

In some ways I agree but I still think the internet has just made the peoples boiling point higher before eventually conditioning or the internet wil mean nothing.

 

[Rooster]

@TRUE LIBERTY

You know, I thought about that.

I have to agree with you, the internet certainly is a part of the equation. It would indeed make our "boiling point" higher.

Which then brings the thought that they will never take the internet away, they will just try to filter it (and probably succeed). If they ever did entirely take the internet away from us, then finally there would be rioting in the streets!

And that's probably what it would take, sadly enough...