TTAG reader JF writes:

It seems NRA commentator Dom Raso just doesn’t get the pitfalls of up-arming every cop in America to the point where they could fight the Decepticons. He’s made a new video [above] where he acknowledges the resistance to police militarization in his previous video. He states that he’s a civilian now and doesn’t want MRAPs on every street. Then he goes on to say that we really need MRAPs on every street. Because terrorists. That’s his mantra; that the military fights terrorists so the police need to be just like the military to fight the terrorists when they show up here. He must think it’ll be like that Chuck Norris movie Invasion USA where 500 Jihadis land on a beach. Of course he never mentions any of the abuses of police acting like military and treating all citizens like potential insurgents. He does ask anyone who disagrees with him to “make a video” and send it to the NRA. He loves to say “Crush Everything” and I guess he’s including most of the Bill of Rights.

Recommended For You

190 Responses to NRA Commentator Dom Raso Hearts Police Militarization. Again. Still.

    • Is anyone randomly attacking Brimfield police officers that they need an armored military vehicle for “purely defensive” purposes? I’m not sure I have the same concept of “purely defensive” as the Chief.

    • If the police chief of New York, Dallas, Chicago, Los Angeles, etc., any city over a million people said they needed MRAPs for protection that would make sense. The police chief of a town of slightly more than 3200 people saying that is asinine and beyond ridiculous.

      • Guys..

        It’s not like they intend to drive these damn things around, pulling over tourists, or crashing them into your garage, before tactically shooting your dog while doing a no-knock because you didn’t pay a parking ticket.

        Remove the tinfoil hats.

        • Then why do they need one? Seriously – are there tempting strategic targets (like a nuclear bomb assembly plant) in their town? I’m looking, but I’m not seeing any risk there.

        • Well, if you could buy an MRAP for $1, would you? Not all PD’s or SO’s get them for that cheap, but they get really steep discounts on them from the military. The benefits outweigh the costs from their perspective and the military has a lot of them that they want to get rid of. IMO it would be better to sell them to allies or private entities or even to recycle the materials used; however, Law Enforcement is offered them first.

        • C’mon guys stop with the conspiracies… The govt just needs MRAPs to keep us safe, duh…

          (^^sarcasm, if you couldnt figure it out. Then again, you might be in favor of police militarization so you probably needed to be told it was sarcasm.)

    • Brimfield absolutely does not need a MRAP. Free does not mean its free, maintenance alone on that puppy will be in the thousands of dollars a year and then you need a place to store it. They’ll have to build a specialized garage just to store the useless penis extension device that’ll only see action during the 4th of July parade, if they can keep it running. I can fully understand needing one if you are in a large city, but Brimfield come on. Basically that department is wasting thousands of dollars of tax payer dollars on an essentially useless piece of equipment.

  1. Anyone that says police shouldn’t be militarized doesn’t know what they are talking about. I live in Arizona and I can say without a doubt that police should be more armed and equipped than they are. They are outnumbered and outgunned by the cartels, their automatic weapons, and their virtually limitless budget. Here in Arizona, I would say a cop should be bale to carry an AR as a primary and a pistol as a secondary because things are getting so crazy and violent towards them that they need to be able to defend themselves and us.

    I am not a cop. I am an EMT

    • Honest question: how many cops have been shot up by automatic weapons in your town in the past year? Shot at?

    • Paul, the reason that cops in AZ will have trouble getting such weapons is because they might use them against our “guests” who are so beloved by our government. The reason that cops in other places may get such armament is because they may use them on us, who the government hates.

      • I think Rich has the right idea in that the governments are creating the cartels by their stupid policies with the “War on Drugs”. I have not seen too many shoot outs over alcoholic beverages as of late.

        • But all the governments are making too much $$$ in salaries and “tips and gratuities” to call off the war.

    • If they are so vastly outgunned in Arizona, why aren’t we hearing about how Arizona is a warzone like Detroit and Chicago?

      Police DO NOT need more militarization.

      • Seriously. This needs to stop. I LIVE in Detroit. Do you? A warzone? As long as you carry and dont do any of the stupid times in stupid places you will be fine. Granted, the D is the skidmark of the midwest, but Berlin 1945 it is not.

    • No thanks. Without cops enforcing victimless crimes, the black market/cartel problem wouldn’t exist. They can sleep in their bed without driving a free MRAP over mine.

        • Unsafe driving was already a crime and a lightly drunk 20-something has a reaction time no greater than a sober geriatric 75 year old. So yes.

        • Drunk driving causes the black market / cartel problem?

          Or, did you mean they have MRAP’s to combat drunk driving?

          What in the world does drunk driving have to do with the point of militarization (which flows as an offshoot from drug enforcement)?

        • Somebody sitting on his back porch smoking a a bowl that he grew on his windowsill isn’t hurting anybody, neither is somebody having a couple of beers at a barbeque. Nobody says driving under the influence is ok, but going full-stormtrooper on the general public because of a couple of stoners in the basement playing x-box is a cure worse that the disease.

        • “Yeah!, Just like drunk driving is a victim less crime.”

          Yeah! Ban alcohol like we ban drugs! Some sort of “prohibition”, perhaps! It’ll totally work! Just like prohibiting drugs works!

          Awesome logic!

    • If thats the case then the ranch owners along the boarder should be able to be equally as geared up as the LEO’s. However all you mentioned was an AR as a primary and a handgun as a secondary. Im not sure if you were talking about true AR’s or the semi version. If it was the semi version, what departments don’t already have several units armed with MSR’s and handguns?

      • “… Im not sure if you were talking about true AR’s or the semi version.”

        Do you mean “true Assault-Rifles”? Because true AR-10’s and AR-15’s are already semi-auto.

        The AR in AR-10 or AR-15 means “Armalite Rifle”.

        The correct statement above should’ve been:
        ” Im not sure if you were talking about true M16’s/M4’s or the semi version (AR-15).”

        Just clarifying things for the anti-gunners that read this blog.

    • Sorry, Paulie, but that’s not a police issue – that’s a Border Patrol issue and a direct result of Obama & Co refusing to defend the borders in hopes of gaining millions of new Democrat voters .

  2. Perhaps we should have a few NRA commentators make Youtube videos promoting the idea of downsizing police departments. I’m not convinced that there are all that many criminals out there to justify the numbers we have right now, and the profession seems to draw in those that are looking for a means of becoming an “elite” citizen.

    • It’s not the numbers that I don’t like, its how geared up they are. I may get hate for this next sentence, but oh well. I wouldn’t mind a lot of cops roaming our streets…. but they should be like the good ole “to protect and serve cops.” Not the “to enforce and regulate” and why do I need a warrant operator cop. Cops with badges, a good serving mentality, a side arm, and an 870 in the squad car is cool with me. The new elite force with a heavily armored vehicle, battering rams, flash bangs, and a sever case of operator status is whats wrong with too many modern departments.

      • I tend to agree. In most locations the number of cops is either barely adequate or inadequate, or effectively inadequate because too many man hours are devoted to activities that aren’t beneficial to lower crime (gun buy backs come to mind but there are myriad other things that fall in that header). More patrol officers with actual police uniforms, with faces you can see and a demeanor you can approach, actually doing legitimate police work would be nice.

        The problem is the head to toe armored, balaclava wearing, rifle toting armored car riding operator wannabes and the superior to you power tripping jerks in standard uniforms the former recruit from.

        I’ll let you all in on a well kept secret: Most ‘SWAT’ teams in most departments have way more equipment than training. It’s difficult to describe the magnitude of the disconnect. They may have what would be at retail $10,000 worth of equipment on each team member without having $10,000 worth of training between them, including their basic LEO school and yearly qualifications.

        LEO discounts, government subsidies and give aways, personally purchased equipment and items confiscated in the field and even things picked up by having raffles and charity drives grace these up-armed and up-armored officers but underneath it all they have little competence as an individual and virtually none as a team. In many rural counties the SWAT team is little more effective than your kids little league team would be with the same equipment and a days instruction in its use.

        I’m not knocking small department SWAT here, I’m actually bemoaning the fact that their training is either too little, too poor or non-existent. Training builds competence which builds confidence. Confident operators don’t attack every position as if it were a bunker, don’t feel the need to send 20 guys when 2 would have done fine, don’t no knock when ringing the bell and speaking sternly would do, and don’t shoot your dog or beat you up while you’re on the floor during a raid because they don’t have to, because they know it doesn’t help and because its unprofessional and beneath them.

        These repeated fiascos are a direct result of untrained personnel playing army with tactics and tools they don’t understand and in a state of extreme confusion and arousal because they know they don’t know what the hell they are doing.

        Is a SWAT team necessary in a small jurisdiction? Maybe, maybe not but they can be useful and appropriate at times. However, long before they have an MRAP and FA, suppressed SBRs and flashbang grenades they need 100’s of hours of specialized training that isn’t available just anywhere, which doesn’t come cheaply, and which most small department ‘SWAT’ team members couldn’t pass or even much benefit from without first being schooled in the very basics of marksmanship, weapons handling, communication and movement.

        Two weeks of summer camp with a National Guard infantry squad would teach them more about command/control, communication and group movement than most currently even know exists. Likewise most could benefit heavily from range time with basic firearms instruction in the use of their weapons. This is long before they are ready to tackle dynamic entry or building clearance. Those skills will forever elude them until they have a better base to learn from.

        This profound lack of both actual competence and the confidence it brings are the primary problem with most SWAT teams and giving them more gear only amplifies the deficiencies.

        • Great post.

          Further, there is NOT WAY for the typical small sheriff/police dept to pull active cops of duty for several days/weeks of training then multiple (squad) of these guys for days/weeks of unit training.

          Just manhours cost of thousands $ and they also aren’t out patrolling (or whatever they do with their time on a normal day). If the dept can do without these days of patrolling, obviously the cop is not needed in the first place.

      • “I wouldn’t mind a lot of cops roaming our streets”

        Query: Why would we need more cops roaming our streets?

        Factor 1: If we got rid of the fiat crimes and dismantled the idiotic War on Drugs (**), there would very likely be less need for ‘more cops.’

        The War on Drugs is a giant engine. It creates the problems the Statists want to solve…and like a self fulfilling prophecy, justifies the ‘need’ for more enforcement resources.

        Factor 2: With Constitutional Carry in all 50 States, there would be in place a ready “security force.” Not cops; not vigilantes. But deterrent effect coupled with having enough of a presence so that deterrence has real teeth, streets would actually be safer without the increased taxpayer and social burden of “more cops.”

        (**) Disclaimer: I’ve been part of the War on Drugs. I’m comfortable with my calling it idiocy.

      • I don’t like the numbers or the gear / tactics. Most police forces are drastically overstaffed (see the high percentage of cops who spend almost all of their time writing traffic tickets) and as a result of their boredom from a lack of real work, they go batshit crazy in the rare instances of an actual event (see what happened in Boston after the marathon bombing). Obviously, you can’t have a blanket rule for all departments, but you could probably easily trim 25% – 30% off the payrolls of most police departments and have no impact on actual crime.

    • I am really tired of having to go on youtube and dislike NRA videos. If their (and the GOP’s) goal was to inundate me with a feeling of the futility of fighting, well… they haven’t succeeded, but they have me thinking we might not have as many allies as we thought.

  3. There’s a time and place for MRAPS. Should they be available to law enforcement? I say yes, however they should only be used dying the worst possible situation.

    • Then perhaps give them to the state’s unorganized militia unit in the county and the sheriff’s office can request it from them. This way, there is little danger of them being used against the People (represented by the unorganized militia) and they are still available to the county sheriff in a time of genuine need.

      • “Then perhaps give them to the state’s unorganized militia unit …”

        Yeah! They were bought with taxpayer money in the first place, so technically they’re ours, right? Right?

      • That’s similar to what I’ve been saying for awhile. Have small police forces and then call up the militia in instances when you actually need heavy man-power. If you want to ensure that people will join without fear of losing their jobs, you can even put in a law that employers cannot fire you for working for the public good as part of the militia during a crisis (hostage situation, kidnapping, etc).

  4. Dom is a government fanboy that just doesn’t get it. It would be nice if he did a bit of research into the damages these tooled-up cops are doing … preferably before he puts his foot in his mouth.

    Hey Dom! Look here!

    And for a real treat, Google swat brutality and read up a bit.

    The cops have already caused more damage and mayhem to innocent people than we will probably see terrorists cause in the next hundred years. And I’m sure we haven’t seen the worst from the cops yet.

    Hang on boys. The ride is going to get quite a bit bumpier. But, we don’t have to worry about terrorists. There are plenty of cops doing their job for them.

  5. The NRA needs to get rid of these commentators and do a much better job finding people who can make a point.

  6. “If you give up freedom for security you deserve neither.” OK I know that is not the exact quote, however, it works for this instance. For the gentlemen in the video, all I can say is wow. As I do not want to put a personal attack on him here. However ex military rooting for police militarization, does not surprise me.
    P.S. I believe the quote is “If you give up liberty for security you deserve neither” or something like that.

  7. I don’t think the MRAP is such a big deal, it is a special purpose vehicle after all. I also don’t think a cop having an AR or armor is a big deal. What I have a problem with is the conduct of police nationwide which has been brought to light again and again.

    Police need better training more than they need bigger trucks and guns. In general I would say that police need to remember they are there to protect and serve citizens, not harass them. I believe that government authorities are actually encouraging the police to have a hostile attitude toward the public and that needs to stop.

    I must says as well that I think it is ridiculous to compare terrorist attacks in Mumbai or Nairobi to something that could happen in the United States. I don’t mean to offend anyone, but most of the LEO/Military personnel in those places are a bunch of yahoos compared to the professionals America has at her disposal nationwide. There is a reason that they used jetliners to attack us on 9/11, it is because the would be terrorists are scared they will humiliate themselves before their God if they try to fight us face to face.

    Police are not ‘militarizing’ to fight Islamic militants. They are doing it to fight Americans who they have been conditioned to perceive as a threat to their lives and the lives of those who sign their paychecks. It is rooted in paranoia and that is the problem, because they are afraid of their own countrymen.

    Obviously that begs the question “Why are they are so afraid of us?” It is difficult to try and answer this question without coming to the conclusion that our leaders are guilty as hell of all kinds of malfeasance and once we find out the details, they think we will come for them.

  8. I believe that there does need to be some armored equipment, and special trained personnel to handle unique situations. However, there is a very fine line that does get crossed too often. We as pro-gunners however, can not make the same mistakes the anti’s do; we can not blame the inanimate equipment, but hold those who misuse and abuse the equipment responsible for their irresponsible actions. Another point, the officers on the special response teams, should have that team as their only responsibility. That would help to company some abuses, but we still must demand they be held accountable when they screw up. If enough of us demand action when it does happen, there won’t be much of a choice in the matter.

    • To some degree I agree with you. However, let us not forget that the comparison between the People with rights and agents of government operating under privilege is very loose. The People are correct in asserting that they do not want agents of their government to have the privilege of MRAPs or any piece of equipment. That is a one way street.

      • Yes, that brings another point, equality. We are not able to have much of the same equipment, which I believe is constitutionally unsound law, but who am I. Government needs to be shrunk down and put back in its place across the board, but I did also talk about how they need to be held accountable. We still control government, at least some, for now, and we all need to demand our voice be heard however you individually see fit. If a community does not wish for their police to have an MRAP, than they should not, it is the community’s say, but others outside the community need to respect the decision, whatever it may be.

        • +1000

          I speak with county officials and officials of the nearest city regularly. I have been reminding, asking, and warning them away from militarization of the two associated police forces. I know the incoming county sheriff as I knew his predecessor and the one before him. I plan on passing the local hat to get a copy of Rise of the Warrior Cop: The Militarization of America’s Police Forces so that it can be given to him prior to taking office. (My preference is to get a signed hard cover edition.) We currently enjoy some fine, constitution loving officers and administrations here but I feel it is important to regularly praise good work and remind them of the necessity of constitutional behavior in office.

          I agree complete with you that law enforcement ought not be permitted to possess equipment that non-law enforcement individuals are denied or must jump through more hoops than departments to obtain. It doesn’t seem compatible with a free people remaining free. Also, I see lack of adequate accountability to be one of the biggest problems today.

      • Bingo. That’s why I’m against police having equal firepower to their non-government employed civilian brethren. If John Smith misuses an M16, he’ll be arrested, taken to court, and spend a long time in jail as a result. If Officer Toughguy misuses his M16, the worst that will happen is he’ll get a two week vacation while Internal Affairs “investigates” [they’ll rule he did nothing wrong, SOP for IA] while the department waits for the story to blow over due to American’s short attention spans.

        Until there is accountability for police officers, I say they should have nothing more than a .38 special revolver, 20 gauge pump action shotgun, and for the select few who might need to perform sniping duties, a bolt action rifle. When they show that they’re responsible enough to act like adults, then they can start being treated like adults.

    • Maybe start with the really easy stuff….

      Remove the IQ cap that limits hires to <110.

      Have LEO receive training from the local mailman on how to avoid seeing the need to shoot every dog they encounter.

  9. The police already get classIII stuff doled out to them, if a situation arises where you need a MRAP, or dozens of cops with gihllie suits and mp5’s, its probably too late for the local spec-ops wannabe swat backed by the government. Most of the problems that swat will kick down doors and shoot dogs/innocent homeowners are problems that over aggressive police force has created

      • “Some” drugs is right. We don’t seem to be clamping down on Big Pharma when they make more Percocets than the licit market can possibly handle. But woe betide the poor b@stard who grows some weed in his basement.

    • SWAT teams are useless for real time crisis situations in that they cannot respond in a fast reaction timely manner to a dynamic crisis. SWAT teams can really only perform when static operations arise such as pre-planned drugs raids, shooting dogs, raiding the wrong addresses, throwing hand grenades at babies and baby sitters, etcetera. MRAPS are cheap to the SWAT teams because the military figured out that while they did protect the vehicle occupants, they were worthless for about everything else. The MRAP might be cheap for the SWAT squad but you still have maintenance and upkeep.

  10. Put on a tinfoil hat Sean. I don’t worry about foreign terrorists. We have enough in our alphabet agencies. NSA, IRS, FBI ,CIA, state and federal( and in Cook County,Illinois we have city, county & township guys all doing essentially the same overlapping job. Hey my own son is essentially a spy for DOD. He wouldn’t admit to that but he speaks Arabic & spends his days ” analyising data”. Hope you aren’t the victim of a no knock raid ( wrong address? Oops ) in your nice little town.

    • You’re certainly onto something here and while I respect Dom for his service and the likelihood that he is highly skilled, that doesn’t make his opinion on this any more valid. Terrorist attacks like the ones he describes don’t take place in the US because of the perception and the reality that we’re an armed (and somewhat warlike) people who won’t tolerate it. Islamofascist terrorists know what happens when you pull something like that in Israel; everyone in the crowd opens up on you, and they suspect the same is true in the US.

      Further, if large groups of armed terrorists taking large numbers of hostages in crowded public places is the concern then the elimination of GFZs and national constitutional carry is a far better deterrent that giving police departments MRAPs. As for response to such an event, perhaps up-armed and up-armored police are the answer, but if we’re going to have them we need better controls on when and for what they are used. I think that ‘common sense’ restrictions on the use of these paramilitary tactics and equipment would include deploying the only when the suspect(s) have initiated violence, not for non-violent warrant service and as a trade off no-knock warrants should be off limits altogether.

      It is a sad, strange and dangerous situation when we’re afraid of our police being better equipped and more effective instead of feeling safer in that situation. I think it’s a powerful reflection that we don’t trust the police, that we feel there are too many and many unjust laws, that we mistrust government and its intentions and that we see the fallout from the use of paramilitary tactics.

      When one conducts military operations against enemy combatants force protection is second only to mission success and there is a certain amount of collateral damage that is both inevitable and acceptable. Think of force protection, mission success and collateral damage as three sides of a triangle which can have its ratio skewed to favor two sides at the cost of the third.

      The paradigm for police operations has been and should be completely different. In criminal law, Blackstone’s formulation that: “It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer”, must apply at least as much to the terrorizing and murder of innocent citizens by police as it does to unjust convictions. The acceptable level of collateral damage caused by police in serving a warrant must always be less than that which my reasonably follow by not serving it or else it should not be served. It is a rare circumstance when warrant service is of such extreme and pressing concern that any innocent casualty at all is an acceptable result.

      If warrants are ineffectual for enforcement of drug laws due to destruction of evidence unless hyper-violent paramilitary raids are conducted to serve them and so preserve evidence then warrants for the seizure of drugs should generally not be issued. This is not a cost-benefit analyses that takes into account the overall effect on society against the potential collateral damage resulting from such violent warrant service precisely because it is better that society bear the ills of drugs rather than one innocent person be victimized by the police while trying to prevent them. We must look only at the individual because individuals have rights and societies do not. That a person is innocent until proven guilty suggests that smashing in their windows and doors in masks and armor with machineguns trained on them while painful and disorienting flash bangs detonate around them is an unacceptable way to treat them in the pursuit of evidence that they have committed a crime. We don’t allow the convicted to be terrorized or subjected to flash bangs as punishment, in what way would it be acceptable to subject the innocent to such tactics?

      There is as there should be a fundamental disconnect between military and police operations. They have divergent goals and different levels of both mission priority, acceptable collateral damage, and even of force protection; It is possible to lose a war and the result would be catastrophic to society as a whole, it is not conceivable that an individual or household will prevail against a police force while resisting a warrant, and even were they to do so time to time the results are hardly catastrophic to society.

      There is also a disconnect between combatants and suspected criminals and the populations they live among. It is acceptable to bomb suspected combatants from afar because there is a war, it’s inconceivable that it would be acceptable to bomb suspected criminals from afar, justice is not served by these tactics. For the plainest example possible consider the Allied bombing campaign of German cities during WWII. This was acceptable only because we were engaged in total, zero sum warfare in which the victor subjugates the loser and whole cultures and societies were at risk of destruction and because the people of those cities provided material support to enemy combatants. The parallel in law enforcement would be to bomb certain neighborhoods flat in order to destroy the criminals there and the culture that provides them with material support. This is the logical (if absurd)end to using armored cars and machine guns to facilitate breeching the homes of heretofore innocent civilians regardless of the risk or the justice of subjecting suspects and even innocent bystanders to the effects of dynamic entries and explosive distraction devices. The question being asked has been how much military style force is acceptable to combat crime when it should be whether there is a legitimate use of para-military tactics in law enforcement at all. Perhaps in hostage rescue, and perhaps a few other examples could be had, but to seize potential evidence of a suspected crime is not a justification for the use of para-military tactics by law enforcement as only the laws regarding kidnap, murder and possibly rape could ever justify the inherent collateral damage caused by these tactics.

      Better that 10 drug dealers deal drugs than one infant be immolated during warrant service and better that 10 drug dealers escape prosecution than one innocent homeowner is violently murdered attempting to defend his home against what is for all intents and purposes a home invasion.

        • The single most often used argument for the need for an MRAP and heavy weapons by police is the bank robbery in LA a few years ago. How often has that happened since? And how often since then was the use of that equipment and tactics set been the appropriate response to the task at hand?

          I can’t think of any really.

        • I was thinking of that too Jus Bill, but even that event was poorly handled (the police were incredibly lucky), their own policies weren’t followed, local policy was flawed and an armored car inserted into the mix of bad tactics wouldn’t have improved the situation.

          While I realize (obviously) that police aren’t soldiers, the barest of understanding combat suggests the solution to the N. Hollywood incident: If the enemy commands the middle and near range you need to engage them from afar. In this case, a single appropriately armed marksman could have incapacitated both perpetrators with some ease. The N. Hollywood shootout is an excellent argument for patrol rifles, but offers little to suggest that an armor car is needed by police.

          The closest I’ve heard for it is that wounded officers could have been rescued more quickly with an armored car, which is likely true. It’s also true that it was the LAPDs well demonstrated if unwritten policy of almost unbridled aggression that resulted in so many casualties in the first place.
          It’s said that fools rush in and given that recovery of stolen money and apprehension of robbery suspects was the legitimate police goal, taking actions that resulted in thousands of rounds being fired in a densely populated area isn’t only inadvisable, it’s almost criminally negligent. Consider again the meaning of 10 guilty persons going free rather than 1 innocent person suffering. Chasing everything that runs and staging a massive firefight in the middle of the city are not conducive to public safety nor support the general welfare and lawfulness of the people.
          While one can sometimes cover tactical mistakes with better or more equipment one can’t cover strategic mistakes this way. LAPD had strategic issues in N Hollywood that could only be exacerbated in later events with more powerful and destructive equipment just as faster, more maneuverable cars would not rectify their strategic errors in pursuit policy.
          Strategic errors cannot be explained away for lack of equipment.

  11. In the unlikely event the days of taking Dom Raso seriously haven’t quite come to an end, they’ve certainly come well past a middle.

  12. He states that he’s a civilian now and doesn’t want MRAPs on every street. Then he goes on to say that we really need MRAPs on every street. Because terrorists. That’s his mantra…

    No, actually that’s his line of work. A quick Google of our good buddy DOM’s name:

    Dom Raso | Facebook – View by Ixquick Proxy – Highlight

    Dom Raso, America. 8183 likes · 772 talking about this. Patriot, Athlete, Navy SEAL, NRA News Commentator, Host of Media Lab, Host of I am Forever,…
    Dom Raso (DomRasoJr) on Twitter – View by Ixquick Proxy – Highlight

    The latest from Dom Raso (@DomRasoJr). Patriot, Athlete, Navy SEAL, NRA News Commentator, Host of Media Lab, Host of I am Forever, and Founder of …
    Videos | Dom Raso – Dynamis Alliance – View by Ixquick Proxy – Highlight

    Dom Raso, founder of Dynamis Alliance, knows that one trained man can stop hundreds of enemies. In his 12 years as a US Navy SEAL, Dom learned that …
    Dynamis Alliance – View by Ixquick Proxy – Highlight

    So his “commentaries” seem more like very subliminal commercials for Dynamis Alliance. Well, well.

  13. Dom is aware, is he not, that the 9/11 terrorists were armed with box cutters?

    Or that aside from the bombs, the Boston bombers were armed with one handgun between the two of them?

  14. Law enforcement should go back to revolvers. Keeping an AR in the car is fine but maybe if they go back to six shooters they’ll actually be forced to learn how to hit their targets. I’m looking at you NYPD.

  15. I see no issue with police having armored vehicles. My issue is with the US government preventing the sale of said surplus vehicles from going to the open market.

    If I had the funds, I could buy a Russian T-72 or BMP. Yet, for some stupid reason cannot purchase a surplus Abrams or Bradley.

  16. I’m not going to make a response video, because I have neither the time, energy, or inclination.

    What I will do, however, is simply say that safety only ever follows in the footsteps of liberty. Any student of history worth their alt will tell you this. Explicitly. It is up to all of us, not just the police or the military, to secure that liberty — by all means that avail themselves to good use without at all interfering in the liberties of peaceable citizens.

    This does not include unlimited, warrantless surveillance by the NSA. This does not include the radical militarization (and dare I say straight-up radicalization) of our domestic police forces. This does not include giving SWAT teams to every federal agency (as even the EPA and Dept. of Education has them now). This most definitely does NOT include arming up said peace officers more heavily than the citizenry.

    There are a lot of things we can do, Mr. Raso, to achieve heightened security without trampling on any our natural, fundamental, individual, civil, and Constitutionally-protected and affirmed rights — subject neither to the democratic process nor to argument based in social or individual utility — as that is precisely the only thing that eventually happens when you have an arms race amongst your police forces.

    I’m not saying that SWAT doesn’t have its place. Far from it. There are times, places, and circumstances where they are invaluable. But with crime going down for more than 20-plus years now (certainly not solely attributable to increased police presence though it is certainly a factor), more and more excuses are being made to use these teams when other less violent, less expensive, and less legally and civilly-intrusive means will achieve the same exact aims with the same exact results. Not to mention there is currently next to nothing in the way of culpability when things go awry, and this has in fact increasingly become a continually larger problem. It’s a big part of way there is a little to no trust amongst the public at large in their government (much less their agents) at any level.

  17. “It seems NRA commentator Dom Raso just doesn’t get the pitfalls of up-arming every cop in America”
    –Every cop in America is NOT up-armored. But thanks for the drama.

    “to the point where they could fight the Decepticons.”
    — The gear is protective, not offensive, you can’t relax, the Decepticons would kick our asses

    “Then he goes on to say that we really need MRAPs on every street.”
    –No he did NOT say that, but again….thanks for the drama.

    “That’s his mantra; that the military fights terrorists so the police need to be just like the military to fight the terrorists when they show up here.”
    –Military is not going to be deployed on US soil ‘with arms’ unless an act of congress is issued, that aint happening and you should be glad that it aint, cause if you think police are a bit rough handed…you aint seen shit until marshal law gets declared. I can see you now, at a check point on some highway trying to tell the 20 something year old soldier who doesn’t want to be there, all about your constitutional rights. I’m sure he will be very understanding.

    “He must think it’ll be like that Chuck Norris movie Invasion USA where 500 Jihadis land on a beach. Of course he never mentions any of the abuses of police acting like military and treating all citizens like potential insurgents.”

    “He loves to say “Crush Everything” and I guess he’s including most of the Bill of Rights.”
    –That man has fought and sacrificed hard to protect the constitution. Please get bent.

    And Robert…thanks for up-armoring the drama. It would prob just kill ya to try and some clarity and perspective..balance even, wouldn’t it?

    • Military is not going to be deployed on US soil ‘with arms’ unless an act of congress is issued, that aint [sic] happening…

      Not only is there a DoD Directive that addresses that, but it has already happened – New Orleans/Katrina. Remember? Just to name one instance.

      Also, Google “COGCON.”

      Observe and learn.

    • “–That man has fought and sacrificed hard to protect the constitution. Please get bent.”

      Even former Seals can say things that are dumb. And when they do, just like anyone else, they can be criticized for it . THAT, sir, is what this man “sacrificed hard” to protect.

    • Just because he served does not make him automatically right. His threat assessment is off. This equipment the police are getting are not going not be used against terrorists to stop Mumbai style attacks. They will be used against American citizens.

      Oh and listen to geniuses like this guy who think veterans learned how to make IEDs and might know how to defeat law enforcement tactics. Yeah, I learned how to make powerpoints during my time in Baghdad. You can listen to this tool at the 2:00 mark. This guys sees veterans as potential threats and that to me is scary.

      • (beginning @2:22) And at the end of the day it gives the guys the ability to go home safely. So, no matter what the price tag is on it, umm, as long as they get to go home, that’s all that really matters.

        No matter what the price…

        Thanks for the reminder link.

        • @ the 2:45 mark:

          “We need to be as well equipped as the bad guy, so to speak”.

          Since I am far more likely to encounter the bad guy before you come rolling up in your MRAP, I agree wholeheartedly with you there chief.

          So where MY military-surplus select fire M-16?

    • And Robert…thanks for up-armoring the drama. It would prob just kill ya to try and some clarity and perspective..balance even, wouldn’t it?

      But then ole Farago wouldn’t be able to put on his cop-hating hat. I have to admit, his anti-cop rants are largely the reason why I don’t frequent TTAG as much as I used to, he’s nearing the levels of derp normally associated with “chem-trail” conspiracy theorists.

      • What you call “anti-cop rants” are really more just reports on hot-shot trigger-happy Dirty Harry wannabees in camo and masks doing home invasions at wrong addresses, shooting pets and innocent bystanders, and maiming children.

  18. As such a small and elite fighting force as the Navy Seals is it sure seems like every Tom, Dick, and Harry commentator was one at one point our another.

  19. Maybe ‘ole Dom should pay attention to some interesting factoids:


    “Since 2011, officer fatalities across all categories have decreased by 34 percent, and firearms deaths have dropped by 54 percent.” (From Britebart.)


    Humm . . . Roofers have very dangerous jobs. So do fisherman. And garbage collectors, too. Yep, very dangerous jobs those guys have. . .

    The 10 Deadliest Jobs:

    1. Logging workers
    2. Fishers and related fishing workers
    3. Aircraft pilot and flight engineers
    4. Roofers
    5. Structural iron and steel workers
    6. Refuse and recyclable material collectors
    7. Electrical power-line installers and repairers
    8. Drivers/sales workers and truck drivers
    9. Farmers, ranchers, and other agricultural managers
    10. Construction laborers

    • Also note that wile the MFM rags 24/7 about the “war on women” and the supposed glass ceiling for some reason all the men dying in the death basement gets no press.

  20. i cant believe how butthurt you people get about “the police dont NEED mraps or gear” you sound like gun grabbers. there is nothing that an individual officer can purchase that a non LEO cant. you act like cops can go to the store and buy NFA items all day long with no stamps. what about non LEOs with litterally rooms full of gear and guns? check an arfcom gear thread if you dont believe it exists. what about private individuals with military vehicles? do they not need that stuff either? or is it only because they arent cops that thier are allowed to have it? the money was already wasted when the FED purchased that stuff, the LEO agency usually paid a pittance for it.

    • Apples and oranges. Agents of government operate under privilege. If you are an agent of government and don’t understand that then you are part of the problem.

    • Oh, and here’s a free hint:
      The proper use of capital letters make you look less like an uneducated blowhard.

  21. It’s all about accountability. Period. They can drive the street in MRAPs if they want, so long as everybody is clear that if they half-incinerate an infant in a crib for no good reason etc. they pay.
    It’s the grand juries no-billing cops for egregious behavior that is really the biggest problem.

    • Exactly. Recently here in Arizona a cop was driving an unmarked car at twice the speed limit with no lights or siren and t-boned a senior citizen, killing him. The cop was PART of the pursuit of a suspected murder suspect, but nothing AT ALL happened to the cop. Not even a speeding ticket or a administrative slap on the wrist. The district attorney declined ANY charges against the cop. You or I would be in jail waiting to be tried on manslaughter charges and have our driver’s license pulled, at a minimum.

      If cops want to be soldiers, they should join the military, not treat the rest of us as insurgents.

      • That brings up an interesting question:
        Do cops even have a driver’s license?
        If they don’t it would explain many things I’ve seen.

  22. the ‘boston bombers’ did not put the city on lockdown – state and federal agencies did that. it was a gross display of martial law – completely overkill. Mr. Raso takes that ball -without question- and runs the full 100 with it. cheerleaders like this who promulgate the official story wholesale while claiming it is a legitimate need to further blur the line between military/police… well, these are the guys who worry me the most. it’s called blind patriotism and it is dangerous.

    • I don’t get today’s society. Back when I was growing up in Philly, it would have taken 9,000 cops to pull us off of the terrorist that dared to come into our neighborhood. He might have had a gun but certainly not enough ammo. We also used to regularly fight “City Hall” and win. What went wrong?

  23. National defense at home is the role of the National Guard. Each state has its own branch. The average police officer struggles with a sidearm, in judgement, restraint, accuracy, and shot accountability (what is beyond the target.). Rifles, etc. belong only in the hands of SWAT, etc, hence the acronym, and the National Guard.

    • “…Thank you for calling. Your call is very important to us at the [your state] Adjutant’s office. The National Guard is currently away fighting the [drug/terrorist] wars overseas. Call back in a year. Thank you and have a nice day.”

  24. Fighting terrorists is not a job for the police. That’s for the military and the Guard. The police should be investigating crimes, not fighting a war.

    • Most of the foreign terrorists in the USA have been rather poorly armed with things such as box cutters and a single Ruger pistol with 10 rounds. The police should be able to engage the “terrorists” with weapons on hand in the squad car. If any sort of fast reaction time is required, they will be fighting with weapons on hand in the squad car as the SWAT team will have too much of a delay in getting to the location and deploying.

  25. It seems to me that towards the end of the video he has confused the function of the militia with that of law enforcement. As I understand it, the militia may include law enforcement officers*** but it isn’t composed only of law enforcement.

    (*** However, since the insistence of non-law enforcement being called “civilian” and law enforcement not, I’m not so convinced nowadays that they fit the militia paradigm.)

  26. Reminds me of that speach King Obama gave, you know about how we needed a just as well trained and funded civilian army here at home to fight the terrorists here at home or some such nonsense.

  27. After watching the video, I fail to see what was wrong with anything Dom said. The gear and vehicles are inanimate objects folks. What matters is how they are used. Should armored vehicles be used so constantly that your street resembles occupied territory? No. Should a SWAT team bust down a door for no good reason? Obviously not. Should police be aiming firearms at peaceful protestors? No. There is a time and place for everything and that is the point I believe that Raso was getting at.

    Police have used military grade equipment for decades now folks. They used Tommy guns,BARs, and armored vehicles in the 20s-40s. So did the army. Yet, somehow this myth of the good old days where Officer Friendly resembled Andy Griffith or Barney Fife seems to persist. Frank Hamer’s posse didn’t kill Clyde Barrow with a six shooter or a lever action. They used BARs and Remington Model 8s.

  28. A lot of you guys have gone off the deep end and sound like illogical anti-gun people… Curious, do you all chip in and buy your tinfoil hats in bulk? Is it a TTAG special order? If not you should so you don’t waste so much money.. In all seriousness, a lot of you need to step back for a few seconds and breath; you’ll live longer and be able to see the upcoming apocalypse…..

      • Haha, so because I don’t totally fall inline with what most of you think makes me a boot licker? Seriously? You need to grow up and stop acting like an ignoramus.

        • Your opinion is worth the same as anyone else’s here. But pray some bored kid doesn’t SWAT your house.

  29. Mrmysterio13; so did you sleep through history class? Maybe your just a public servant getting paid on our dime. Maybe your just a government worshiper that loves more and bigger Big Brother to keep you all snuggly and safe like Raso.

    Go tell the Founding Fathers they wore tin foil hats when they said the greatest danger to a free people was their own government. That the threat to our freedoms was from a large standing army. That the second amendment was to defend against enemies foreign and domestic; including a tyrannical government.

    So go back to school; you’re embarrassing yourself.

    • Oh, what is this? My, my, ThomasR. You are quick to criticize anything you claim is an “insult” and yet, just look at this comment of yours…insulting, generalizing, attacking…..

      Hypocricy, you has it, big time.

      • Yeah Paul: I agree. I let my inner Paul T. McCain run wild. I really felt bad afterward. I definitely was not following the Christ in my response to him. You show me Paul what I don’t want to be.

    • ThomasR, no I didn’t sleep through history class, actually I did quite well thank you. Also, no I am not a public servant, nor a government worshiper that likes big brother; far from it.

      My comment above was mainly a joke at how crazy a lot of the people in the comment section sound so don’t get too upset (maybe your tinfoil hat is too tight and is crushing your brain). 😉

      Also, I never once even inferred that the Founding Fathers were crazy or “wore tinfoil hats”. I agree with everything the Founder’s said, did and believed. What I don’t agree with is the crazy, illogical attitude a lot of people here are exuding which hurts our cause. I would equate this type of talk to almost being as bad as that group from Texas purposely going around open carrying to scare people because it’s their right to open carry. The way a lot of you are expressing yourselves is just like anti-gun people; that makes you all hypocrites.

      • Texas purposely going around open carrying to scare people because it’s their right to open carry.

        FIFY. However, your point isn’t made when the lie is stripped from your sentence.

        • Nah, you didn’t fix anything; what I said is pretty true even if you don’t agree. There is a time, place and way to go about doing it without alarming people and coming off as a bunch of jackasses. Those people not only don’t try and do it the right way, they purposely don’t because they think they are making some point. Yet, all they are doing is proving the generalization anti gun people say that all pro gun people are nuts; those people are gravely hurting our cause.

          You can say it over and over again that anti-gun people can’t infringe/regulate the Second Amendment but you are wrong. If anti-gun people succeed in indoctrinating generation after generation of Americans they will finally win. It may not be this year, or the next decade or even the next century but it will happen. When we have pro gun people pissing off, scaring and bothering Americans who are in the middle of the gun debate we are hurting our cause and helping the anti-gun people achieve their dream earlier. To stop this we should act like gun ambassadors not gun antagonists; we should do everything we can to unite and show undecided Americans that guns aren’t bad, to stop this fear of guns and to create new gun owners so that we can protect the Second Amendment for future generations.

        • Scaring people isn’t what’s behind the push to disarm our people, Mrmysterio13. The first part of the Second Amendment is why. This is about control, usurpation of power, and tyranny.

          A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

        • John, I didn’t say that scaring people was the push behind the disarming movement. What I said was we need to win the “hearts and minds” (so to speak) of those that are in the middle of the gun debate. If we can win over more American’s a lot of our problems would lessen and some would go away.

        • “What “we” need is fewer people bitching about those who enjoy exercising the rights that haven’t been stripped away, and people who, rather than pander to the pantswetters, want to restore full Constitutional Carry.”


      • Ah yes; the old stand by- Say hurtful and degrading things to someone and then say “I was just joking”.

        I saw that in bullies in school; they would bully with their words; and then they would say “I was just joking; what, can’t you take a joke?”

        I saw it as cowardice then; I see at as cowardice now.

        • I don’t care if you think it’s the old standby, what I said above was meant to be a bit humorous while making a point. If you took my words as hurtful and degrading that is your problem not mine. What I said was good natured ribbing, if you don’t think so again that is your problem. Maybe you should work on being a little less sensitive since there is little in my above comment that is meant to be insulting.

          Also, I think being openly insulting/rude online; hiding behind a computer, is cowardly (which I’m not calling you), yet since you can’t see the humor in my post you compare me to a bully and a coward? You make an awful amount of unfounded assumptions. Again, think what you want. The intent was to be a bit humorous; maybe I failed at conveying that.

  30. Here’s the real test. allow citizens the same shot at these vehicles and equipment as the police. make the eddie eagle program permanent in all elementary schools. make bill rogers reactive shooting classes mandatory in all high schools. Then we will see if they really view us as citizens to protect and serve or as the enemy to control and corral for the elites.

  31. Dom is correct and “Reader JF” is smply reacting emotionally, with no substance behind his remarks. And many of the comments here are examples of what happens when a tin-foil hat is put on way too tightly.

    • Paul T. McCain; So JF is emotional with no substance behind his remarks and other people are wearing “Tin Foil Hats” in their remarks.

      I have noticed Paul; maybe I missed it; that you never have any derogatory or demeaning things to say about anti-gun people. You only have derogatory and demeaning things to say about supposed “fellow” gun owners.

      I will say; that when you dehumanize those you disagree with; when you make them sub-human by demeaning; insulting and disrespecting them; then I start looking at you like you are sub-human and having no respect for you. Then I remember what the Christ said; that there only two things he was here to teach; Love G-d with all your heart, mind body and soul; and to love your neighbor and enemy as your self.

      As a baptized Christian; I have committed with all my being to live by G-d’s laws. And to love those that attack verbally, demean, insult and dehumanize me is to live by what the Christ was here to teach. Otherwise; I become like those that are attacking me. I forget that some times.

  32. So SWAT Cops need to be tooled up like DEVGRU or SFOD-D operators because terrorists “locked down” Mumbai and Narobi for days during their attacks?

    Does Boston ring a bell, Dom? Y’know, two guys with pressure cookers causing a large portion of a major metropolitan area being told to “shelter in place” . . . until your (not so) friendly, neighborhood SWAT team comes and gives you the “Raus! Mach Schnell!” at gun point?

  33. So, people don’t like police forces acquiring MRAPs and claim it is an injustice to John Q. Public who can’t get one. What else do you think John Q. Public should have? How about an M1 Abrams in every garage?

    Just wondering how far the thinking will go, if it is consistent.

    • I know I want an M1 Abrams tank in my garage. Made with local pride in Lima Ohio. I got it one part at a time and it didn’t cost me a dime, I’ll have the only one like it around.

      • Heck, who wouldn’t it? When you get it are you going to reload rounds for it, or buy commercially loaded stuff. Might get kind of pricey either way. Wonder if Dillon makes the right dies for it?


      • Tom, you inspired me, and in return I offer this, a bit crude but I hope it’s worth a laugh

        The Psychobilly Abrams

        Well I left Columbus back in ‘89
        and went to Lima workin’ on an assembly line.
        The first year they had me fitting road wheels on Abrams battle tanks.
        Every day I’d watch those beasts roll by
        Sometimes I’d hang my head and cry
        Cause I always wanted me one of my very own.
        Now, one day I devised myself a plan
        That should be the envy of most any man
        I’d sneak it out of there in a lunch box in my hand.

        Now gettin’ caught meant gettin’ fired
        But I figured I’d have it all by the time I retired
        I’d have me a tank, and that sure would be grand.

        I’d get it one piece at a time
        And it wouldn’t cost me a dime
        You’ll know it’s me when I come through your town
        I’m gonna ride around in style
        I’m gonna drive everybody wild
        ‘Cause I’ll have the only one there is a round.

        So the very next day when I punched in
        With my big lunchbox and with help from my friends
        I left that day with a lunch box full of gears
        Now, I never considered myself a thief
        But the government wouldn’t miss just one of these
        Especially if I strung it out over several years.

        The first day I got me a fuel pump
        And the next day I got me an engine and gun
        Then I got me a transmission and all the track
        The little things were no big bother
        Like nuts, an’ bolts, and smoke launchers
        But the big stuff we snuck onto a flat bed out the back.
        Now, up to now my plan went all right
        ‘Til we tried to put it all together one night
        And that’s when we noticed that something was definitely wrong.

        The transmission was a ’83
        And the motor turned out to be a ’03
        And when we tried to put in the bolts all the holes were gone.

        So we drilled it out so that it would fit
        And with a little bit of help with an A-daptor kit
        We had that engine runnin’ just like a song
        Now the spotlights was another sight
        We had two on the left and one on the right
        But when we pulled out the switch all three of ’em come on.

        The armor looked kinda funny too
        But we put it together and when we got thru
        Well, that’s when we noticed that we were missing a plate
        About that time my wife walked out
        And I could see in her eyes that she had her doubts
        But she opened the hatch and said “Honey, let’s take it out for a date.”

        So we drove up town just for a gag
        And I headed her right on down main drag
        I could hear everybody laughin’ for blocks around
        But up there at the sheriff’s department they didn’t laugh
        Instead they called up the whole damn staff
        But once they saw it there wasn’t a cop to be found.

        I got it one piece at a time
        And it didn’t cost me a dime
        You’ll know it’s me when I come through your town
        I’m gonna ride around in style
        I’m gonna drive everybody wild
        ‘Cause I’ll have the only one there is around.

        [Spoken] Ugh! Yow, RED RYDER
        This is the COTTON MOUTH
        In the PSYCHO-BILLY ABRAMS Come on

        Huh, This is the COTTON MOUTH
        And negatory on the cost of this mow-chine there RED RYDER
        You might say I went right up to the factory
        And picked it up, it’s cheaper that way
        Ugh!, what model is it?
        Well, it’s 89,90,91,92,93,94,95,96
        97,98,99 Main Battle Tank
        It’s 2000, 01,02,03,04,05,06
        Abrams Main Battle Tank. . .

  34. Meh…I don’t know what the big deal is.

    Look, the voting public likes it when their police look like they could take on an invading army. It makes them feel safe, fake Ben Franklin quotes not withstanding. If the people didn’t like it, they would ask their elected representatives to change it. Those representatives, wanting to get reelected, would institute the changes they want.

    I know most of you disagree, and think everybody is scared and distrustful of the police, but I suspect most of you live in an echo chamber. The fact that the voters are quick to approve additional funding for law enforcement underscores this point. Want to know an indicator of when the public is turning against the police? When politicians stop asking law enforcement officials to stand on the podium with them during press conferences. That isn’t going to happen anytime soon.

    If people were uncomfortable with the weaponry the police have access to, there would be an uproar every time law enforcement is exempted from some new law – I have yet to hear the public complain about it. Someday when some 40 watt plasma rifle becomes the new weapon to have, you can be sure politicians will race to ban it. You can also be sure there will be one in my gun safe at home, purchased with taxpayer dollars, and provided to me with the knowledge and blessings of the constituents in my locality.

    And yet, all we see are poorly produced You Tube videos where some stoner screams “Police Brutality” and guys on blogs like this talk about getting even with the cop that trespasses on their property. My favorite is the one about “you took an oath to blah, blah, blah…” Yeah, I took an oath to support and defend the Constitution. The thing is, the Constitution also says that the courts decide what the provisions in it mean; if the court says the 4th allows me to search your car, I will. If says a missing child is an exigency allowing me to enter your curtilage for a search, I will. Someday, the court may change its mind, but until then, I will go by what they say, not the opinion of some butt-hurt basement dweller that thinks the Constitution is in exile.

    Now, if you’ll excuse me, I have to prep for a no-knock warrant execution.

    • “The thing is, the Constitution also says that the courts decide what the provisions in it mean; “

      So. Much. Fail.

      As a former LEO, let me be the first to say to you, sir, if you really are a cop and not some snot-nosed little brat troll scratching his nuts in his mother’s basement…you are the problem.

      That smug, self superior attitude you have is leading the destruction of this country.

      If you don’t see that, you do not understand the oath you claim to have taken.

    • “Want to know an indicator of when the public is turning against the police? When politicians stop asking law enforcement officials to stand on the podium with them during press conferences. That isn’t going to happen anytime soon. . . ”

      Or perhaps when police unions stop contributing millions of bucks to buy the support of local politicians? The problem with your analogy is that most politicians that accept police money turn out to be shameless whores who will sell-out anyone and anybody to stay in office. Social media and internet sites like this one are now shining a very bright light on corrupt practices cops have always worked very hard to keep covered up. Every time cops do something stupid there’s always someone with a cellphone camera recording what happened and then, within minutes, the video is posted on the internet where it becomes a permanent document to be viewed by millions. The net effect of all this is to slowly eat away at police credibility.

      Have you noticed that the videos are getting better and more numerous, the comments more pointed and revealing of police bad behavior? Have you noticed how reluctant cops are to give their names and badge numbers to people recording them? This is how change happens. And defending dysfunctional, corrupt, police behavior with lame excuses like “officer safety” just isn’t working as well as it used to.

      The only thing that defeats money in a politician’s life is public opinion and that is changing. Think about this for a moment. The complaints about police brutality that commonly appear on internet sites like TTAG were being made decades ago by America’s minority communities. Now those same complaints are being made by affluent, well-educated, middle and upper-class Americans, people who have real social and political influence. Care to speculate on what’s going to happen as a consequence?

      “Now, if you’ll excuse me, I have to prep for a no-knock warrant execution.”

      This is not funny.

      • “The problem with your analogy is that most politicians that accept police money turn out to be shameless whores who will sell-out anyone and anybody to stay in office”

        Well, then every politician is a whore, because the endorsement of the local police union is the first one they go for – regardless of party affiliation.

        “Now those same complaints are being made by affluent, well-educated, middle and upper-class Americans, people who have real social and political influence”

        You mean those same well-educated, middle and upper-class Americans that approved my 10% raise? The ones that bought up the tickets to the last Police Ball? The ones that threw us a bbq after we raided a house in their neighborhood because we are making the world safer for the law-abiding people out there? I work in an area that has a pretty good balance of red and blue and is typically a bell-weather for the political direction this country is taking – and I’ve never had it so good. You should probably read something besides Balko if you want to know how the typical American feels. The fact is, as long as Soccer moms can safely take the kids to their swim lessons, I’m golden.

        This reminds me of a post a few weeks ago when commentators were claiming that Switzerland doesn’t have a gang problem. I lived there for three years and spent a year on a joint task force dealing with a nexus between European and American gang activity. The people here that think there is no gang violence in Switzerland are completely out of touch with reality. They never stopped to consider that Switzerland reports their violence differently that we do, so you can’t compare stats. Again, YouTube videos about “Police Misconduct” don’t impress the voters any more than science fiction movies make them think they can live on Mars.

        I’ve been recorded and put on YouTube. I can tell you this much – we would watch it at work and laugh at the guy on the video. Do you think recording the police is a recent phenomenon? I’ve been using a camera on my uniform since I could get one. Since then, it has recorded every shooting I have been in, every door I’ve kicked in, and every encounter with a citizen that I have had. It has exonerated me every time it has been used to disprove the claims made against me by the people that have filed allegations against me, and it has recorded my serving arrest warrants and taking them in to custody when the DA has charged them with filing false complaints against a Peace Officer.

        I serve the voters of my community, and they like the way I do my job.

        • “I serve the voters of my community, and they like the way I do my job.”

          Given the tone of your remarks above, I doubt this very much.

        • “Given the tone of your remarks above, I doubt this very much.”

          Well, I’ve held this job for years, and will for many years more. I suppose that’s all the proof required that they are satisfied with my performance.

          I’ll take their opinion over the opinion of a “former LEO” that couldn’t manage to stay 10-8.

        • Hubris always preceeds the fall. The mood is changing and pigs like you are accelerating the shift.

        • You have to be the most arrogant self righteous commenter I’ve ever seen on TTAG. Welcome aboard! You’ll fit right in.

    • No Officer; you are correct. If there wasn’t enough of the population that wanted a bunch of black masked armed up Storm Troopers looking like they just stepped off of the battle field; you and your arrogance, condescension and dripping contempt would not even exist.

      But you do exist; you do look with contempt upon the constitution. You do look with contempt upon your oath to defend that constitution with your life. You look with contempt upon your fellow citizens; because to you they are “civilians”, and You will kill anyone of those civilians you are told to by your “superiors” with out a second thought as to whether it violates the constitution or the persons civil liberties.

      And you are entirely correct; you would not exist except that there were enough of the people that have become so helpless, powerless and defenseless that the very idea of using lethal force to defend themselves causes them to panic, let alone pee their pants.

      You are the canary in the coal mine; you are symptom of the disease that will destroy this once great republic. That disease is the sickness of the soul that fears freedom and what is required to be free.

      I don’t hate you Officer, I don’t fear you, I simply pity you. Because you will be used up by those in power once you have served your purpose. and there will be no place for you; you will be the symbol of all the atrocities that will happen once the Dogs of war are released. and you will never find a place of rest among the people, forever an outcast.

      Unless you find the truth, and realize the lie that you have been taught; and become a defender of the people instead of the destroyer;a true Sheep Dog instead of the Wolf, a predator upon the people.

      • This is the IACP standardized oath. The one I took was basically the same:

        “On my honor,
        I will never betray my badge,
        my integrity, my character,
        or the public trust.
        I will always have
        the courage to hold myself
        and others accountable for our actions.
        I will always uphold the constitution
        my community and the agency I serve.”

        Like I said before, the courts decide what the Constitution means, not a bunch of malcontents on a blog. If you don’t believe me, you can always read through Article III of the U.S. Constitution. If you are uncomfortable with that, there are plenty of other countries for you to live in.

        I know you think I have violated my oath, but I don’t answer to you – I answer to the citizens of the locality I serve, and they seem to like the way we do things.

        By the way, I don’t see the requirement that I use my life to protect the Constitution in there. I risk my life every day, but I do that for the people I serve, not because you think I must.

        “I don’t hate you Officer, I don’t fear you, I simply pity you.”

        You can pity me all you want, as long as you obey the laws I enforce.

        “…and there will be no place for you; you will be the symbol of all the atrocities that will happen once the Dogs of war are released. and you will never find a place of rest among the people, forever an outcast.”

        I would take this a lot more seriously if it wasn’t basically a word-for-word quote from a Heinlein book. And quoted out of context, at that. You must think nobody here reads.

        “…a true Sheep Dog instead of the Wolf, a predator upon the people.”

        This “Sheep Dog” canard is one of my favorites. The whole “I’m a sheep dog” thing is always most popular with couch potatoes working in career fields that keep them a safe distance from what is truly dangerous out there. I am a member of an invite-only forum for law enforcement and police. It is similar to what the 10-8 forums were, but you can only join if you are verified LEO or mil. We use the forum to discuss tactics, etc., and as a meet up tool for private training classes with some of the best trainers out there. Here is a relevant quote from an industry expert that I have seen mentioned quite a few times here:

        “This sheep-dog sh*t is ridiculous. All the sudden, every IT slug is taking some watered down class and deciding hes going to protect every one around him, but he cant even manage a sub 10 second el presidente. Not even par-time. Sheep dogs go out and become marines and soldiers. They become firefighters and cops. They don’t get some boring, safe job and then spend the day fantasizing about a stupid oath keeper revolution where they relive 1776. They dont plaster their cars with dont tread on me stickers and talk about schwag flags. They go out and do it for real. so their family doesnt have to. The next time someone talks about being a sheepdog, ask him what he does for a living and then laugh in his cowardly face.”

        • Well Officer; you continue to show what I was talking about; your arrogance, your absolute contempt of the people you are sworn to give your life to protect.

          “This sheep-dog sh*t is ridiculous. All the sudden, every IT slug is taking some watered down class and deciding hes going to protect every one around him, but he cant even manage a sub 10 second el presidente. Not even par-time. Sheep dogs go out and become marines and soldiers. They become firefighters and cops. They don’t get some boring, safe job and then spend the day fantasizing about a stupid oath keeper revolution where they relive 1776. They dont plaster their cars with dont tread on me stickers and talk about schwag flags. They go out and do it for real. so their family doesnt have to. The next time someone talks about being a sheepdog, ask him what he does for a living and then laugh in his cowardly face.”

          Your contempt, your arrogance toward the people is dripping through all your writings and the people you quote. Your attitude that only a cop, soldier, firefighter can only be the one true “sheepdog”. That all others are just “cowards” with delusions of grandeur and only deserves contempt from you and others of your specially trained class is a continuing proof that you have lost your way.

          You and your attitude is exactly why our founding fathers warned against a large standing military or in your case, a large standing militarized police force. And like I said; with your absolute contempt of the civilians, you will have no problem enforcing unconstitutional laws against the people, after all; if we are not a soldier, marine, firefighter or cop, we are just “cowards” and deserve any thing you decide to do to against us.

          So again I pity you; I hope and pray that you find your way back.

        • Yeah John in Ohio, I was thinking about this statement by Officer as well. Then the scene from Southpark comes to mind with Cartman demanding that you obey his “authoritah”. It is obvious that Officer does not think of himself as a public servant but instead as a public master. Or another scene is Judge Dredd; saying ” I am the Law!”. And being judge, jury and executioner and dealing out the death penalty on scene with extreme prejudice.

          Our Founding Fathers understood history.

        • Take heart, ThomasR. I am confident that one day the People will take such petty tyrants to task. Unfortunately, they don’t mark themselves with a tattoo like others of their ilk had done in the not so distant past. No matter, they don’t exist in a vacuum so there will be many witnesses and records to their deeds and identity.

        • ” . . . I risk my life everyday . . .”

          While this meme is part of the never-ending story police and their unions prefer to tell about themselves, is it really borne out by facts (see below)?

          “Since 2011, officer fatalities across all categories have decreased by 34 percent, and firearms deaths have dropped by 54 percent.” (From Britebart.)

          This doesn’t mean you don’t believe the story. In fact, I think it’s such an essential element of police self-identity that it’s something that must be believed because, if for no other reason, not believing it or even questioning it undermines the legitimacy cops need to present themselves as defenders-of-the-public. But, let’s face it, this is fabulism. Now, don’t get me wrong, it makes for a great story to tell about oneself and, as you’ve pointed out, it’s a very effective story to tell politicians and the public. No argument about that.

          But there are lots of dangerous jobs in America. Loggers have dangerous jobs. The guy delivering chips to the 7-11 has a dangerous job. So do roofers and farmers. If you’re willing to accept Forbes magazines veracity (which you probably won’t) all of these occupations are more dangerous than police work. I don’t say this to denigrate what you do for a living. What I’m trying to point out, what I’ve mentioned earlier, is that the police role in American society has become deformed in some significant ways and, as a result, has become increasingly dysfunctional. Militarization, MRAPS, no-knock SWAT home invasions, and shooting people’s dogs are just symptoms of the greater problem.

  35. My problem with this is not the equipment itself, it is what will happen with the equipment. As a government employee, one thing we have to do each year is justify our existence to keep our budget. There is no reward for saving taxpayer money. What do you do to make sure you keep your budget? You use your equipment. You use it so much you bust the budget and have to ask for more money. This equipment will fall into the same use. The local government will have to justify the budget to keep and maintain the equipment. It will get used, often. Most likely more than it should. Events that do not even remotely require an MRAP will have an MRAP. We already have SWAT used for things a regular uniformed police officer could handle with a knock on a door and showing the occupants a search warrant. This is not Iraq or Afghanistan and American’s do not deserve to have their doors kicked in for piddly crimes.

  36. I don’t understand the infighting. The reality of the situation is the military has wonderful weapons and tools that will quickly kill a lot of people and destroy buildings, vehicles, bridges, roads and communications. When these things exist they will eventually filter down to state guards, county sheriffs and local police. Why? Not because their is plan to start a conspiracy or to counter a conspiracy. It’s because nobody wants to suck hind tit in the arms race. So the armorment is their, it’s available, it’s going to be used. Well it be used inappropriately? No doubt about. Well it be available to non-LE? Only on the black market.
    Outside of Hollywood when was the last time LE used a bow and arrow instead of a gun? Why use an old Crown Vic when you can use an MRAP? It’s just like civilian gun ownership – there are people who should not own them but just because that is true doesn’t mean everyone should be disarmed or be screened for qualification. So let LE have the best they can get.
    When the digital communication and internet emails where created it also created a way to capture all of that data. A daunting concept but not to the NSA. Forevermore, legal or not, the NSA will record every email sent and every digital phonecall transmitted. It will then be automatically scrutinized, categorized and filed. Why? Because all the records ever made is a handy resource. Once you have the data you need the best equipment to attack the threat. Yes the future is here.

    • I could buy your argument if accountability existed for when they screw up…SOMETHING to help ensure responsible use of the equipment and responsible leadership.

      Military surplus gear in the shed is harmless.

      Military gear in the hands of responsible men that take their responsibilities (and their humanity) seriously is not a problem, either.

      Military surplus gear in the hands of aggressive men with low IQ

      that have no fear of consequence is a recipe for disaster.

    • let me try to help: There is infighting exactly because the reality of the situation is that the police have absolutely no legitimate need of military weapons and tools that will quickly kill a lot of people and destroy buildings, vehicles, bridges, roads and communications precisely because destroying things is not a legitimate goal or practice of law enforcement.

      In fact, the exact opposite is the stated goal and only legitimate purpose of the police, that is; preserving life, property and infrastructure. If enforcing the law results in the destruction of these rather than their protection then either the law or the method of its enforcement are unjust and illegitimate.

      If police actually need MRAPs to enforce the law we need to take a look at the legislation, and if they don’t need them to enforce the law, we need to look at policy and procedure. What we must not do is come to accept a situation in which civilian police attack the homes of citizens from armored cars with grenades and automatic weapons because that is simply never in the service of justice or promoting of the general peace and welfare of the citizenry.

      • Interesting. Change a few words and it is the exact argument the grabbers use to ban high cap magazines and “assault weapons”. You believe the purpose of the police is the “service of justice or promoting of the general peace and welfare of the citizenry”. I believe their purpose is to enforce the law. That usually means investigating, serving warrants and making arrests. As long as they do it legally if they feel military equipment and tactics work best that’s okay with me.

        • Agents of government operate under privilege when they are “on duty.” Non-agents operate on rights. There is a huge difference. The People can completely disarm agents of government while they are “on duty” if they so choose. I wouldn’t recommend it but it would be within their scope of authority to do so. Those agents of government and future agents are free to choose to no longer be agents of government or not become one. The People have to live. Individuals must retain the free exercise of their rights. Being an agent of government is a choice. Government has only privilege and can only bestow privilege upon its agents. Those privileges are at the discretion and will of the People. Individual rights are not.

  37. I’ve suspected for a long while that the NRA plays the good cop in the good cop/bad cop civilian disarmament agenda. Articles like this come as no surprise.

  38. Once again, I’m going to bottom-line this in dollars and cents, because police forces make no money of their own. They’re funded by the taxpayers, and I think in the overall cash flow, MRAPs are a bad deal for the taxpayer.

    When the FedGuv “gives” a MRAP (or other special-purpose military vehicle or similar military asset) to local PD’s, it creates an ongoing cash flow liability for the taxpayers. Those vehicles are big, fuel-sucking beasts, they use tires you can’t get from the local tire dealer, they use parts you can’t find down to your local NAPA store, etc.

    I’ll give you a very concrete example from the past how this works out. Our local volunteer FD has a converted “Duece-and-a-half” military truck for a wildland fire tender (water tanker). It does OK in this role. The feds provided hundreds of these trucks to fire departments all over the US for the last couple of decades. I don’t think you can walk into any volunteer fire house in the western US and not find at least one converted M35 truck for wlidland use.

    Now let’s talk about what they’re like to deal with in the real dollars-and-cents world when you’re dealing with a military surplus vehicle.

    They lack modern safety gear for the firefighters driving or riding in them. Believe it or not firefighting is covered by OSHA standards. M35’s lack lots of modern safety equipment that insurance companies want to see on emergency vehicles for crew protection (like three point seat belts and tall seats).

    They don’t have a ready parts supply any more. Many of these trucks used an engine made by Continental, Hercules, White, and others. I’ll bet that almost no one here under the age of 45 has ever heard of those old midwest engine makers unless you collect old iron. Guess how you get parts? By calling around to collectors and junkyards. You ain’t gonna find them made new any more. The MRAP no doubt uses a specialized engine that has a limited production run for the MRAP DOD contracts, and the transmission and axles are likewise limited production as well. “Limited production” means “parts cost an arm and a leg” when you need parts.

    The tires on these old M35 trucks are sometimes old “split rim” tires. For you youngsters that have never had to work on split rim times, here’s a tip: Don’t. Find an old geezer that knows something about these rims. They can literally take your head off when you’re just filling a split-rim tire with air. People have been killed doing nothing more exotic than airing up a split rim. Split rims used to be common, so hey, everyone knew the safety issues with split rims. Not anymore – the civilian world decided we didn’t live for the rush of seeing a split rim tire blow up in the tire cage. So we got rid of split rim tires – and we got rid of tire cages, too.

    When you take a split rim into many tire shops today? They often tell you “See ya, there’s the door, get that thing out of here.” No one saw that coming 25 years ago when the M35’s were being handed out like party favors to local FD’s. So you have to convert the truck to use modern civilian tires. Big expense there.

    I’ll bet that someone in a LEO garage who is used to working on common passenger or pickup truck tires is going to get a surprise the first time they have a MRAP tire flop over on their feet. Someone is going to get hurt.

    And then there’s the issue of emissions. We get an out because we’re in a rural state that doesn’t really get into all this idiotic preening tree-hugger nonsense, but if we were such a state, we’d probably have to ditch the M35-based tenders/trucks entirely, because they sometimes smoke like they’re being stoked with soft coal. Military vehicles don’t really care that much about emissions.

    Lastly, there’s the issue of licensing. For any vehicle over 26,000 pounds curb weight, the driver must have a CDL. If the vehicle has air brakes, then the person driving it has to have an air brake endorsement on their CDL as well. Now you need to have every cop who is going to drive a MRAP trained and licensed for a CDL.

    So you see how these “free” ex-military vehicles suddenly start costing money – lots of it, nickel and dime’ing the budget just to keep these things in operating order. No one sees this when they accept the “free” vehicle – mostly because more public agencies are used to running whatever fleet civilian vehicles they’ve had for years, they don’t even think that much about support logistics for their vehicles. It “just happens.”

    With ex-military vehicles, it no longer “just happens.” Sometimes, it really is a good idea to look a gift horse in the mouth. I think the taxpayers of these communities adopting these surplus MRAP’s should start asking how much money these LEO’s are going to be spending on their new toys.

    If the cops wanted a vehicle that has some armor to provide protection from small arms fire at a scene, they could have done this more cheaply in the long run by buying a fleet vehicle like a F-550 Ford and adding protection. All the parts, service, etc available at the local dealership, it fits into common streets and parking spaces, the vehicle weight doesn’t mandate the use of a CDL licensee to drive it.

      • That’s not “making money.” That’s “conversion of property.”

        When done by other people, it is a crime. When done by the police, hey, that’s policy.

        Yet another reason why I don’t like cops, BTW. Asset forfeiture was another straw on the camel’s back that changed my opinion of cops 180 degrees, and in California, it was abused quite widely.

        • Of course you know there’s no hope of ever reversing that militarization of cops without first calling off Nixon’s criminally insane racist War on (some) Drugs.

        • Absolutely, and I agree. I’m for wholesale legalization (and taxation) of the drug trade.

          Give the dopers the purest stuff they can put into their bodies. When some of them OD, oh well, there’s evolution in action.

        • “Give the dopers the purest stuff they can put into their bodies. When some of them OD, oh well, there’s evolution in action.”

          And imagine the drug warmongers’ surprise when they don’t.

  39. John in Ohio, I think I’ve said this before but I don’t trust militias, unorganized or not, and that distrust stems from personal experience here in the states. Now if by militia you mean a group of citizens who are law abiding and who hold the constitution/ Bill of rights near and dear to their hearts, I don’t have a problem with that. Of course there are details that would need to be worked out. Like, the holder of said MRAP couldn’t use it all willy bully either. So no using it to take your kids to school lol.

    I also noticed that in a couple of articles it was mentioned that law enforcement is using fully automatic M4 style rifles. I am here to say I have never worked with any LE organization local, state, or federal who had fully automatic M4/ AR15 style rifles. They did have fully automatic MP5s/ MP10s and one agency had the KRISS and another UMPs. But sub machine guns have been used by LE for several decades now.

    • Now if by militia you mean a group of citizens who are law abiding and who hold the constitution/ Bill of rights near and dear to their hearts, I don’t have a problem with that.

      Yep. That’s what I meant.

  40. Dear Dyspeptic Gunsmith,

    I must say, I specifically look for your comments on TTAG. You consistently have the most interesting things to say, not just on guns/gunsmithing but on ancillary topics as well. Your comments alone rival some of the official posts on this site. Have you ever thought of officially posting for TTAG? I’m sure Farago and company would appreciate your contributions, and it would certainly be a bright spot in my day!

    • I haven’t the time to do so now, I might in the future.

      The trouble with doing real postings (as opposed to just tossing off comments on other articles) of the quality that TTAG would expect would require me to up my game on photographing gun parts/detail/issues, I’d need a faster way to come up with video simulations of how guns work (Solidworks has a good player for this sort of stuff, but I have yet to buy Solidworks for my shop because it costs over $4K to get into the basic version of the s/w), and then I’d need to format all this stuff so that it comes out on your screens correctly, and that takes a bunch of time as well.

      In short, it is a time issue, and there are lots of demands on my time at the moment.

  41. There is no reason for any of these agencies to get an MRAP. Period. Or any military equipment, period. They’re not in a war zone and not in combat, they do not need things of war. They’re not getting attacked daily, they do not get blown up all the time & they do not know what it’s like either. Some of them are combat vets who have been overseas in war but, they’re not when they’re working as a badged thug. I served in Iraq & while it’s not a fun experience to talk about, MRAP’s amongst other things were tools we needed as real soldiers to stay alive while being attacked and to keep us safe from IED’s and other explosives. Cops want to be that but they’re not. Even the veterans who are cops are traitors for simply being a cop. They chose to throw out their flipping oath to the Constitution to work for a system that doesn’t regard the Constitution or our freedom and rights. So they continue to prepare for a rebellion here & until then, they want us to feel intimated and scared and believing we can’t fight back against this crap. People, all I can say is that the “LE” community is not real law enforcement and it is comprised of about 4 million traitors & these people are part of the domestic army of civilian badges. It’s our job to put this down.

  42. BTW, to the guy above who doesn’t trust the militia in any form, your reasoning for it I can’t argue against but I can just say that you need to learn more about what the militia is and what it stands for and no, it’s not only for so called “law abiding citizens” because that’s just a bunch of wording to throw people into a group to fit the mold of what the govt and cops say we must be in order to be armed. Screw that. Here is the legal definition of it which is backed by historical precedent. WE are the militia, in short.

  43. Matheus Grunt, by law abiding I mean those who are not a bunch of child molesting, gun and drug running murderers who hae decided that despite living in these United States, have decided that they are above the law of the land. Frankly, I don’t consider us to be a militia as gun owners. I consider all of the gun owners in America to be the metaphorical chain on the door for when the aliens come and try to eradicate us like they did to the dinosaurs.

    • The militia is comprised of those who own guns and those who do not; the People. Although it has fallen out of training and order (well regulated) in most areas, it is still the militia and it is still the primary defender against enemies foreign and domestic.

      One of the things that concerns me today is that is seems that so many pro-gun people focus on ordinary crime and dismiss militia duty.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *