• @charliespider
    link
    291 year ago

    I think it was in California in the 90s that some guys tried to rob a bank, but they had full body armour and helmets, and were armed with assault rifles and high capacity magazines. The cops were useless against them as all they had were squad cars, pistols, and a few shotguns. It was a huge wake up call for police forces across America and it didn’t take long for them to start acquiring better equipment.

    If you don’t like the militarization of your police, then you need to do something about the militarization of your general populace.

      • @charliespider
        link
        71 year ago

        Thnx for the link. Didn’t know their body armour was home made. That’s some pretty good dedication to one’s trade. Too bad they couldn’t have put that talent into something constructive.

        • @lennybird
          link
          English
          61 year ago

          They just stitched bought armor together, basically.

      • @butwhyishischinabook
        link
        5
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        How dare you point out that this is an example of weapons that have been federally prohibited for a century! Now how can people moderation fallacy their way into sounding reasonable?

      • @uis
        link
        21 year ago

        illegally modified

        So let’s make more things illegal because it will fix everything for sure

        • flying_monkies
          link
          fedilink
          31 year ago

          Not sure what has your panties in a wad over that.

          The converted rifles in that crime were not ATF Form 2 weapons, so calling them “illegaly modified” is a true and factual statement.

          • @uis
            link
            01 year ago

            I don’t have gun context. Just saying that banning sething(i.e. making it illegal) will only increase amount of illegal. Things that are banned will not just “have you seen the law? Well, it seems I shouldn’t exist” and disappear.

        • Flying Squid
          link
          11 year ago

          You can now prosecute people doing harm with new charges. I don’t know why that isn’t significant. Why does every action have to “fix everything?”

          • @uis
            link
            11 year ago

            Aaaand? They are already charged with, you know, killing people.

            • Flying Squid
              link
              11 year ago

              Not necessarily. Not if they were stopped before they could kill anyone.

              • @uis
                link
                11 year ago

                Well, trying to kill is already illegal.

                • Flying Squid
                  link
                  11 year ago

                  You really don’t understand how adding charges results in longer sentences? Really?

                  • @uis
                    link
                    11 year ago

                    Well, you can just increase sentence for killing if you want what you claim

      • @lennybird
        link
        English
        0
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        What point are you trying to draw, here?

        • Taking reliable existing semi-automatic firearms and modifying to fully automatic still would not be feasible for these dunces if they were starting out from scratch (at least not with any semblance of reliability from an engineer’s standpoint). Finally, should be noted that there’s little reason the outcome would’ve been different had they been semi-automatic, considering ammunition waste and less attention to accuracy. If their goals were that of the Aurora shooter, then that would be different.

        • “home made body armor” implies they made it from scratch. No. They used several vests worth of manufactured body armor to make full body armor.

        • flying_monkies
          link
          fedilink
          31 year ago

          What point are you trying to draw, here?

          None, I linked the wiki entry for the person who “remembered there was an incident” because I remembered the incident.

          What point are you trying ro draw here?

          • @lennybird
            link
            English
            -2
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            You included more than simply a link to a wiki page.

            Pretty sure my points are self-evident by context.

            • flying_monkies
              link
              fedilink
              31 year ago

              No, I provided a link to the wiki page with the tldr from the article on the weapon/armor for anyone who didn’t want to click on it.

              The fact you believe there’s some sort of point I’m trying to make by linking the wiki article that covers the bank robbery and includes the information on the weapons, tactics and outcome and think “I’m trying to make a point” speaks volumes about you.

              • @lennybird
                link
                English
                01 year ago

                Ah, so indeed it was more than just a link. An emphasis on armor and weapon, curiously, despite that already being mentioned by the original user. Interesting.

                Tell me, how does it “speak volumes?” when I’m merely providing obvious context and correcting misconceptions?

                • flying_monkies
                  link
                  fedilink
                  21 year ago

                  Because that was the persons comment I linked to was regarding the weapons and armor.

                  I’m sorry you don’t like what the wiki says and you apparently feel the need to read more into an article and a direct quote of statements from the article. Maybe you could try linking documents you approve of that answers a persons question in the future?

                  • @lennybird
                    link
                    English
                    1
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    My apologies if I misunderstood. There are just a lot of gun nuts out there who would twist the two points you coincidentally highlighted in order to claim that regulation of these things is pointless when that simply is not the case (especially when “home made” is a half truth). Since you clearly agree, then again, my apologies.

    • @JBar2
      link
      -201 year ago

      This is the stupidest thing I’ve ever read on the internet. Sure give up all your rights as a citizen based on one (probably fake, but either way) story about a single supposed situation where someone outgunned the police

      Fucking bootlicker

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        151 year ago

        Ah yeah, I remember giving up my rights as a citizen in 1996 when Thomas Hamilton outgunned a bunch of children in a primary school

        We seem to be doing just fine here without our rights, oddly enough, along with the rest of modernity

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        91 year ago

        I think having some higher power weapons for law enforcement in case it ever comes to that is (while related) a different problem than police militarization. I think the best bet would to be have specialized units for those extreme cases they could reasonably deploy in a timely/effective manner. Every cop having access to surplus military gear is a huge problem and I wish weren’t to a point where having specific units was even a necessity.

      • @bob_wiley
        link
        English
        4
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        deleted by creator

        • @WindInTrees
          link
          English
          01 year ago

          These deluded right-wingers don’t care about what’s true, unfortunately.

      • @charliespider
        link
        21 year ago

        Pointing out the likely catalyst that triggered all of the police militarization makes me a bootlicker?

        Well that’s one way to missinterpret things!