Goin COMMANDO
 

Local Cops Ready for War With Homeland Security-Funded Military Weapons - The Daily Beast

Coming to a town near you. Just another example of govt self perpetuation.

:wall:

Would you prefer they spent the money on Sno-cone Machines?

THEY DID THAT ALREADY :smash:

No, but god forbid there is an attack where they need that artillery, and he'd be lamenting that they only had 9's and shotguns to retalliate....

I like snow cones.

Yeah, I know....and you were pissin and moanin that they spent the money on those......

Now they spent the money on weapons....and your pissin and moanin. :huh:

So Grumpy you'll be heating your house with coal :tooth:

Lots of coal starting on the 26th

Or... and here's a novel concept... they could *refrain* from spending the money.

Our government is like some of my idiot friends that live paycheck to paycheck and then complain about not having any money. 50" LED TVs, going out for dinner 3x/week and driving a new car are not an essential part of living and is why those people don't have any money. Just like APCs, snow cone machines and the millions of other things the government wastes aren't essential for getting their jobs done.

Too much wood dust, not enough fishing :uhuh: I say give them every weapon necessary.

A TANK??????

DING DING DING

Someone who gets it.

You guys are messed up if you think it's justified to have a tank or armored cars with frickin gun turrets on them. Half a million dollars to sit somewhere and park next to the dare car at your next strawberry festival?

Moonbats :smash: :hee:

They could...but they won't...

The biggest problem w/ the government is their Budget planning mentality....If they have money left at the end of the year they spend it instead of saving it....because if they don't spend it they get their budget cut by what they save the following year.

Stupidest thought process I've ever seen

If they want to fix it they need to stop working their budget that way, and also give managers an incentive based bonus for saving money....maybe 5% of what is saved in a department....

But until they do....which would you rather see....Sno-cone machines or weapons going to the police force

PLUGS John PLUGS

100% eco friendly, renewable, clean green energy, NOT govt subsidized :smash:


I'm tellin you...we're on the wave of the future. Cuz if they ain't gonna sell they'll burn just nicely.

Agree TDF, but that 5% incentive sounds Capitalistic. :)

I would defer to the police on this as to whether it is necessary. There are other places to cut, like subsidies for corn and sucrose growers.

"Local police bristle at the suggestion that they’ve become “militarized,” arguing the upgrade in firepower and other equipment is necessary to combat criminals with more lethal capabilities. They point to the 1997 Los Angeles-area bank robbers who pinned police for hours with assault weapons, the gun-wielding student who perpetrated the Virginia Tech massacre in 2007, and the terrorists who waged a bloody rampage in Mumbai, India, that left 164 people dead and 300 wounded in 2008."

they're grasping at straws

i know
lets get barney

What's that saying "Better to have it and not Need it, than need it and not Have it"

I'm also impressed, Scott, that you are embracing a Liberal Leaning article like this and taking it to heart....:hihi:

I mean, hell, they got somebody from the ACLU to back there position in the article.....says the Cops only job is to investigate AFTER the crime was committed

What was that you said......Moonbats

How bout IF YOU CANT AFFORD IT YOU DONT BUY IT AND DO WITHOUT

moonbat commies it shoulda been :hee:

Wouldn't happen because friggin "Newscenter 5 Investigates" would be all over the government for using our tax dollars to give government employees bonuses....without pointing out the fact that it is incentive based and actually saving money in the long run...

so its business as usual for the federal government....:smash:

Do they remind you of your hat?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Yes, yes they do. It's the perfect combination of style and function.

I was lucky enough to fire a 98B that I believe was obtained through this DHS grant. That thing was sweetness.... And a bargain at just under 5k without toys for the upper receiver.... Might have displaced the M107A as my favorite, and at a quarter of the cost!!!!

But to actually be able to put either of these weapons to use in a domestic situation..... maybe once a year across the whole country. Love the weapons, but can't see the justification.

There are limitations to that saying. Limitations like "hey, our country/state/town is deeply in debt so we should be reasonable with our purchases."

On that "need it but not have it bit", I'd like to see a report on how many times in the last 5 years the town *needed* an APC and how many times any police officer *needed* an M14 with military grade head protection - especially in a large city in North Dakota that: Two homicides a year in the last 6 years... yeah, that definitely demonstrates a need for a militarized police force.

Me too. Why look at hillbilly country. Switch it to Boston. When is the last time you saw a need for a apc with a turret and guns..

oh wait there was that Occupy camp wasn't there LOL

they must know something their not allowed to divulge.
maybe the cartels are going to switch countries.

kinda curious that the drug cartel king pins liked to keep Lions.
reminds me of early Roman times.

I was saying it more Toungue in Cheek than anything....I do tend to be a smart ass at time.

Yeah, common sense dictates thats how they should think but, as I said before, its how the governments do budgeting that is the real problem.

If the feds give a town 5 million to the police force and the force this year says that we are good, we only need $500k here's the rest back, now next year the funds come out and the town gets $500k....but they need 2 million....the government says Welll you made do with $500k last year thats all we're giving you this year, sorry.

So the way the towns/states think is Heck, They gave us 5 million we sure as hell are going to spend it on something so they will give us the same next year.

so is it going to be on sno-cone machines or on an APC's?

The government needs to learn to budget on an "As Needed" basis...and they need to learn how to speed the process up.

what budget?????

Another Grim Milestone: 900 Days of Budget Neglect
October 17th, 2011

Yesterday, America reached another grim milestone that went entirely unreported among the major media outlets. No newspaper ran it as a headline, no cable news network devoted a segment of any show today to it. In fact, if people like Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) and Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) didn’t mark these dates, you probably wouldn’t hear about them.

This is the second consecutive year that Senate Democrats have disregarded the legally mandated budget process. In fact, this Sunday will mark the 900th day since Senate Democrats last adopted a formal budget plan as outlined in the Congressional Budget Act. It is a national disgrace.

The Constitution did not give Congress a very lengthy job description and one of its most important tasks is to handle the money it takes from us in taxes. The Republican-led House has done its part but the Senate, led by the hyper-partisan Harry Reid, simply will not pass a bill. This is what Reid said back in May, about 150 days ago.

“There’s no need to have a Democratic budget, in my opinion,” Reid told the Los Angeles Times last week. “It would be foolish for us to do a budget at this stage.”


'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' '''''''''''''

Dems won’t pass budget in 2010
By Jared Allen - 06/21/10

House Democrats will not pass a budget blueprint in 2010, Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) will confirm in a speech on Tuesday.

But Hoyer will vow to crack down on government spending, saying Democrats will enforce spending limits that are lower than what President Barack Obama has called for.

In the scheduled address to the progressive think tank The Third Way, Hoyer will acknowledge that the lower chamber will do things differently this election year.

“It isn’t possible to debate and pass a realistic, long-term budget until we’ve considered the bipartisan commission’s deficit-reduction plan, which is expected in December,” according to Hoyer’s prepared remarks that were provided to The Hill.

The House has never failed to pass an annual budget resolution since the current budget rules were put into place in 1974. Hoyer this spring noted that the GOP-led Congress didn’t pass a final resolution in 1998, 2004 and 2006.




'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' ''''''

House says no to mandating balanced federal budget

Nov. 18, 2011
By JIM ABRAMS, Associated Press

The first House vote in 16 years on making federal deficits unconstitutional came as the separate bipartisan "supercommittee" appeared to be sputtering in its attempt to find at least $1.2 trillion in deficit reductions to head off major automatic cuts. The lead Republican on that panel said members were "painfully, painfully aware" of its Wednesday deadline for action and would work through the weekend.

The House voted 261-165 in favor of the measure to require annual balanced budgets, but that was 23 short of the two-thirds majority needed to advance a constitutional amendment.

''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''

December 14, 2011 Senate rejects two balanced budget amendments

(AP) The Senate has defeated two proposals to amend the Constitution to compel Congress to come up with a balanced budget every year. The votes, coming after House rejection of a balanced budget amendment last month, effectively shuts off the constitutional approach for forcing Congress to live within its means.

With Democrats solidly against the amendments, the outcome was never in doubt. But the Senate was required to stage the votes under last summer's deal for raising the government's debt limit in exchange for $2 trillion in future spending cuts.

Senate rejects two balanced budget amendments - CBS News

No Chit :wall:

amazing isn't it?.....vociferous arguents over which side has more dissenting views on their radio/tv programs and an 18 dollar a week, 60 day reduction in contributions to an entitlement that is 30 billion in the red this year.......... our Federal Government has been operating without a budget for quite some time, and noone sems to care...:confused:

As part of the "War Supplement Bill for FY2011", The Pelosi House of Representatives "deemed" the 2011 Budget, and the Senate completely discarded the Presidential Budget Proposal. So there was not Federal Budget for FY2011.

Similarly, the President submitted a budget for FY2012, but Senator Reid tossed it, and would not let Congress vote on it. The House of Representatives also sent a 2012 budget proposal to the Senate. Same result. There is no U.S. Federal Budget for FY2012.

Instead, we have a series of "continuing resolutions", allowing Congress to continue spending without the guidelines of a budget