Page 4 of 15 First 1234567814 ... Last
  1. #31
    You have to work the look. supporting member
    CrackFox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Bat Country
    Posts
    3,077
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by slamdunc View Post
    And if it didn't come from NPR, I might only research the source statistics instead of automatically calling bullshit on it.
    It doesn't come from NPR, it comes from the ACLU. https://www.aclu.org/sites/default/f...t-web-rel1.pdf

  2. #32
    slamdunc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    2,301
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by CrackFox View Post
    It doesn't come from NPR, it comes from the ACLU. https://www.aclu.org/sites/default/f...t-web-rel1.pdf
    I stand corrected, there could never be any biased information from a source such as ACLU.

  3. #33

    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Norn Iron
    Posts
    160
    1
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    I don't think the figures are particularly damning.

    — 62 percent of SWAT raids were for the purpose of conducting drug searches.

    If SWAT are used in cases where a possibility of firearms exists and searches are against dealers as opposed to some guy smoking a joint then there is a good chance firearms will be involved. Especially if you're talking gang or organised crime related raids.

    — Just 7 percent of SWAT raids were "for hostages, barricade, or active shooter scenarios."

    How often do these incidents happen vs other incidents where guns may be present? Slightly less than one in ten?

    — SWAT raids are directed disproportionately against people of color — 30 percent of the time the "race of individual people impacted" was black, 11 percent of the time Latino, 20 percent white and 30 percent unknown.

    Race figures are meaningless unless compared to the areas where the crimes requiring SWAT took place as opposed to population spread as a whole. If drug crime for example happens in lower income area's and these area's have a higher proportion of colour vs pink then it distorts the figures. It's not right that things are this way but the police have to respond to crime. It's not their job to fix income inequality.

    — Armored personnel vehicles that local law enforcement agencies have received through grants from the Department of Homeland Security are most commonly used for drug raids and not school shootings and terrorist situations.

    How often is drug raid support required vs school shootings and terrorist situations? School shootings and terrorist incidents are few and far between. If you've got access to a 'tank' why not use it to protect your personnel rather than have it sitting gathering dust? It also means they get to train with in in live environments for when it's really needed.

    — In cases in which police cited the possible presence of a weapon in the home as a reason for utilizing a SWAT team, weapons were found only 35 percent of the time.

    Possible presence means there might be a weapon not there will be a weapon. 1 in 3 seems reasonable and sure it's better safe than sorry.

  4. #34
    ghost55's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Portland, Oregon
    Posts
    2,239
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by slamdunc View Post
    I stand corrected, there could never be any biased information from a source such as ACLU.
    The ACLU might have an agenda (and one I support at that), but they don't just make **** up.

  5. #35
    slamdunc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    2,301
    1
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by ghost55 View Post
    The ACLU might have an agenda (and one I support at that), but they don't just make **** up.
    I would be safe in saying there is a difference between an organization that makes **** up and one that puts a unique slant on the information they put out. That is just the nature of the beast; I would like to see the numbers on this topic from a source without any agenda; an objective study would be nice.

    I tend to generalize and utilize my own anecdotal ****; if I use numbers that aren't ones that I made up, I will source them. I have no personal issues with the ACLU (even received legal assistance from them once), but they do have an agenda.

  6. #36
    Permalost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    13,092
    2
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by slamdunc View Post
    I would like to see the numbers on this topic from a source without any agenda; an objective study would be nice.
    So, who doesn't have any agenda?

  7. #37

    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Southeast WI
    Posts
    892
    3
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by slamdunc View Post
    And if it didn't come from NPR, I might only research the source statistics instead of automatically calling bullshit on it.
    Do you have any information to indicate this is "bullshit", or is "LOL, NPR" the entirety of your argument?

  8. #38

    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Southeast WI
    Posts
    892
    1
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Yes, the ACLU has an agenda. That has nothing to do with how accurate the information is or whether or not that information indicates there is something wrong.

  9. #39
    You have to work the look. supporting member
    CrackFox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Bat Country
    Posts
    3,077
    2
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    I believe the ACLU's are fairly clear about what their agenda is. They spell it out on their website for chrissakes.

    Quote Originally Posted by ACLU
    defend and preserve the individual rights and liberties that the Constitution and laws of the United States guarantee everyone in this country
    That means they do not approve of the government operating paramilitary forces which attempt to use legal chicanery to avoid public oversight. Like this kind of bullshit right here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/t...-records-laws/

  10. #40
    My dog is cuter and smarter than yours. Join us... or die
    BKR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bonners Ferry, Idaho
    Posts
    7,211
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by CrackFox View Post
    I believe the ACLU's are fairly clear about what their agenda is. They spell it out on their website for chrissakes.



    That means they do not approve of the government operating paramilitary forces which attempt to use legal chicanery to avoid public oversight. Like this kind of bullshit right here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/t...-records-laws/
    All of them ?

    https://www.aclu.org/racial-justice_...cond-amendment

    I don't think so...
    Falling for Judo since 1980

Page 4 of 15 First 1234567814 ... Last

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Log in

Log in
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO