August 15, 2014 7:49 am -

The Kentucky Senator and likely presidential candidate says police tactics are part of too-big government.


Washington has incentivized the militarization of local police precincts by using federal dollars to help municipal governments build what are essentially small armies—where police departments compete to acquire military gear that goes far beyond what most of Americans think of as law enforcement…

The militarization of our law enforcement is due to an unprecedented expansion of government power in this realm. It is one thing for federal officials to work in conjunction with local authorities to reduce or solve crime. It is quite another for them to subsidize it.

Americans must never sacrifice their liberty for an illusive and dangerous, or false, security. This has been a cause I have championed for years, and one that is at a near-crisis point in our country.

D.B. Hirsch
D.B. Hirsch is a political activist, news junkie, and retired ad copy writer and spin doctor. He lives in Brooklyn, New York.

50 responses to Rand Paul: Demilitarize The Police

  1. Rusty Shackleford August 15th, 2014 at 7:51 am

    Stopped clocks, etc.

  2. eddie1247 August 15th, 2014 at 8:15 am

    I can’t think of any way our tax dollars could have been spent more wisely than turning our local police departments into extensions of the military.

  3. Tommy6860 August 15th, 2014 at 8:37 am

    I can only agree with him inasmuch as they demilitarize the wing-nut sovereigners who have no problem arming themselves against the government. No doubt, the police in Ferguson was a scary sight, but so were the wingers at the the Bundy ranch, two who later on were armed to the teeth as they murdered two police officers and an innocent woman in a Walmart.

    • John Tarter August 15th, 2014 at 8:52 am

      All this is a direct result of liberalism`s desire to have an overpowering federal entity in defiance of the U.S. Constitution. Obama stands up with a straight face and decries the local police`s heavy handed response when it was his D H S which gave them all that military weaponry.

      • craig7120 August 15th, 2014 at 9:24 am

        Now see, I get this argument.
        Quick question, I haven’t read anything you wrote denouncing this federal build up on ferguson, no Gadsden flag spotted in solidarity, why is that?

        So tax cheats ok to defend yourself against the feds, but if our children are killed walking down the streets we should stop complaining?

        Why do you have two different positions? Is it as simple as black & white?

        • John Tarter August 15th, 2014 at 9:51 am

          You missed my reply yesterday to the blurb about Obama decrying the excessive force used there. Even though he was his usual contradictory self, I found myself in agreement with him.

          As for tax cheats, let’s eliminate that problem once and for all and go to either a flat tax or the ” fair tax” where a federal levy is put on everything everyone buys. It’s you libs once again who want to keep the IRS and it’s unbeliveably complicated tax system . Enough is enough!

          And now we have the militarization of the local police as a direct result of Federal interference. It’s time to wake up and smell the coffee.

          • craig7120 August 15th, 2014 at 9:57 am

            Got it, you’re pssed off about taxes.

          • arc99 August 15th, 2014 at 10:03 am

            It is Obama Derangement Syndrome on steroids. Every problem known to civilized man is caused by liberals. Has about as much credibility as those poor souls wandering the streets of major urban areas, muttering about UFO implants.

          • Carla Akins August 15th, 2014 at 11:03 am

            A flat tax or fair tax is hugely unfair to the poor – it helps no one. If you want to stop tax cheats do away with inversion, tax churches and only true non-profits get tax free status.

          • R.J. Carter August 15th, 2014 at 11:34 am

            What’s the difference between a church and a true non-profit?

            Flat tax is completely fair — and would result in larger revenues from those with more money. To be “fair” (which isn’t really so much “fair” as it is “merciful”), the flat tax would only be levied against all dollars above a threshold, presumably the poverty threshold although there might be a better baseline to work from.

          • edmeyer_able August 15th, 2014 at 11:36 am

            True nonprofits don’t usually have trillions of dollars in art and real estate.

          • R.J. Carter August 15th, 2014 at 11:58 am

            So the congregation of 25 in Greenbrier, Arkansas pay the penalty for the HRCC in Italy?

          • Carla Akins August 15th, 2014 at 11:52 am

            I had never seen it stated “above a certain threshold” that makes a big difference in how its applied. True non-profits do 100% charity work. (Salvation Army) none of these 503 part time crap. Churches – should be taxed with the exception of their charitable depts – food pantry, child care, orphanages. The fact that church property is not taxed is cray cray.

          • R.J. Carter August 15th, 2014 at 11:59 am

            It has to be above a certain threshold to be workable. That’s how it is now. Otherwise, you’d have a whole new class of people paying taxes who don’t pay now because they don’t make enough money.

            The plan that is an exception to that is the one that does away with the collection of income tax entirely and does it through the sales tax infrastructure.

          • edmeyer_able August 15th, 2014 at 12:02 pm

            A sales tax is regressive in that it taxes disposable income, in a post right below this you just railed against the inequality of the local church paying the same as the Vatican, you can’t have it both ways.

      • arc99 August 15th, 2014 at 9:59 am

        I presume you have some objective evidence that the police had none of this weaponry until January 2009. Or was your post just more of the usual deranged BS?

        It never ceases, you just flat out lie about what liberalism is and what liberalism wants and then you tell us to stop complaining. You stop lying, I will stop complaining.

        • John Tarter August 15th, 2014 at 10:42 am

          Lets just say that President Obama has not stopped this practice, correct? He said his administration would be different than the norm, but in fact things have gotten worse under him. The IRS going after citizens exercising their political rights, the Justice Dept going after reporters, and the N S A snooping on all of us without warrants are all well known actions of this government.

          • edmeyer_able August 15th, 2014 at 11:02 am

            The job of the IRS is to examine and prosecute tax cheats that is costing the Fed billions every year.
            The job of the Justice Dept is to investigate unauthorized release of information which could compromise the security of the US
            The NSA was created long before Obama and has oversight.
            The fact that any of these departments have workers who overstep their authority is not something that began in 2009.

          • edmeyer_able August 15th, 2014 at 11:31 am

            What would you have Obama do, issue an executive order?…../s

        • John Tarter August 15th, 2014 at 10:48 am

          But really, you liberals don’t want the Federal government controlling everything? You sure fooled me.

          • edmeyer_able August 15th, 2014 at 10:55 am

            My only advice to you would be to stop watching “Fox News” and their ilk.

          • eaglesfanintn August 15th, 2014 at 12:58 pm

            If you could just point to the executive order or bill or whatever that told all these police departments they had to buy this equipment, I’m sure we’d all feel enlightened.
            Making equipment available is not the same thing as making someone buy it. Like, just because that strap on was available didn’t mean your wife had to buy it to use on you.

      • NW10 August 15th, 2014 at 10:01 am

        Actually, the militarization of the police dates back way before Obama. A lot was in reaction to 9/11, in order to make us feel safer. The fact that you lay all of it on Obama demonstrates you’re a partisan with a bad case of ODS.

        • John Tarter August 15th, 2014 at 10:53 am

          No, I did not like Bush doing the very same things. He was one president who had the perfect excuse to put the.military on the southern border with the 9-11 attack. He didn’t and now we have thousands of other problems to deal with.

          • NW10 August 15th, 2014 at 11:05 am

            The 9/11 terrorists didn’t come from the southern border, they came here legally on VISAS. Another right wing idiot who doesn’t know what the hell they are talking about.

          • William August 15th, 2014 at 11:33 am

            “He was one president who had the perfect excuse to put the.military on the southern border with the 9-11 attack”.
            So….Skippy?. Just how many 911 Terrorists came in through the southern border?
            (can’t wait to hear this one)

  4. R.J. Carter August 15th, 2014 at 9:02 am

    Hey Rand — how about if people quit hurling rocks, molotovs, and — oh yeah — bullets at the police, then the police wouldn’t need that stuff? Mmkay?

    • craig7120 August 15th, 2014 at 9:14 am

      Of course killing unarmed black kids by the police warrant a scolding and paid leave. You catholic? Just curious, seems the same type discipline

      • R.J. Carter August 15th, 2014 at 9:17 am

        Not Catholic, but still a “law and order” type.

    • MIAtheistGal August 15th, 2014 at 9:24 am

      Did you see the difference in protests last night, when the police didn’t treat the protestors as criminals?

      • R.J. Carter August 15th, 2014 at 9:51 am

        Yes. And I expected that — but for different reasons.

        Does anyone think that the State Police don’t have the same equipment, and would have used it if they’d been attacked in similar fashion?

        • NW10 August 15th, 2014 at 9:59 am

          Does anyone think that the State Police don’t have the same equipment,
          and would have used it if they’d been attacked in similar fashion?

          Let’s take a look at last night, with the state police in charge: peaceful and quiet, which goes back to the point MIAtheistGal made. The state police treated the protesters with respect as opposed to turning Ferguson into the Gaza strip.

          You cannot honestly say that the pigs (and I call them pigs because they’ve earned that title) at FPD didn’t exacerbate things. Again, as I asked you above, what was the excuse for lobbing tear gas at an Al-Jazeera reporter who was doing his job?

          • John Tarter August 15th, 2014 at 10:58 am

            You cannot deny that there are two camps down there – the peaceful protesters and the thugs who have used this killing as an excuse for doing mayhem. They don’t care a rats a s s about the death on Mr. Brown, it’s all about stealing and raising some hell against “the man”.

          • NW10 August 15th, 2014 at 11:04 am

            Which doesn’t answer my question.

          • R.J. Carter August 15th, 2014 at 11:07 am

            I had to look up the al Jazeera incident because I wasn’t familiar with it. Were they in a place with protesters? Were they off on their own under a tent?

            From the images, it doesn’t appear there were any protesters nearby. They clearly had cameras and broadcasting equipment set up. Given what I can see in the three images I found, there was no reason for the CS to be deployed at that location.

            I maintain, however, that if the State Police were having to defend themselves, they would bring out the same equipment.

    • NW10 August 15th, 2014 at 9:35 am

      And what was the excuse for throwing tear gas at the one Al-Jazeera reporter who wasn’t doing any of those things?

      • edmeyer_able August 15th, 2014 at 9:44 am

        The news crew was hurting the cops fee-fees.

  5. MIAtheistGal August 15th, 2014 at 9:04 am

    Th militarization of our police started when we decided in 1996 that we would give surplus military equipment to local police departments. Now we have police with tanks, machine guns and other military gear that they don’t need. Stop over buying in our defense department and stop giving surplus to police departments!

  6. NW10 August 15th, 2014 at 9:36 am

    Paul’s argument is essentially that local police departments (and private citizens and private security forces) should have the right to purchase and use whatever sort of military grade equipment they desire, but just as long as the federal government isn’t involved.

    Armed drones for liquor store security guards? Sure! Just as long as “big government” isn’t part of the equation.

  7. Abby Normal August 15th, 2014 at 10:03 am

    Rand Paul is correct. It’s a sad day when peaceful American protestors are treated the same as the Taliban. The guy sitting on top of that truck with a machine gun says it all. This has to stop.

    If there is a real threat, like the armed goons who took on government agents at Clive Bundy’s ranch, then call in the National Guard.

    • edmeyer_able August 15th, 2014 at 10:18 am

      I stated in an earlier thread that every officer pointing a gun should be identified given 2 weeks off w/o pay and retrained. There was absolutely no call for police to be aiming weapons into a crowd of people.
      However with the number of armed militias on the rise there could come a time when the type of arms on display in Ferguson will be necessary this just wasn’t one of them.

  8. William August 15th, 2014 at 10:26 am

    I’m feeling a tad smug. I worked for a police Chief who had a simple uniform policy. He felt that the standard was that if a small lost child would be afraid to approach you, then you’re doing something wrong. We didn’t wear combat boots because we were not in combat. Nylon gear meant that you were too lazy to shine your leather. He would refer to the new breed of para-military types as “The shaved head cops”. Chief was tough as nails, and his requirements for weapons proficiency was merciless. If it happened to be snowing or raining when weapons qualifications were scheduled, then you qualified in the snow and rain. He was real world. He taught me that 99 percent of the people you have contact with are good people, therefore you should act accordingly, and be able to switch gears to the one percent when needed. I guess he was right all along.

    • Carla Akins August 15th, 2014 at 12:48 pm

      That’s a great picture.

      • William August 15th, 2014 at 3:13 pm

        Thanks it’s me and my granddaughter. She is age seven now.

        • R.J. Carter August 15th, 2014 at 3:17 pm

          If my seven year old son ever gets lost, he’d come up to you. I’d want that.

          Then again, he’s gregarious enough to go up to the crack dealer as well. :/

          • Carla Akins August 15th, 2014 at 3:29 pm

            My youngest knew no strangers. We’d go to the museum and I’d allow the kids to scatter among a few rooms – Seth always came back with someone to introduce. Sometimes it was the curator, others the janitor.

    • MIAtheistGal August 15th, 2014 at 1:14 pm

      That is a real law enforcement officer! We need more like him.

  9. edmeyer_able August 15th, 2014 at 1:27 pm

    A petition for all law enforcement to wear body cams.

  10. fancypants August 15th, 2014 at 11:18 pm

    Rand paul the party pooper
    We are trying to be a global player with china

  11. greenfloyd August 16th, 2014 at 12:30 am

    Demilitarize the police? It’s a good sound-bite, but not very likely.