San Bernardino

December 4th, 2015 22 Comments

BearCat

Like all the rest of the country, I watched the events that unfolded in San Bernardino with horror, and like everyone else I was stunned by the extraordinary courage and competence, the staggering professionalism, the heroism, and the humanity of the responding officers.

In an Olympian twist of sick humor, one of the earlier breaking stories that day was about certain politically correct cities (Oakland, California was specifically mentioned) that are divesting themselves of some of the surplus military gear that the federal government had made available to law enforcement. Depending on which news agency was doing the reporting, this divesting was attributed either to “the Fergusson effect,” or to local governments trying to avoid (I’m quoting Barack Obama) “[giving] people a feeling like [the police] is an occupying force instead of a force that is part of the community…” Either way, no matter who was doing the reporting, to hear that piece of news and then to contrast it against the strong, but clearly agitated, voice of the officer in San Bernardino calling for medical assistance and a “BearCat” (think an armored vehicle on steroids, above) was a fitting reminder of the divide between reality and the politically correct fantasy so many Americans seem to live in.

I’m not trying to point a finger here; instead, in the unlikely event I have any progressive liberal readers out there, I am asking for information, for elucidation, because I truly do not understand your thinking.

Clearly, those of you on the progressive liberal left do not feel the average American citizen is fit, or even has the right, to defend himself with a firearm. Even as the events were unfolding, before anyone had the least idea of who was doing what to whom, President Obama, Hillary Clinton, Martin O’Malley, and certain members of the media were already stridently calling for stricter gun laws (stricter than California?) and placing the blame for whatever it was that might be happening on guns, on the NRA (for the record, I am a proud life member of that same NRA), on conservative Republicans, and on firearms manufacturers generally. There was no mention of terrorism.

Putting aside my personal feelings, I can understand how people who know nothing about firearms might be terrified by them, but then how can those same people also want to hamstring the law enforcement agencies that are sworn and mandated to protect us all? If the various responding agencies in San Bernardino had not had the equipment and training they did have, many officers might have died; the terrorists might even have gone on to stage yet another attack to kill more innocent American citizens. So if you don’t want me to defend myself, and you don’t want the police to have the equipment they have asked for, and need, to do their job of protecting and serving, what do you want? Who do you expect will be there to protect you if, God forbid, you should find yourself in a conference hall when ISIS walks in? Who? It can’t be the military because under the Posse Comitatus Act, that is illegal. So please tell me, how will this play out in those cities, such as Oakland and San Francisco where people are considered too irresponsible to own firearms and their sensibilities are too delicate to be exposed to the dogs of war? How will it play out when terror comes to those towns?

For myself, I will put my faith in men and women of the caliber of the San Bernardino law enforcement agencies, and I will hope they have whatever equipment they might need to help them and keep them safe. I will also hope they get to me before I have to do any heavy lifting, but if they can’t get to me, I’ll put my faith in prayer and a M1911.

 

Share Button
Follow me at:
  1. Anonymous says:

    Even before all the facts where in the media and Democrats started to blame the NRA and lack of gun control. That was my thought too. A lack of gun control in California? They have strict gun control and what about France? Don’t they have strict gun control? Then they had the nerve to say that gun owners and the NRA were as bad as the terrorist.
    Hillary Clinton and all the usual suspects tweeted about needing more gun control. By the way this Muslim couple had an IED factory in their home. They placed bombs in the same building that never went off. There car was also full of IEDS. I am pretty sure that those are illegal, but that didn’t stop these people from building bombs in their own home.

    http://www.nationalreview.com/article/427978/liberal-gun-control-cynicism-mass-shootings

  2. Anonymous says:

    http://www.nationalreview.com/article/427905/mass-shootings-gun-control

    Does more gun control really stop mass shootings?

  3. Anonymous says:

    Well said!

  4. Anonymous says:

    A mild correction: The police forces are not intended for citizen protection, particularly for individuals. Many Supreme Court decisions have been written on that subject.

    Responding to a terrorist attack, or rioting, would be considered a core responsibility. For these activities, an armored vehicle, such as the Bearcat, is a sensible piece of equipment for sizable cities, or perhaps heavily populated counties. The Bearcat is not a military issue vehicle, but one of a number on the market, and intended for this sort of duty.

    Actual military issue armored vehicles are a poor choice for civilian government use, and the cheap upfront price is deceiving. Maintenance costs can be horrendous, and impacts the readiness standards that would be expected of local government emergency equipment.

    The people do not want their streets to look like Baghdad, with military grade equipment running around, unless it is a parade.

    Unfortunately, cities like Oakland will ignore the reality that requires allowing the citizens to exercise their Constitutionally acknowledged right to self-defense, and will double down on the stupidity of their gun (actually citizen control) agenda. They will do their best to turn the state into a complete totalitarian regime, which will not make the population safer.

    • The courts have indeed ruled that law enforcement agencies are not mandated to protect the individual (hence the need for the second amendment, among other reasons), but rather society as a whole, but since society is made of civilians, I disagree with your assessment of their not being “intended for citizen protection.”
      I stand corrected on the issue of the BearCat not being military, and I’m sure people don’t want their streets looking like Baghdad, but since those vehicles are only called for in emergencies, I don’t believe that’s an issue. The police don’t drive them around to issue parking tickets, but when it comes to keeping our law enforcement safe, I’m all for BearCats or whatever else helps, and the news story I heard specifically mentioned the divesting of armored vehicles. If “armored vehicle” means something other than a BearCat, then we may be talking at cross purposes, but it was a BearCat specifically that the officer in San Bernardino called for.
      JP

      • Anonymous says:

        During the Detroit riots I remember seeing army tanks on the television driving into Detroit to restore the peace. It is frightening when you see a city near you that has army tanks rolling into it. I understand why it was necessary though.

      • Anonymous says:

        The real deal is available, but some local politicians don’t want those visuals being shown on tv, so they opt for the bank/money transport style of armored car, like the Bearcat.
        The problem with all these is that the swat teams end up using them to serve run-of-the-mill warrants. New toy for the tactical types to play with, essentially. Not proper, but who’s going to tell them not to?

        The police may have originally been oriented toward protection of the citizens, but I would say that changed quite some time ago. Now they seem more directed toward tax assessing/collection, and when you look at their abuse of the asset forfeiture laws, they have become what they used to fight. Some may still have honor, but it is a depressingly small percentage by now, judging by the numbers. The War On (some)Drugs(tm) basically ruined the police.

  5. Anonymous says:

    Yes, I thought the law enforcement agencies did an AMAZING job. I was very proud of them and a bit mystified at how ‘stupid’ the terrorist were to make so many mistakes.
    Nancy

  6. Anonymous says:

    Just read this on FB;

    3,400: Americans who died by Terrorism
    Since 2001

    3,400: Americans who died by household
    Firearms since Five weeks ago.

    SERIOUSLY?????? Do you think there’s slight a problem? just saying.

    • Anonymous says:

      SERIOUSLY????? 3,400 Americans died in the last 5 weeks…provide sources and let’s analyze it.

    • Please be very careful believing what you read on FaceBook. The only reliable source for crime statistics is the FBI and they do not release their statistics for any given year until well after the year is over, partly because incomplete statistics are meaningless, and because there is a natural lag time to recoup all the information needed. To the best of my knowledge, there is no organization that tracks crime on a daily, weekly, or monthly basis. So, here are the FBI’s statistics for 2014:
      there were 11,961 homicides, total;
      of those, 8124 were caused by firearms of all kinds;
      that breaks down into slightly over 156 homicides by firearm per week;
      which in turn adds up to 780 homicides by firearm in the last five weeks.
      Here is the link to the relevant page on the FBI Uniform Crime Report:
      https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2014/crime-in-the-u.s.-2014/tables/expanded-homicide-data/expanded_homicide_data_table_8_murder_victims_by_weapon_2010-2014.xls
      For the record, in a recent interview, someone from the FBI said it looked as though the violent crime rate in America for 2015 was going to be lower than it was in 2014.
      JP

      • Anonymous says:

        Thanks JP for pointing this guy’s mistake out. Though I doubt they will believe it since it doesn’t fit their biases.

      • Anonymous says:

        Still way too many deaths

        • Anonymous says:

          There have been many threads going around on Facebook and in the mainstream media that there have been 355 mass shootings this year. Complete and under lies. Sensationalism meant to shock and awe people who are uninformed and believe anything they see and hear without fact checking.

          In fact, according to the FBI, there have been only 4 mass shootings in America in 2015, and so far it is looking like the death count, while horrible, is going to be less than what it was in 2014.

          Here is a fact for you, but don’t take my word for it, look it up for yourselves: France has had more people killed in mass shooting attacks in 2015 than the entire United States has had in the past seven years of President Obama’s Presidency.

          TD Bauer
          Wisconsin

  7. Anonymous says:

    http://www.fox2detroit.com/news/local-news/55532466-story

    This is a local county in Michigan that had their BearCat taken back by the Federal government. The timing is really strange because this happened at the same time as the mass shooting in California. The county sheriff was not happy about this at all.

  8. Anonymous says:

    I just find it interesting how the NRA mobilized its base to kill a Senate proposal that’d strip gun rights for people on the terror watch list.

    Guns for everyone, I guess. Even those who should NOT have them.

    • Anonymous says:

      People on the terror list if not a US citizen should be immediately deported or charged. Those on the list who are citizens should be investigated and charged if found guilty of a crime.

      The basic problem is this list is 1) arbitrary and 2) if they are under suspicion they should be under indictment. There is a huge whole in the legal and law enforcement process if we have anyone who is truly dangerous being able to walk around, but we also must temper that with the risk of quickly moving into a police state.

    • Anonymous says:

      Have you taken the time to look at the actual bill and see all the BS that was attached to it?

      Did you know Ted Kennedy was on the ‘no fly list’? Yes, Senator Ted Kennedy. Maybe he should have been on the “don’t sell booze to list” and ‘keep away from bridges when driving list”.

      TD Bauer
      Wisconsin

  9. Anonymous says:

    My concern with ordinary citizens carrying guns to protect against such actions is the total lack of common sense used by a great many people as evidenced by just watching the news, reading the newspaper, and general observation. Recently three people in traditional Muslin garb were seen walking peacefully through a local mall minding their own business. A sales clerk became nervous, texted his mother and told her there were Muslims in the mall. She in turn panicked and posted on Facebook about an impending terrorist attack and a call for people to bring guns to the mall on Black Friday. Fortunately for all concerned, that did not happen. I don’t believe stricter gun controls will solve anything. We could do a better job of enforcing the laws we already have. I do, however, find it alarming that we find ourselves in a society where individuals may be carrying guns who lack the common sense to use them wisely and as a last resort.
    jr

    • Anonymous says:

      I tend to agree with what you are saying. I feel everybody should have the right to own a gun and protect themselves. However, I would feel much better if people who did carry guns outside of being a law enforcement officer did have more training. With that said everybody I know who does carry a gun is actually well trained and have good heads on their shoulders.

      I carry about 90% of the time I leave the house. I attend training courses one or twice a year on my own accord, not because I have to, but because I want to be skilled and ready and because it is actually fun to train. I also go to my local range at least twice a month and shoot because marksmanship is a perishable skills, but also because I enjoy my time doing it.

      In all of the training courses I have taken, one theme is always present, and that is the legality of using your gun… I am talking about being sued if for any reason you use your gun and screw up. There are many scenarios possible that a person drawing his gun could find themselves in that will lead to getting sued civilly or even find yourself in jail. The only time my gun would leave its holster is if it is a life or death situation.

      TD Bauer
      Wisconsin

  10. Anonymous says:

    The Feds also seized military surplus vehicles, including an armored vehicle from the Sheriff’s Dept. in Alabama in late November.

Top of Page