After all these comments I'd like to thank @bobknight33 for instantly redirecting the discussion away from the actual and important topic of police militarization and use of force against protests.
It is quite remarkable how well this tactic works in changing the attention of public outcry from the important to the negligible.

@lantern53

Having been an officer for a long time, long enough to really have seen the entire process of the "militarization" of the police force from its inception to its current state. I'd really like to know your opinion of it. Can you honestly say you feel its appropriate, even needed or justified? The very rare opportunities I've had in the past to ask police officers this question, i find they are very reluctant to give honest and straight answers. Paraphrasing, they tend to fall back on the, "we'd rather have it and not need it" line of thinking. If you do support it, do you truly feel you or the officer utilizing it have received appropriate training?

I remember driving by our local police station (small town Texas) on the way to school and seeing BOTH the giant armored vehicles parked prominently in front with the bold SWAT on the side. Its always been extremely hard for me to accept them or the fact that we as a town of 30k needed a SWAT team to begin with.

the situation in st louis did not just pop up out of thin air overnight.the tensions between the poor community (mostly black) and the police has been a festering pressure cooker for almost 15 years.

a particularly venal chapter in the st louis police archives is the RNC of 2008,for anybody to absorb some context on the militarization of a police force.

the tinder has been accumulating just waiting for the match.
mike brown WAS that match.
this is not new nor original.
it has happened before.

and as @lantern53 has pointed out:it is the chain of command that sets the tone of how that police force performs their duties.so if those in charge are authoritarian douche nozzles,that attitude tends to trickle down to the everyday cop on the street.

cops by their very nature are authoritarian due to their vocational choice.they respect the chain of command and the authority it represents.to follow orders is to be a "good" cop.

so i do not understand the ridicule that lantern is receiving.he is offering his perspective AS an actual police officer.i am not suggesting that he is right NOR that his opinion somehow exonerates the st louis cop JUST because he is a cop but rather we should listen to someone who actual IS a cop.

there is absolutely ZERO evidence that lantern is a bad cop.we simply do not know how well,or poorly,lantern is at his job.

there IS evidence,however,that lantern tends be a tad racist,authoritarian and contradictory.lantern may be a poor debater but that does not make him a bad cop.

though his defense of zimmerman does reveal an extremely poor judge of character.(seriously lantern?that dude is a full fledged cunt).

but i get it @VoodooV,
lantern is easy pickings.
a right wing authoritarian conservative commenting on a mostly secular left site?
its like shooting fish in a barrel.

sometimes lantern brings it on himself...i know.
his poor debating skills coupled with an almost embarrassing understanding of history and government makes him catnip to someone like you.

its
just
so
easy

i disagree with lantern,pretty much always and i agree that sometimes his biased rhetoric should be taken to task,if only to clear up the bullshit.

but you take it to whole new levels voodoo.
you follow him from thread to thread and chastise and belittle him and THEN act all hurt and shocked when he lashes out at you!

seriously?thats like poking a grizzly bear in the face and then crying when it rips half your face off.

you use the exact same tactics choggie used,but at least he was entertaining.

you are just a bully.
a hypocritical,sanctimonious bully.hiding behind the skirts of others who may find lanterns comments distasteful (which they certainly can be).this is a cowards path and just like all bullies,you rely on the silence of others to continue your persecution of someone who does not have the support of an entire site.

i find your lack of humanity disturbing.
and i will not be silent.
your actions do not deserve respect but rather ridicule.

The trends in policing throughout the country are ominous, thanks to the drug war, the Dept of Homeland Security, and the spillover from America's many foreign wars. The whole world is a U.S. battlefield, and the people of the world, including Americans, are the enemy.

*promote

there is some speculation and a ton of conjecture but people need to be aware that the situation in st louis did not happen over night.remember the militarization of the RNC of 2008?

Your video, BIll Maher Unleashes Against Militarized Police, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

I think this may well be a dupe of this video http://videosift.com/video/BIll-Maher-Unleashes-Against-Militarized-Police.

If you really want to go down that rabbit hole, just google "Alex Jones" "black helicopters". Jones has been warning about the militarization of police and the national guard doing policing for at least a decade. He spews all kinds of other paranoid crap though, so it's hard to take him seriously.

I consider most libertarians to be right wingers, so your definition may be more granular than mine.

Fuck the Militarization of America's Police Forces!

Fast. The US is highly militarized. And its military/police are much better funded than in Mexico.

"a mob of random untrained angry armed strangers"

If they are my friends and neighbors, I would not call them a mob (I don't know how you view your friends but I don't see my friends like this) and I would trust them more than the police. So did the American Revolutionaries. They trusted their fellow colonists more than the "well regulated and trained" British Army. But even then, many trusted the establishment, the Red Coats.

And who are you even talking about? Because, to each other, they are not "random strangers." The police are the "random strangers!" For most people, anyway.

This scene comes to mind.
Like Corleone implies, it's good to know where your loyalties lie. And that of those who engage with you.

"I will trust the police. EVERY. SINGLE. TIME. (and make no mistake, I don't trust the police much at all) That's just me."

Yep, that's just you, and some others, for sure. So what?

"I don't know about you"

Now you know.

And like I said: Good luck with that. I wish you the best and that you never have to 'rely' on the police to 'protect' you.

You don't have to approve of it, but you're certainly forced to accept it, because there's really no way to change it is there? How could you? Most local police departments receive militarized weaponry and vehicles, and even funding, from the federal government, and no one has done a thing to stop that.

You can't fire the police. In fact, the most you can do is complain. And how often do police launch internal investigations only to find later that the officers being investigated acting in accordance with protocol? So often it's almost protocol itself.

So what can you do? Vote for politicians to reform the system? Isn't that quant. The statist's only recourse to problems like these is to punch holes in a piece of paper every four years and that seems to put their whole worldview into perspective somehow. It's chilling, actually.

This is without doubt about money. What else could it be if it isn't about generating income through fines and securing funding by artificially creating a need for a bigger than necessary police force? If not this, for what the incentive to generate more arrests and tickets? Just as a career move by somebody higher up? I doubt that, as higher crime rates tend to reflect negatively on elected officials and cops. Especially when the rate is fixed like this.
Locking up people is a business in the states and it shouldn't be but that's why America has the biggest prison population in percentage and headcount. And the same goes for militarizing the police. There's money to be made and those who get it do everything they can (lobbying for example) to make sure they keep getting more. This is not different.

i dont pay taxes.
i refused ten years ago and have stuck with that path.
and its been sunshine and rainbows ever since....
ok..not really.my income is severely crippled due to me not paying taxes BUT goddamn does it make me feel good!

i do not pay taxes not to be a cheap ass but rather to protest a system that is so obviously rigged against me.(and you).

as for american libertarianism.
i will say they have the civil rights down.
i totally agree with their philosophy of personal liberty and right to do whatever you want as long as you aint stepping on another blokes shoes.

but when they start with the "free market" sermons i start to look at them as wide-eyed and innocent children.
do they not SEE whats going on?
free market?
what is this free market you speak of?
america is NOT a free market.
it is corporate socialism.
or welfare if you want to troll a bit.

go ahead and de-regulate corporate america.
see what happens.
better yet,just look at some african nations,or former soviet states.
guilded estates with private armies for the uber-wealthy and elite while the majority of the population live in either indentured servitude or total squalor.

i am noticing a disturbing trend here in america.its like they are preparing.
we have a government bought and paid for by corporate america,which does the corporations bidding.
the co-opting of the tea party and the crushing of occupy.
a massive surveillance operation.
militarized police forces across the country.
civil liberties made into mere "suggestions" and no longer inalienable.
executions of american citizens with no due process (bye bye habeas corpus).
a standing army that has been in place for over 60 years and a war on terror that will never end.

it is madness.

so i cannot blame my libertarian friends for calling for smaller government.
because the government has become TOO big and no longer is "for the people,by the people".
it serves its corporate masters.
which is why the "de-regulate" argument truly baffles me.

just as my liberal friends who wish to use the system to correct these imbalances.
what?
the system is utterly BROKEN.
we no longer have a functioning democracy!
why would you even suggest to use a system that threw us all overboard to lick the boots of their masters 30 yrs ago?
the mind..it boggles.

every political philosophy has its flaws.none are perfect.
libertarianism has some very good points while others are a bit...naive in my opinion.

for me the end result is this:
i do not trust power nor authority because i find them to be illegitimate until they prove themselves otherwise.
so i am suspicious when someone tries to force their authority on me based on arbitrary and subjective parameters.(like a cop,or judge or some rich dude).

i am a humanist by nature so my political philosophy flows from that birthplace.
i will never step on you to further my career nor take food out of your mouth.
corporate america has spread a propaganda campaign that is insidious.

capitalism is good.
greed is good.
dog eat dog world out there.
here,buy this,it will make you feel better.
wear that and you will be sexy.
you are lone wolf,against the world,drive this car you lone wolf and be a rebel.

its all bullshit.
human beings feel better when they are co-operating.
when they feel their life has purpose and that they are needed.
not by living in a perpetual 7 yr olds wet dream.

oh
my
god.
you fuckers got me ranting!
i hate you both......
/drops mic

I'm shocked by this, although I know I shouldn't be. Do these people understand that we Conquered half of Mexico? If you take over part of a country don't be surprised if some of those people stay.

Also don't be surprised when you enact legislation that trashes their economy that they will come to the alternative place where they do have roots and live a life! You especially can't be surprised when this response was predicted and the border was militarized in anticipation of it.

I'm starting to think we're about to have something similar to a serious crime against humanity, and it will be these people lead by a fucking Believer who says we should destroy Mexicans.

@Yogi
well said my friend.

ya know.
i was talking with @VoodooV on another thread concerning this topic.
he was of the opinion that this is all about perspective and to look at the bigger picture.

now i actually agree with that, but i think the perspective is on how we approach this subject.

@Yogi and i are not coming from some alex jones 'new world order" premise but rather a historical one.
we do not trust our government because our government has proven over and over they do not deserve our trust.

and as @Yogi alluded to,the list of abuses of power by the US government is massive and extensive.

remember in 2006 when it become public that the telecoms had call system rerouters in data collection?those small rooms?
and remember how the bush administration push forward to give the telecoms retroactive immunity to avoid any civil suits?

my main point is that whenever a government gains a new power or authority they WILL use it.since 9/11 and the "war on terror" (which is just a war on ideology) our government has broadened its power and authority ten fold and it HAS USED that power.

this is not opinion.this is fact.

guess it all comes down to trust.
do you trust this government to obey the law?
i dont because they go out of their way to be creative little monkeys to circumvent the law,or redefine it to suit their purposes.

i know i am going off on a rant here,so let me end with this:
historically empires in their last stages have always become concentrated centers of power and certain criteria have always become evident.
1.the over-reach of empires always culminate with an extreme disparity between rich and poor.
2.they become incredibly militarized.
3.infrastructure and commerce begin to break down.
4.nationalism reaches fever pitch.(see:tea party)
5.those in power (the governing class) tend to become more corrupt and less idealistic and begin to pick the remnants of empire for their own enrichment.hastening the demise of empire.
6.the ruling class becomes extremely paranoid and begins to focus its attention on its own citizens.seeing enemies everywhere.
7.power seeks only to further its own power and it becomes a cycle of cannibalism.

by my statements here i am in no way disregarding or dismissing some of the great achievements that have been won by this country.but those milestones were ALWAYS because of the people and not ONE was ever implemented by a benevolent government.

so while i trust the people i,in no way,trust my government.
because they have proven they do not deserve my trust.