Are police getting too military?

[nomadpete]

Something I notice is how our civilian police are looking more and more like military operatives. I think this hampers their connection with the communities that they are employed to protect.

 

Are we getting too americanised?

 

Should our coppers carry assault rifles like in USA?

 

What think you?

 

 

[onetrack]

Yes, I believe we are blindly following the U.S. and making our Police look very threatening. Mind you, a lot of security service companies are pretty good at making their employees look very intimidating, too.

[nomadpete]

The curious thing about security guards in Aus... is they have no power to detain or arrest or touch an alleged offender. At least that's what I was told. A friend did security for a while and he said he had to bluff. Basically he was legally only allowed to ask them nicely to wait here whilst he phoned the police.

The exact opposite to what we see in usa.

[old man emu]

So many points tocomment upon.

 

I believe that the American influence has not been introduced by police. In my opinion the generations which have come after the Boomers have had their attitudes towards Society molded by what American entertainment media has poured onto them. There is definitely a failure to acknowledge that the exercise of one's Rights as granted by Society has to be balanced by the acceptance of one's Responsibilities towards Society. It is that abandonment of Responsibilities that has lead to Society reducing many previously granted Rights.

 

Should our police regularly carry long arms? Definitely not, for the simple reason that using high powered firearms requires a lot of skill to avoid 'collateral damage'. Gaining those skills takes long and frequent training to do which would markedly reduce the number of police available for the day-to-day duties involved in keeping the Peace. Competency with firearms cannot be obtained through a one day per year revision session on a range under virtually stress-free conditions. I agree that a small police unit of police regularly trained and disciplined in the use of these more powerful firearms is required for those operations aimed at the arrest of person reasonably expected to be prepared to use firearms to avoid arrest. These are planned operations in which each participant has a defined role within the team.

 

Arrest by persons other than Police. I've explained before that anyone can arrest an offender in the act of, or immediately following the commission of an offence. Obviously a security guard would not want to do it because such an action is likely to result in loss of time by the employer if the security guard is required to attend Court as a witness. From my expereince, security guards are mostly just full of piss and wind. 

 

The Media. Once again the Media make matters worse by publicising situations when specialist armed police are in action, even if that action is simply patrolling on foot at New Years Eve events. One heavily armed police constable wearing body armour gives a false image when the majority of police are getting atound in cargo pants and shirts. When you see those bulky vests that regular police wear, they are not wearing body armour. The vests were introduced becasue police were carrying too much equipment on their waists and this was causing lower back injury. The introduction of vests was a Work, Health and Safety measure.

[Litespeed]

Police should be called a service not force, they are here to serve society.

 

The use of black uniforms in some states is silly, its hot and sends the wrong image.

 

The use of body cams in all interactions should be mandatory and a offense of office not to use it.  Most critical incidents magically fail to get camera vision, this leads to a lack of trust in policing.

 

Police should never be in charge of investigating police, its a massive conflict of interest.

 

Police should never be  allowed to hide their identity , they quite often do when policing protests, public order etc, this allows thuggish behaviour and zero accountability.  Only speacial ops police should have such needs and then must wear clearly visible badge numbers.

 

We are not like the usa or uk yet but its a slippery slope some right wing pollies would love to follow.

[Jerry_Atrick]

I hope you're not conflating UK police with US police. Most here are still unarmed and there is hot debate about whether or not they should be as a matter of routine be given tasers

[nomadpete]

3 hours ago, Litespeed said:

The use of body cams in all interactions should be mandatory and a offense of office not to use it. 

I totally agree.. That helps to even out the playing field for both sides of the thin blue line. I think it should improve public trust, too.

 

I note that in US, the feds have prohibited the ICE from wearing body cameras. Are civilians permitted to wear body cameras?

Edited yesterday at 11:20 AM by nomadpete

[red750]

I have read that ICE agents do have bodycams but the images are not released so they cannot compromise their use as evidence in a trial. The video of the Minnesota murder were shot on the agent's phone camera.

[red750]

Apparently he posted it on his social media account as if he was proud of murdering her.

[nomadpete]

Seems that body cameras have not beed issued to all agents. If there was any body cam footage, it is being witheld.

 

Quote from Fox News (USA):-

 

MINNEAPOLIS (FOX 9) - Bystander videos showed an ICE agent shooting and killing a driver in south Minneapolis. It is not clear whether the ICE agent had a body-worn camera that recorded what happened right before the shooting. 

,...................

Body-worn camera footage from a similar incident there led to the dismissal of charges against a woman who was shot by a border patrol agent.

The woman was charged with trying to ram federal agents with her vehicle. DHS called her a "domestic terrorist." But the woman's attorney said the U.S. Attorney's Office dropped the charges after reviewing body-camera footage of the incident.

"And they're still labeling her a domestic terrorist, even though the charges have all been dropped by the attorney's office," Christopher Parente told the FOX 9 Investigators. "So in this case, I would tell everybody what I told them in our case. I would be very suspect of any press release that is put out right now by DHS."

[nomadpete]

9 hours ago, nomadpete said:

I note that in US, the feds have prohibited the ICE from wearing body cameras.

With apologies, I take that statement back. It came from a unverifiable source. I should have checked before posting.

[old man emu]

There are more than enough recordings of the incident made by independent witnesses that any body-cam video would be redundant. 

 

The problem is that a Federal Authority is ignoring the sovereignty of a State, something that is unconstitutional. But we are talking about the Trump Federal Government. 

[facthunter]

TO Restrict using of information is OBSTRUCTION  of Justice. The Perpetrators have already made their Position VERY clear. The Victim was Unarmed and attempting to drive away when she was Executed.  Where is the evidence of Police Injury? Nev

[Litespeed]

19 hours ago, Jerry_Atrick said:

I hope you're not conflating UK police with US police. Most here are still unarmed and there is hot debate about whether or not they should be as a matter of routine be given tasers

I refer not to militarism but the use of terrorism powers to do wholesale arrests of peaceful protesters for daring to support action in Palestine.

This is a gross abuse of powers.

[nomadpete]

Concerning the US border control agents, I am disgusted to see the 'agents' wearing large 'POLICE' labels on their uniform. As far as I can tell, they are NOT actually police, do not have police training, do not have the legal authority of police. Yet they are armed, and can use lethal force.

 

Another instance of over reach by a government 'authority'.

[Jerry_Atrick]

37 minutes ago, Litespeed said:

I refer not to militarism but the use of terrorism powers to do wholesale arrests of peaceful protesters for daring to support action in Palestine.

This is a gross abuse of powers.

Can you please point to the law in the UK that prevents protesting in support of Palestine as I know of no such law and I have a feeling you are confused. Also can you please point to a situation where the police have acted unlawfully in abuse of power against a peaceful pro Palestinian protest. You may not have all the facts

Edited 17 hours ago by Jerry_Atrick

[nomadpete]

The situation in US seems to cast the ICE staff as paramilitary. Neither real police nor military but more empowered than either. 

Not everyone is pleased.

But I don't see that changing things.

 

 

[Jerry_Atrick]

I hope Philadelphia's Sherrif is true to his word. Although, in terms of ICE, it could lead to a dangerous showdown. Maybe even the spark that sets off a civil war.

 

I lived in Philadelphia for about 6 months in all.. they are rougher than New Yorkers and straight talking

Edited 16 hours ago by Jerry_Atrick

[Litespeed]

4 hours ago, Jerry_Atrick said:

Can you please point to the law in the UK that prevents protesting in support of Palestine as I know of no such law and I have a feeling you are confused. Also can you please point to a situation where the police have acted unlawfully in abuse of power against a peaceful pro Palestinian protest. You may not have all the facts

Sure,

https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2025/07/uk-palestine-action-ban-disturbing-misuse-uk-counter-terrorism-legislation

 

 

[nomadpete]

Umm, Jerry.... not 'he'....

 

"Rochelle Bilal, was sworn into office on January 6, 2020. She is the first elected African American woman to hold sherriff position in Philly county's history.

[Jerry_Atrick]

4 hours ago, nomadpete said:

Umm, Jerry.... not 'he'....

Oops. 

 

5 hours ago, Litespeed said:

Sure,

https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2025/07/uk-palestine-action-ban-disturbing-misuse-uk-counter-terrorism-legislation

 

 

Ahh.. OK.. this is not the militarisation of the police like the US.. The police here do not use brutal tactics as they do in the USA. They are trained to first de-escalate and they don't usually send in fire-armed police as a first option unless the threat assessment is very serious. 

 

Whether you think it is right, PA is a proscribed terroirist organisations and there are laws against showing support to proscribed terrorist organisations. And the police have to uphold the law irrespective of their own political beliefs. 

 

Frankly, anything coming out og the UN Human Rights agency, council or whatever they call themselves has to be treated initially with some degree of scepticism. Apparently up to 10% UNRWA, a body within the UNHROC were affiliated with islamist militant groups including HAMAS. Yes, they are supposed to have all gone now, but does that remove the bias that allowed them there in the first place? Secondly, look at the members of the UN Human Rights Council: https://www.ohchr.org/en/hr-bodies/hrc/membership

 

I would suggest that those who have an honest repect the basic freedoms and rights of people ar probably in the minority. It is strange that they have sent delegations to Australia report on violence against women, yet have not sent delegations to Saudi, Pakistan and the like - other member nations. 

 

You can guess, I don't hold them in high esteem. 

 

The article purposts that PA has been a proscribed terrorist organisation becausde they damaged a few planes. Unfortunately, their website notifies they are proscribed, requests a donation in some obscure crytocurrency, so I cannot go to the source for their actual policies, agenda, etc. On the internet, it mainly talsk about them targetting Israeli firms in protest and limits it to property. However, the UK government has documented the following in https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2025/803/pdfs/uksiem_20250803_en_001.pdf

 

"Palestine Action
5.2 Palestine Action is a pro-Palestinian group with the stated aim to support Palestinian
sovereignty by using direct criminal action tactics to halt the sale and export of
military equipment to Israel. Since its inception in 2020, Palestine Action has
orchestrated a nationwide campaign of direct criminal action against businesses and
institutions, including key national infrastructure and defence firms that provide
services and supplies to support Ukraine, the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation
(NATO), “Five Eyes” allies and the UK defence enterprise. Palestine Action has also
broadened its targets from the defence industry to include financial firms, charities,
universities and government buildings. Its activity has increased in frequency and
severity since the start of 2024 and its methods have become more aggressive, with its
members demonstrating a willingness to use violence. Its activities meet the threshold
of being concerned in terrorism as set out in the Terrorism Act 2000.

 

There are varying defnitions of terrorism, but this is what Google spat out:

Terrorism is the calculated use or threat of serious violence against people or property, intended to intimidate the public or coerce a government for political, religious, or ideological goals, often by creating widespread fear

. Key elements include violent acts (murder, damage, endangering life) and specific intent (influencing government/public, advancing a cause). Definitions vary, but generally focus on these core components. 

 

So, it would seem the general definition is not limited to violence, despite being played down by the artiucle you present. 

 

Now, the UK may be unfairly acting against Palestinians and Muslims/Islam in general, but I don't think so on the evidence and definitions. After all, the UK, to its moneatry costs in exports of education, are not sanctioning the Muslim Bortherhood, where others do: https://www.ft.com/content/f256cc27-b80f-4fce-88cf-e80cb2451ef5

 

Also, as a display of how police tactics try (possibly too much) to de-escalate, here is a video documenting a policewoman receiving potentially life changing injuries at the hands of a PA protestor:

 

 

Unf, I couldn't find the video my son dug up, which was far more graphic. And this was before they were proscribed?

 

Peaceful prtest, eh? 

 

Just like Sydney jews were actively encouraged not to walk near the Palestinaian protests in Sydney and Melbourne because they were in danger.. because of the possibility ov violence purely because they were Jewish.

 

But I gues it is OK for some Palestinian supporter to taunt the Jews at Bondi after the attack? Actually, it is a free world so yes, but I recall the Jews getting heated but no violence emanating from it. 

 

Wake up and put your prejudices aside for a change. I am happy to say there are times where the UK police go too far, but seriously, peaceful protest! FFS! Israel also have stuff to answer for. But to paint the Palestinian protests in the UK as peaceful is generally a joke.. Yes there have been few - very few of them.

 

Shall we mention intimidation and threats of violence on the campuses etc.. where Jes had to be protected or refused entry to the campus.

 

The lsit goes on. 

 

UK police are generally very good. 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited 7 hours ago by Jerry_Atrick