NYPD to form heavily armed anti-terror/protestor unit

[OMGeverynameistaken]

http://nypost.com/2015/01/30/nypd-to-la ... ism-squad/

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/30/nyreg ... tions.html

tl;dr:
The NYPD is forming a 'Strategic Response Group,' equipped with 'heavy body armor' and 'machine guns' to deal with terrorists and protestors.


This is "machine guns" in the words of the police commissioner, not journalists, mind. Still, that can presumably mean anything from an SMG to a vehicle mounted 50 caliber machine gun. However, more disturbing than the simple existence of the unit (which is pretty goddamn disturbing,) is the fact that protesters are now apparently in the same category as terrorists, and that it is apparently official NYPD policy to employ machine gun armed paramilitary units against them.

[Mike the Progressive]

I suspect there's a reason why the NYT didn't use the title of this thread for their article. It's called hyperbole.

[Slakonian]

50 cal. machine guns against protestors? What the fuck? What's next apache helicopters?

It's logical to imply such tactics to terrorists but not to protestors

[Ifreann]

American police forces becoming militarised? Surely not!

---

50 cal. machine guns against protestors? What the fuck? What's next apache helicopters?

Don't be silly. Next is predator drones, then A-10 Warthogs, then Apache helicopters.

It's logical to imply such tactics to terrorists but not to protestors

Is it actually logical to employ .50 machine guns against terrorists?

[-The West Coast-]

You have to do what you must to watch over the innocent civilians at risk.

[Gauthier]

When it comes to gunning down hippies, Never Enuf Dakka. *nod nod*

[Korva]

Is it actually logical to employ .50 machine guns against terrorists?

Is it more logical to use pistol calibers?

If you want to kill someone at range, behind a wall, or inside a vehicle it makes sense to use larger caliber guns.

[Farnhamia]

American police forces becoming militarised? Surely not!

---

50 cal. machine guns against protestors? What the fuck? What's next apache helicopters?

Don't be silly. Next is predator drones, then A-10 Warthogs, then Apache helicopters.

It's logical to imply such tactics to terrorists but not to protestors

Is it actually logical to employ .50 machine guns against terrorists?

They do save time in dispersing a crowd, you can't deny that.

[Ifreann]

You have to do what you must to watch over the innocent civilians at risk.

I fail to see how this is something the NYPD must do, though.

---

When it comes to gunning down hippies, Never Enuf Dakka. *nod nod*

Ficks'd.

[-The West Coast-]

You have to do what you must to watch over the innocent civilians at risk.

I fail to see how this is something the NYPD must do, though.

Yeah, right! Who needs a functioning police department patrolling the streets protecting people from crime?

[Ifreann]

Is it actually logical to employ .50 machine guns against terrorists?

Is it more logical to use pistol calibers?

If you want to kill someone at range, behind a wall, or inside a vehicle it makes sense to use larger caliber guns.

Is this something the NYPD can realistically be expected to ever need to do? Does New York not have a National Guard?

---

American police forces becoming militarised? Surely not!

---

Don't be silly. Next is predator drones, then A-10 Warthogs, then Apache helicopters.


Is it actually logical to employ .50 machine guns against terrorists?

They do save time in dispersing a crowd, you can't deny that.

True enough.

[Gauthier]

I fail to see how this is something the NYPD must do, though.

Yeah, right! Who needs a functioning police department patrolling the streets protecting people from crime?

If machine guns are needed to patrol the streets and protect people from crime, you'd expect it to be Northern Ireland rather than New York City.

[Ifreann]

I fail to see how this is something the NYPD must do, though.

Yeah, right! Who needs a functioning police department patrolling the streets protecting people from crime?

Are you saying that without this proposed Strategic Response Group the NYPD cannot function as a police department? Because that sounds like bullshit to me.

[Farnhamia]

I fail to see how this is something the NYPD must do, though.

Yeah, right! Who needs a functioning police department patrolling the streets protecting people from crime?

They have over 30,000 police officers, a lot of them armed to the teeth. This new squad seems a bit excessive. And it's not going to be doing everyday patrolling, either.

[Korva]

Is it more logical to use pistol calibers?

If you want to kill someone at range, behind a wall, or inside a vehicle it makes sense to use larger caliber guns.

Is this something the NYPD can realistically be expected to ever need to do? Does New York not have a National Guard?

Which is quicker:

1) Governor declares state of emergency, National Guard units (with little to no training in the realm of counter-terrorism/hostage rescue) called up and deployed.
2) Local police unit gets emergency call, already has task force equipped and trained for the situation.

Within the articles posted I didn't see anything about heavy machine guns (and it is likely that the police would rarely, if ever, have need to suppress area targets at 1+km).

But I think the argument that it just never makes sense for police to use large caliber or "military" weaponry is a bit weak.

[Mizrad]

So it's just a SWAT team with a new name?

[Herskerstad]

As an anti-terror unit I can certainly see merit. I wonder how AK-brandishing terrorists would respond to incoming bulldozers.

But yeah, as an anti 'protest' utilization of 50 cal machine guns. Not going to happen.

[Farnhamia]

So it's just a SWAT team with a new name?

I guess. I couldn't find an official SWAT unit in the WIki article on the NYPD. Maybe regular patrol officers are so heavily armed now they disbanded it.

[The Black Forrest]

Yeah, right! Who needs a functioning police department patrolling the streets protecting people from crime?

They have over 30,000 police officers, a lot of them armed to the teeth. This new squad seems a bit excessive. And it's not going to be doing everyday patrolling, either.

They are? I was out there awhile back. The guys walking around didn't have heavy weaponry.

"advanced disorder control and counterterrorism protection,”

That's not exactly bring out the heavy weapons because occupy wall street is here!

[Korva]

So it's just a SWAT team with a new name?

I guess. I couldn't find an official SWAT unit in the WIki article on the NYPD. Maybe regular patrol officers are so heavily armed now they disbanded it.

NYPD has Emergency Service Unit (ESU).

[Mizrad]

So it's just a SWAT team with a new name?

I guess. I couldn't find an official SWAT unit in the WIki article on the NYPD. Maybe regular patrol officers are so heavily armed now they disbanded it.

I would be a little bit surprised. I mean it's doable considering organizations like the FBI, DEA, ATF and National Guard as well as event the local departments could get an equivalent unit on the ground within a short amount of time but I'm not always trustworthy of wikipedia. Then again it could be right expecially with this new unit being brought into service.

EDIT: Just saw above post. Makes sense now. In my area we've got an "SRT", not a lot of areas still call SWAT by "SWAT".

[Spirit of Hope]

So it's just a SWAT team with a new name?

I guess. I couldn't find an official SWAT unit in the WIki article on the NYPD. Maybe regular patrol officers are so heavily armed now they disbanded it.

The NYPD calls their SWAT teams Emergency Services Unit. It is SWAT with a different name, and they are more heavily armed and armored than patrol cops with very different training.

[Herskerstad]

So it's just a SWAT team with a new name?

I guess. I couldn't find an official SWAT unit in the WIki article on the NYPD. Maybe regular patrol officers are so heavily armed now they disbanded it.

Normal patrols? Nope. The NYPD got all kinds of task forces including submarine drones, parachute teams, ect, ect, list goes on and on. The normal patrols are not going around in heavy body armor with fully automatic smg's which is unlike most SWAT.

[Ifreann]

Is this something the NYPD can realistically be expected to ever need to do? Does New York not have a National Guard?

Which is quicker:

1) Governor declares state of emergency, National Guard units (with little to no training in the realm of counter-terrorism/hostage rescue) called up and deployed.
2) Local police unit gets emergency call, already has task force equipped and trained for the situation.

Which doesn't demonstrate any need for this task force.

Within the articles posted I didn't see anything about heavy machine guns (and it is likely that the police would rarely, if ever, have need to suppress area targets at 1+km).

Just machine guns, not heavy machine guns. I'm sure the local gun enthusiasts will revel in the opportunity to go on at length about the difference.

But I think the argument that it just never makes sense for police to use large caliber or "military" weaponry is a bit weak.

I'm not making that argument. I'm asking why the police need these weapons and this squad. "So they can kill people with them" and "So they can do so quickly" aren't very compelling reasons.

---

So it's just a SWAT team with a new name?

I guess. I couldn't find an official SWAT unit in the WIki article on the NYPD. Maybe regular patrol officers are so heavily armed now they disbanded it.

Maybe they don't want to be associated with the Colin Farrell movie of the same name.

[Central Kadigan]

It is troubling, although not at all surprising, that the NYPD treats terrorists and civil protestors the same.

When we have armed out domestic law enforcement as if it is an invading army against it's own citizens, then the terrorists have accomplished everything that they sought out to do.

Our foreign enemies don't have invade to destroy us; we are doing it to ourselves.

As journalist Edward R. Murrow commented during the "Red Scare" that engulfed our domestic policy during the Cold War: "We cannot defend freedom abroad by deserting it at home."