Police Arrest Journalist and Delete Some of his Pics and vids, but not all the way

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
It's so cool that when it's someone you despise that it's OK for the government to use tanks and grenades on them.

Oh please- I never despised them, I felt sorry for the delusional fools from the start. They're the only kind of people who will knowingly kill Federal Agents, or hang with people who do. It's beyond stupid.

The tanks were just a way to get tear gas into the compound, & create pathways for those inside to escape. the grenades were CS.

If you're not lying to yourself, then you're deliberately lying to the rest of us.
 

monovillage

Diamond Member
Jul 3, 2008
8,444
1
0
Oh please- I never despised them, I felt sorry for the delusional fools from the start. They're the only kind of people who will knowingly kill Federal Agents, or hang with people who do. It's beyond stupid.

The tanks were just a way to get tear gas into the compound, & create pathways for those inside to escape. the grenades were CS.

If you're not lying to yourself, then you're deliberately lying to the rest of us.


Just because i know a hell of a lot more about it then you do doesn't mean I 'm lying when I tell you things you don't know.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waco_Siege

When the FBI's documents were turned over to Congress for an investigation in 1994, the page listing the use of the pyrotechnic devices was missing.[61] The failure for six years to disclose the use of pyrotechnics despite her specific directive led Reno to demand an investigation.[61] A senior FBI official told Newsweek that as many as 100 FBI agents had known about the use of pyrotechnics, but no one spoke up until 1999
 

Ninjahedge

Diamond Member
Mar 2, 2005
4,149
1
91
I think we are digressing.

I do not like what happened at Waco, but that was a 2 way F-up.

And it bears little on the police today and their "rights" or "need" for additional armaments or blind faith in their loyalty.

The police require answerability to another agency which should be answerable to the general public forming the circle of accountability needed to keep our own authoritarian instincts in check.

Humans are far from perfect, and putting too much responsibility of purity on one agency or another is an unreasonable and foolish assignment.
 

Darwin333

Lifer
Dec 11, 2006
19,946
2,329
126
No they are not.
AFV (that n00b's call "tanks") are used for figthing other AFV/APC/infantry.
Usually (today) witha 120 mm cannon as primary gun,

APC's are used for transporting troops on the battlefield and fire-support..with the norm being a 20 mm machine cannon as primary weapon.

Go read up:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armoured_fighting_vehicle

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armoured_personnel_carrier

Therein lies the confusion. To a layperson that isn't in the .mil nor are they familiar with .mil hardware because we aren't used to seeing it on the streets of the US it looks like a friggen tank.

They make armored SUVs if they are worried about getting shot up while in their vehicles and responding to any situation needing that kind of support (meaning there will be a shitload of cops responding). When has the last time a bunch of people unloaded on a bunch of cops in their vehicles and how many of those times would they have waited until the mini-tank (sans bigass gun) showed up?