Trump threatens to take federal control of D.C.

jimc said:

The weapons that National Guard troops now carry in Washington, D.C.

The pistols and powerful rifles guard members carry are similar to those local police use across the country. Troops have been told to use their weapons only as a last resort.

www.nbcnews.com

"Armed guard members will carry the type of weapon they are normally issued and trained on, typically M17 handguns and M4 semiautomatic rifles, similar to assault-style rifles, the Defense Department officials said. Some guard members will carry M9 pistols."

"The military weapons are similar to those used by local police departments across the United States. The M4 is a standard semiautomatic rifle and has roughly the same capabilities as semiautomatic rifles used by law enforcement agencies."

I may be wrong, but isn't the M4 a select-fire rifle?

Click to expand...

jimc said:

The weapons that National Guard troops now carry in Washington, D.C.

The pistols and powerful rifles guard members carry are similar to those local police use across the country. Troops have been told to use their weapons only as a last resort.

www.nbcnews.com

"Armed guard members will carry the type of weapon they are normally issued and trained on, typically M17 handguns and M4 semiautomatic rifles, similar to assault-style rifles, the Defense Department officials said. Some guard members will carry M9 pistols."

"The military weapons are similar to those used by local police departments across the United States. The M4 is a standard semiautomatic rifle and has roughly the same capabilities as semiautomatic rifles used by law enforcement agencies."

I may be wrong, but isn't the M4 a select-fire rifle?

Click to expand...

jimc said:

"Armed guard members will carry the type of weapon they are normally issued and trained on, typically M17 handguns and M4 semiautomatic rifles, similar to assault-style rifles, the Defense Department officials said. Some guard members will carry M9 pistols."

Click to expand...

spat said:

For the most part the police *do* their job.

They make tons of arrests.

If the criminals weren't back on the street in hours the problem would go away.

This is entirely on the prosecutors, judges, and legislators.

Click to expand...

SonOfSun said:

I'd argue that is mostly on the legislators. Many judges want to hold people but "bail reform" prevents them from doing so. Many judges have complained about it, rightly so by the way.

Bail reform was needed to a degree, but that pendulum swang way too far the other way. If it's a first time offender for a non-violent act I don't want them stuck in jail taking up taxpayer resources. I'm not saying to not hold them accountable, they still need to go through the courts and have a punishment doled out if found guilty, but a first time offender that stole a loaf of bread doesn't need to be stitting in jail while waiting. It's wasteful of tax dollars. On the other hand violent acts, acts of severe public safety (ie. Drunk driving, Hit and run, etc.) or repeat non-violent offenders should be getting held in jail while waiting trial. No bail - you did something bad enough that you get to sit and think about it until trial or you didn't learn your lesson the first time on a lesser act to reconsider future actions.

Click to expand...