Ya, I had the same thought Frank. Also, every conservative I know believes the people ought to have the fire power. Of course, its the liberals, such as our host, that feels better with an unarmed populace.
The police chief in question is a conservative Democrat or the sort we don't see a lot of these days, except in the conservative south. He is a member in good standing of the Democratic Party. Note that I called him "conservative" rather than "Republican." I get tired of the argument that not all members of political parties are the same, even when i make it myself. So I referred to this as "conservative."
The militarization of police forces began in the 1970s, when Darrel Gates came up with the concept of SWAT teams. He was also responsible for the LAPD's purchase of an armored personnel carrier, the first police force to arm itself with military-style equipment. He was a conservative.
Since then, the get-tough-on-crime movement has been proudly conservative and proudly conservative. Liberals who oppose this kind of thing are routinely smeared by conservatives as "soft on crime."
There may be some conservatives who, based on conservative theory, disagree with this kind of thing. I disagree with it for what I think are highly conservative reasons having to do with government power.
But this is very much in the mainstream of conservative doctrine as it is practiced today -- and that kind of conservatism is largely a Republican phenomenon. Forget the theory; in the real world, this is American conservatism made manifest.
There are conservative Democrats, Steve, though not many of them. Just as there are liberal Republicans. Most of the conservative Democrats are from the south; most of the liberal Republicans are from the northeast.
Conservative and liberal aren't tidy classifications. Take it from me, a small government liberal. But if you asked this guy, he'd tell you he's a conservative. And if you ask people who gets tough on crime, most would answer conservatives. If you asked conservatives, they'd certainly agree.
You can claim these aren't conservatives, and in some theoretical sense I'd even agree with you. But this is what conservatism has become. You may not like it, but it's true.
Throwing away money on an item as ridiculous as that is NOT being tough on crime. I don't have to ask him to know that he is a democrat, so perhaps this wasteful spending is a shining example of democratic governance.
"There may be some conservatives who, based on conservative theory, disagree with this kind of thing. I disagree with it for what I think are highly conservative reasons having to do with government power."
Love this. You pulled the article from Reason mag. Isn't the heart of conservatism Free Markets and Free Minds? Surely a part of the movement has drifted, but this is more a function of the lack of ideological rigor that conservatives impose as compared to that seen in liberal salons. So your confusion is understandable.
You know, that's funny. Every conservative I know think that it's ridiculous for police to have the kind of fire power.
Posted by: Frank | 02/12/2009 at 08:33 PM
Ya, I had the same thought Frank. Also, every conservative I know believes the people ought to have the fire power. Of course, its the liberals, such as our host, that feels better with an unarmed populace.
Posted by: pursuit | 02/12/2009 at 09:50 PM
Yeah - that ain't right.
Posted by: Adam | 02/12/2009 at 10:49 PM
I think Tom sometimes uses the terms conservative and wing-nut interchangably.
Posted by: Wally | 02/12/2009 at 11:50 PM
Tom seldom, if ever, uses the term "wing-nut."
The police chief in question is a conservative Democrat or the sort we don't see a lot of these days, except in the conservative south. He is a member in good standing of the Democratic Party. Note that I called him "conservative" rather than "Republican." I get tired of the argument that not all members of political parties are the same, even when i make it myself. So I referred to this as "conservative."
The militarization of police forces began in the 1970s, when Darrel Gates came up with the concept of SWAT teams. He was also responsible for the LAPD's purchase of an armored personnel carrier, the first police force to arm itself with military-style equipment. He was a conservative.
Since then, the get-tough-on-crime movement has been proudly conservative and proudly conservative. Liberals who oppose this kind of thing are routinely smeared by conservatives as "soft on crime."
There may be some conservatives who, based on conservative theory, disagree with this kind of thing. I disagree with it for what I think are highly conservative reasons having to do with government power.
But this is very much in the mainstream of conservative doctrine as it is practiced today -- and that kind of conservatism is largely a Republican phenomenon. Forget the theory; in the real world, this is American conservatism made manifest.
Posted by: Tom | 02/13/2009 at 08:07 AM
Ya gotta love it. If a democrat does something you don't like you call him a conservative. Hilarious!
Oh, and I oppose police having this kind of firepower, I'm also conservative, Republican and from the South. You need to find some new stereotypes.
Posted by: Steve | 02/13/2009 at 01:00 PM
There are conservative Democrats, Steve, though not many of them. Just as there are liberal Republicans. Most of the conservative Democrats are from the south; most of the liberal Republicans are from the northeast.
Conservative and liberal aren't tidy classifications. Take it from me, a small government liberal. But if you asked this guy, he'd tell you he's a conservative. And if you ask people who gets tough on crime, most would answer conservatives. If you asked conservatives, they'd certainly agree.
You can claim these aren't conservatives, and in some theoretical sense I'd even agree with you. But this is what conservatism has become. You may not like it, but it's true.
Posted by: Tom | 02/13/2009 at 01:22 PM
Throwing away money on an item as ridiculous as that is NOT being tough on crime. I don't have to ask him to know that he is a democrat, so perhaps this wasteful spending is a shining example of democratic governance.
Come to think of it. That's exactly what it is.
Posted by: Steve | 02/13/2009 at 02:00 PM
"There may be some conservatives who, based on conservative theory, disagree with this kind of thing. I disagree with it for what I think are highly conservative reasons having to do with government power."
Love this. You pulled the article from Reason mag. Isn't the heart of conservatism Free Markets and Free Minds? Surely a part of the movement has drifted, but this is more a function of the lack of ideological rigor that conservatives impose as compared to that seen in liberal salons. So your confusion is understandable.
Posted by: pursuit | 02/13/2009 at 07:23 PM