Narrow Search

  • Show Only

  • Category

  • Narrow by Date

    • All
    • Today
    • Last 7 Days
    • Last 30 Days
    • Select a Date Range

Comment Archives: Stories: News+Opinion: Public Policy LTD.

Re: “Police ballistic vests are a greenlight for CPD to militarize

Retired Sheepdog, why blame Obama? He has opposed the killings of police officers, he is very compassionate on police in general. He just does not like when some officers behave irresponsibly, like stopping blacks for no reason except they are black. Sure, Obama is not perfect, but then nobody is. Obama has been the best president this country has ever had. All previous presidents had major faults.

5 of 11 people like this.
Posted by Tom Martin on July 30, 2016 at 11:58 AM

Re: “Police ballistic vests are a greenlight for CPD to militarize

Almost all police everywhere in the US have been wearing body armor for decades. However, that "soft" body armor is only rated to stop pistol and shotgun projectiles.

This is "hard" body armor which can stop rifle rounds (it's steel or ceramic). I am sure the Charleston SWAT team already has this. I guess they are buying more now since BLM nutjobs want to assassinate police.

0 of 1 people like this.
Posted by Cid95 1 on July 29, 2016 at 6:01 PM

Re: “Don't let Nikki Haley's transformation fool you

Lee why do you love democrats so much?

Posted by Randall Floyd on July 29, 2016 at 4:30 PM

Re: “Police ballistic vests are a greenlight for CPD to militarize

As a former resident of Charleston County who returns at least once a year for a visit; it's nice to see that the "City Paper" has not lost its sense of humor.

Unfortunately, by publishing this article in a less than objective fashion, it is not doing a credible service to its readers who might only get their printed news from this paper.

I don't know the author's professional background, however, based on his commentary, I'm pretty sure he never served a day in a law enforcement uniform. So, as a career law enforcement officer, I will offer some objective facts that the author of this piece failed to provide.

There is a war on law enforcement officers, courtesy of the Obama administration. It goes back to the incident in Cambridge, MA in 2009 where Mr. Obama passed judgment on the officers involved and the agency before the ink was dry on the arrest report.

It can also be traced back to when Eric Holder was the Attorney General of the US, and failed to prosecute both domestic and foreign terrorists (Black Panthers for voter intimidation, and GITMO detainees who were returned only to fight some more). AND AND

Now fast forward to the present day.

As of 28 July 2016, law enforcement line of duty deaths are up approximately 8% over this same time frame last year.

There are only about 900,000 total sworn law enforcement personnel, serving a nation of residents and visitors that exceeds 300 MILLION people. And on average, a law enforcement officer is killed in the line of duty every 61 hours or so.

You should also know that a black Harvard professor jut released a study that shows that claims of racist deadly force incidents by law enforcement have no merit. AND the actual study is here.

Your readers should also know that ballistic vests have a safety rating of approximately 5 years, which can be reduced somewhat in high heat and humidity environments (it has been rather warm this week).

Your claim that no ordinary citizen can buy body armor is also false. There's a company out of Kentucky that has a wonderful selection.

And at around $500 per vest when bulk ordering, $250,000 should outfit the department with new vests, that will last about 5 years.

So, for yours and your reader’s future endeavors, feel free to use the following open sourced items for your research into actual news reporting.

Personally, if I were your editor, I would have at least suspended you over this piece; unless of course this is your normal effort, then I would have fired you.

It’s one thing to be left leaning, it’s another to totally disregard objective fact based reporting.

God bless the USA and all her allies.

8 of 10 people like this.
Posted by Retired Sheepdog on July 28, 2016 at 12:52 PM

Re: “Police ballistic vests are a greenlight for CPD to militarize

You forgot the third thing the shootings have in common; they were resisting arrest (fighting). Another asinine article from a liberal. Why not take their guns away also, so they will have no defense at all?

7 of 14 people like this.
Posted by Showmoor on July 28, 2016 at 8:09 AM

Re: “Police ballistic vests are a greenlight for CPD to militarize

Actually the vests they want to order are a great idea. They work better against the high powered rifles that lunatics prefer. I want the all the p-dogs to get this type of vest as well. I think they are also entitled to safety. And the 50,000 in riot gear is nothing. Better to buy this stuff for them, then to pay for any of the stupid asinine studies to see where the crime is located, as we have in the recent past.

14 of 16 people like this.
Posted by Cia Culinarykid on July 27, 2016 at 9:38 PM

Re: “Police ballistic vests are a greenlight for CPD to militarize

I thought policeman automatically wore bullet proof vests???🤔🤔🤔

2 of 4 people like this.
Posted by eden0718 on July 27, 2016 at 9:03 PM

Re: “Police ballistic vests are a greenlight for CPD to militarize

Seems like the media has declared an all out war on the police as of late. Why not get them these to keep them safe? People are throwing bricks at "peaceful" protests. I have no issue at all with this as a city of Charleston resident. I have nothing but respect for these officers and what they deal with day to day. If you have a problem; who are you going to call? Sorry to tell you but ghost busters are fictional.

6 of 9 people like this.
Posted by Kimmyk1031 on July 27, 2016 at 7:57 PM

Re: “Police ballistic vests are a greenlight for CPD to militarize

Mat, the next time you are in trouble why bother the police, seems that you have a strong disregard for their safety.

6 of 9 people like this.
Posted by Ben West on July 27, 2016 at 2:06 PM

Re: “Police ballistic vests are a greenlight for CPD to militarize

Ballistic vests? As in vests designed to stop a bullet if you get shot? Of course. Why should cops wear a vest that could save their lives?

8 of 10 people like this.
Posted by jadenova on July 27, 2016 at 12:37 PM

Re: “Police ballistic vests are a greenlight for CPD to militarize

"sorry, until there's a trial, you're still a citizen and you have rights"

Yes, and so does the officer. If you are a fleeing suspect and you are shooting at the officer (or about to) the officer, just like any other citizen, has a right to defend themselves. The officer (unlike citizens) also has a right to fire in defense of the society at large as well.

Now, this is not meant to excuse some of the actions seen by law enforcement. however, despite the dozen or so incidents seen on YouTube or media recently, these incidents are still, by far, in the minority. The vast majority of officer / citizen interactions are done calmly, professionally, and occasionally in, a friendly manner.

7 of 11 people like this.
Posted by Jshicke on July 27, 2016 at 12:18 PM

Re: “Police ballistic vests are a greenlight for CPD to militarize

I'm not sure if my previous comment went through, so I'll sum up in another one:

Militarize: to put weapons and military forces in (an area) or to give a military quality or character to (something) - Merriam-Webster, 27 July, 2016.
How does giving police ballistic vests (a.k.a. bullet proof vests), militarize the CPD? Simple, it doesn't. How does protecting our officers, our 'blue lives', militarize them? Joe Public can buy the vests, why can't CPD? If Joe Public can militarize, then the PD's around the country need to as well (North Hollywood Shootout anyone?). Sounds like the media isn't reporting the whole story again (surprise!!!). You say the 'citizen' has rights, and you are correct. However, certain citizens, let's call them convicted felons, don't have certain rights; the right to bear arms, to conceal said firearm in their pocket while resisting arrest and reach for said firearm during the arrest. That's one example. Maybe what you should be writing about is how certain cultures are raised to hate police, how that life is glorified in music videos and movies and songs. What you should be writing is "If stopped by a police officer, show respect, do what you are instructed to do, no sudden movements & explain what and where you are reaching for..."etc. Oh, and don't forget the biggest thing you should write "Don't kill anyone, be they a blue life, a black life, a yellow/brown/red/"
Now, had the CPD ordered four tanks for crowd control, then you could argue militarization. But to anyone with their head on their shoulders, vests are a good thing for our officers.

20 of 26 people like this.
Posted by Craig Gary on July 27, 2016 at 9:49 AM

Re: “Charleston can't handle an influx of new residents

Good written article, but you're all exaggerating. This is what it's like to live in a desirable city, for whatever reason that it may be desirable. Growth creates other issues and growth is inevitable because of things like the internet that make viewing other POSSIBILITIES aside from a "Rust Belt" or "Ice Pack" more interesting. The tech age allows for this and if you trade spaces with someone from Philadelphia, you're going to think of it even worse and the Philladelphian the opposite. If you want small down, go live in Georgetown. People have trouble getting bridges fixed and roads built just the same in Pennsylvania or NY. Heck, in Western NY, bridges are crumbling onto cars. Stop it with the bubble-bashing. Embrace it. Learn that your commute is now 30 instead of 20 minutes. Deal with it.

And to people bashing the Jasper project, shove it. You don't get to decide what a developer can do outside of the master zoning plan for a community. Maybe show up to the meetings 10 years ago and complain before whining about it 15 years later.

1 of 2 people like this.
Posted by rorytmeadows on July 21, 2016 at 11:58 AM

Re: “Charleston can't handle an influx of new residents

LOL assigning party politics to our local government.

In the lowcountry there are developers, and everyone else--and our local governing bodies are inundated with developers that care not for anyone else's opinion.

4 of 4 people like this.
Posted by leemajors on July 20, 2016 at 12:58 PM

Re: “Charleston can't handle an influx of new residents

Sonia Faye, not sure if you know it, but Charleston has been under Democrat government for the last 40 years, so you can stop blaming everything on the other party. They are the ones allowing the growth in Charleston, your party.

3 of 7 people like this.
Posted by Showmoor on July 20, 2016 at 8:38 AM

Re: “Charleston can't handle an influx of new residents

Where's the insight here people? Say? Tell us something we don't know. Do not give this article esteem. Expect more from a columnist called Mat Catastrophe.

Use that 'PRESS' badge. This is a News+Opinion piece...what is your opinion? That this article was even posted and then heralded by the community shows that we have a lack accountability to our city as its citizens.

Mat Cat, man, do better. I think you can. Or CP, let this guy write what he really wants. It's a waste of your platform in the community to publish something like this. Take a chance, or you'll be just another entertaining/cutesy about saturation.

2 of 6 people like this.
Posted by one idiot on July 18, 2016 at 10:04 AM

Re: “Charleston can't handle an influx of new residents

Sonia Faye says "Transplants change the character of the places they migrate too and turn them into the same cesspools that they escaped from in the first place. You come here for low taxes. Infrastructure increases taxes. Which do you want? Low taxes or infrastructure? Can't have it both ways."

This transplant didn't come here for low taxes - I came from Massachusetts - NOT a cesspool BTW - to escape winter snow and cold - period. I'd be happy to pay more in taxes to make infrastructure improvements and while I'm at it I'll throw in some extra for better schools.

6 of 10 people like this.
Posted by Mixbee on July 18, 2016 at 8:51 AM

Re: “Charleston can't handle an influx of new residents

All of you idiots wanted it and ypu got it. Boeing put the quality of life in Charleston into the grave and Volvo is going to shovel the dirt on top to fill tbe hole.

Too late to start crying now...

7 of 9 people like this.
Posted by The Super Saturn on July 17, 2016 at 6:01 PM

Re: “Charleston can't handle an influx of new residents

check the local highways. at times of the day the traffic is >20-30% container trucks. SC's plan? dredge the rivers so larger ships can load an unload. All while they enjoy the nation's lowest gas prices. it's not LACK of focus, it's no focus whatsoever. And as long as the Beach Company has a stranglehold on local development that's not going to change either.

6 of 6 people like this.
Posted by ncspartan on July 16, 2016 at 7:43 PM

Re: “Charleston can't handle an influx of new residents

Influx of new residence? Heck, Mayor Woolsey and his Town of James Island can't even come close to dealing with its obligations to its existing residence. Meanwhile he isn't he violating the promise he used to get elected by raising taxes. Why is lying to get elected not an ethics violation? Any fool can stay within budget if they can raise revenue by fiat. But while Woolsey is an economics professor, he doesn't seem to have a clue regarding the cost benefits of municiple services. That's if you could even call the Town a municipality. Essentially it is an oligarchy, run by upper class bureauracratic elitest that is not going bankrupt anytime soon. Except perhaps morally. Clearly its residents deserve better. That might happen if the Town would merge with the City of Charleston. But don't hold your breath on that one. It just makes too much sense.

2 of 3 people like this.
Posted by Street Law on July 16, 2016 at 5:38 PM
Classified Listings

Powered by Foundation   © Copyright 2016, Charleston City Paper   RSS