quote:

Originally posted by a1abdj:

quote:

The first time it was used was to drive through flooded areas and evacuate people from their homes.

Which is a perfect example of exactly what they were not designed to do, and whomever made that decision putting their officers and the public at risk.

I'll paint with a broad brush, because some versions are slightly better than others, but:

Pavement covered with water, especially moving water, is generally a weaker surface than when it's dry. Combine that with an excessively heavy truck. So you punch through the pavement, fall off the edge, and end up in a ditch. With all of that weight up top, rolling it is a very good possibility.

So how does that work for those inside, upside down, in a flooded area?

You know what works really good in those circumstances? 2.5 or 5 ton military cargo trucks. That's what they are built to do. Much lighter, and much less likely to roll. And if they do roll? You're not trapped inside of a machine where you can't get the doors open.

But again, I know why they take that risk. It's free, it has the agency's name painted down the side, and it's good publicity so long as nobody dies in it. Doesn't make it smart.

I’m not picking a fight with you but they only weigh 14 to 18 tons. Given that we have 40 ton tractor trailers driving down the road I’m not sure the weight is a big issue. If I were to drive a vehicle into moving water I would want some serious weight and clearance to avoid being swept away...
JMHO.

quote:

Originally posted by kimber1911:

quote:

Who is to say that the funds are not solely tied to criminal convictions?

Wow! I would hope so. Curious though, how else would funds be forfeited if not tied to criminal convictions?

Civil asset forfeiture historically has not historically "required" criminal convictions or even charges. This is a big part of what has made it so controversial. An example of this would be an agency stopping a vehicle on the highway and finding ten thousand dollars hidden in the spare tire or something. The police seize it and apply for asset forfeiture. The motorist is then left to have to fund their own case to get it back. There are some obvious due process arguments. There are people that are going to say it's "obvious" the money is the proceeds from some sort of illegal activity and there are those that are going to say there's nothing "obvious" about it and there government has no business touching it.

But what about when it's a hundred thousand dollars? Or it's hidden in a door panel or in the gas tank? And then you factor in the disproportionate number of (otherwise) indigent people caught up in these cases.

Like I said, complicated.

quote:

Originally posted by DaBigBR:

quote:

Originally posted by kimber1911:

quote:

Who is to say that the funds are not solely tied to criminal convictions?

Wow! I would hope so. Curious though, how else would funds be forfeited if not tied to criminal convictions?

Civil asset forfeiture historically has not historically "required" criminal convictions or even charges. This is a big part of what has made it so controversial. An example of this would be an agency stopping a vehicle on the highway and finding ten thousand dollars hidden in the spare tire or something. The police seize it and apply for asset forfeiture. The motorist is then left to have to fund their own case to get it back. There are some obvious due process arguments. There are people that are going to say it's "obvious" the money is the proceeds from some sort of illegal activity and there are those that are going to say there's nothing "obvious" about it and there government has no business touching it.

But what about when it's a hundred thousand dollars? Or it's hidden in a door panel or in the gas tank? And then you factor in the disproportionate number of (otherwise) indigent people caught up in these cases.

Like I said, complicated.

Yeah, it seems especially "complicated" for those who are the beneficiary of the "forfeited" funds.

Anything that provides the good guys an advantage over the bad guys, I am all for it.

quote:

Originally posted by Wolfpacker:
Anything that provides the good guys an advantage over the bad guys, I am all for it.

\\

Until the good guys become the bad guys....

of course I was totally confused by the title of this.... was wondering why the Cedar Rapids police needed 22lr single action Rugers.....

quote:

Originally posted by kimber1911:
“The vehicle cost $297,061 and the sheriff's office says it will be paid by asset forfeiture money collected from illegal criminal activity.”

Military equipment to the cops who illegally seize assets without trial. Wonderful. Maybe we can get them some gunships, too.

quote:

I’m not picking a fight with you but they only weigh 14 to 18 tons. Given that we have 40 ton tractor trailers driving down the road I’m not sure the weight is a big issue.

It's a combination of things. As the entire weight goes, there may my roads or bridges than can not support the weight. If you're only driving them on major roads then weight itself is no problem.

Big trucks that haul more weight have more wheels, sometimes more axles, and a spread on those axles that makes everything a bit more manageable. But have you ever seen what happens to these types of trucks when they start going off pavement?

The Bearcat weighs roughly half of what the lightest MRAP does. Which one would you rather drive through the front yard of a house if your plan is to reach the front door before you sink up to the axles?

quote:

If I were to drive a vehicle into moving water I would want some serious weight and clearance to avoid being swept away...

MRAPs have a certified fording depth of 30-40 inches depending upon model. Military cargo trucks have fording depths of 72 inches.

The leading cause of injuries and deaths with MRAPs are roll over situations. So much so that the military built roll over simulators just to train the guys who operated them on how to get out. The only thing worse than rolling over on a road is rolling over in water.

MRAPs are designed as convoy vehicles to operate on mostly "improved" road surfaces and resist road side bombs. It's not the right tool for the job. You can go to Home Depot and buy a hammer to install some screws, but most people would suggest the right tool for that job, a screwdriver.

MRAPs are not the best tool for anything the police would use it for short of some sort of bomb situation. If you Google around a bit, there are plenty of photos of these things stuck, flipped, and wrecked. That's the nature of this particular beast.

And there are several models of these, some better suited for some tasks better than others. So I'm painting with a broad brush to some degree, because specific individual situations would be better for particular models. The smaller versions usually being a bit better choice than the larger versions.