USA TODAY US Edition

Law enforcemen­t needs protection, but not like this

-

FACEBOOK FACEBOOK.COM/ USATODAYOP­INION

President Trump rolled back an Obama administra­tion policy that restricted the transfer of military equipment to police forces.

Another great move, Mr. President. The more Obama policies you get rid of, the better the country gets. Keep up the good work.

Greg Allen

Wrong move. Military style weapons should not be used against citizens.

Do you want tanks on our streets?

Antonio Epperson

Keep on reversing the Obama policies and America will be back where it was 2008 in no time.

Larry James

This Trump move does nothing to protect police. It’s more likely to hurt the cause. We’ll see the same lapses in proper training as we did before. It was that lack of training that caused the ban on military equipment in the first place. The equipment and this policy rollback will probably lead to more injuries, which is hard to equate with safety. Matthew Farmer

Political groups bus in masked, violent, aggressive protesters to loot, burn and riot with violence as their goal. Look at the arsons, looting and violence associated with the Black Lives Matter protests and the campus protests.

Look at what happened in Charlottes­ville, Va.

Some protesters are increasing­ly and openly advocating the attack and ambush of police and Americans who are exercising their First Amendment rights.

Of course, our police need and deserve the best vests, vehicles, shields and arms to defend themselves and to defend law-abiding Americans and the property of those lawabiding Americans from increasing violence. Warren White

TWITTER @USATOPINIO­N

We asked what followers thought of Trump rolling back restrictio­ns on the transfer of military weapons.

Trump is clueless. His administra­tion is based solely on undoing Obama administra­tion policy. This policy suggests police war against people.

@ExtremeCyn­ic

We already live in a police state, and he is making it far worse. He knows this.

@ CLCurtis20­4 Military equipment implies police face an equivalent­ly armed threat. Armies face that, not police at minority protests.

@ silkysoul

I think it's a great idea. The police need to be equipped for any situation that they may face, and the situations get more dangerous daily.

@ jjzone44

For more of the conversati­on, follow @USATOpinio­n or #tellusatod­ay on Twitter.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States