Sweden’s prime minister has summoned the head of the military to discuss how the armed forces can help police deal with an unprecedented crime wave that has shocked the country with almost daily shootings and bombings.
Sweden’s prime minister on Thursday said that he’s summoned the head of the military to discuss how the armed forces can help police deal with an unprecedented crime wave that has shocked the country with almost daily shootings and bombings.
Getting the military involved in crime-fighting would be a highly unusual step for Sweden, underscoring the severity of the gang violence that has claimed a dozen lives across the country this month, including teenagers and innocent bystanders.
Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson said that he would meet with the armed forces’ supreme commander and the national police commissioner on Friday to explore “how the armed forces can help police in their work against the criminal gangs.”
Bear with me for a second. I am going to agree and disagree with you a bit.
While our law enforcement has more than its share of problems, I can't really think of any instances where it was militarized. Believe me, I am absolutely not a fan of police overreach or some of the idiot, power hungry cops that are out there.
There were some cases where different police agencies did receive surplus military equipment, for whatever reason. Weird, sure. Militarized, not quite. One or two armored personnel carriers does not make a military out of a police department.
We do have the national guard, and they have come in handy a few times. When the US has riots, we tend to have them on a fairly grand scale. It takes some serious manpower to manage them and local police simply don't have the resources. (1967: 12th Street riots; 82nd and 101st Airborne had to be called in after the National Guard)
Personally, I have been in ordered to shelter in place a couple of times when I lived in the D.C. area when SWAT had to lock down a block or two. Honestly, given the circumstances, I am quite glad that they had the equipment they had. The US has some really nasty places, for sure.
Should the a military be deployed because of rampant gang violence? Sure, if the manpower is needed and it's for a short time. However, it absolutely should bring laser focus on the fact that these gangs weren't disolved properly to begin with. If the government is being forced to apply controls to the entire population, there is something seriously wrong.
So, in short, the police shouldn't be militarized themselves, but sometimes having additional manpower on standby can be a good thing.
It can go absolutely overboard and I think we can look at the instability in Africa right now to prove that.
In Germany, the military cannot be deployed to use force inside Germany's borders in peacetime. This is part of the constitution. The military must not be used as a domestic instrument of power. You can guess where this is coming from. As such I always view it quite critically when other countries do this, because there is definitely a danger to it.
Police in America: Poopy Diaper
Police in other developed countries: Fresh Diaper
As ACAB as I am, at least the units they seem they will deploy have more than a daycamps worth of training. The problem with militarized forces in these situations is it can aggravate it further if not handled properly.
I'm looking at you 1985 Phillidalphia MOVE standoff. Even though they weren't a 'gang' but just defying the law together in a non-threatening way; the police took to just bombing the whole city block.
When you say they should focus on the dissolving of the gangs is exactly correct. Bringing force en masse to combat situational instances won't stop the problem from growing, you need to strategically remove the kingpins quickly to have the lower echelon fall apart.
This also in turn with leaneancy on potential criminal whistleblowers, so those associated already have a 'scapegoat' to get out of that environment.
I could be totally wrong though, this is all based off my perceptions as a Midwest American. I just assume the offenders are members of the same community.
All of this applies to the US. US law enforcement hasn't been militarised since Reconstruction in the 1870s. When people say "militarised police", they mean armored cars that can stop up to .308 rounds and carrying .223 rifles, both things that civilians can legally purchase. There is no police department in the US that has actual military equipment (outside of Coast Guard and DOD).
Meh, this military stuff is such an exaggeration. It’s mainly about politicians wanting to look like they are strong and doing stuff.
The military are by law allowed to carry out some tasks the police force can. The main example that has been brought up, is to guard buildings of importance. They also have other skills when it comes to technology, and could help the police with knowledge there. That’s the gist of it.
Would not call that copy anyone’s mistakes at all to be honest.
And the authoritarians keep moving up their positions.
The debate over here is fucking crazy, the post-fascist backed government is sneering at any proposed solution with any nuance or suggested preventative measures included. It's all fucking military intervention, insane deregulation of policing, surveillance, harsher punishments, regressive drug policy, and anti immigration populism.
Do we have an uptick in violence because of a very specific ongoing gang conflict, yes. But Jesus Christ, not anywhere near the level that would excuse anything close to this.
I agree that the current government is implementing exactly 0 long-term strategies to help deal with the root cause of the problems, like strengthening and financing social services and welfare, healthcare and mental healthcare, schools and social programs, decriminalizing some drugs etc, to curb influx of underage criminals into the gangs and remove some of the economical incentives. The opposition is coming out with good suggestion after good suggestion, and the right-wing (by Swedish standards) government has basically just slashed welfare across the board in practice. They are going for only the hard-on-crime approach, which as far as I know has no real scientific proof of long-term efficacy unless paired with social/community interventions.
However, I think many swedes agree that the police need more resources - particularly people watching possible targets of future bombings and just more eyes on the gangs. We have one of the lowest number of police per capita in Europe, slightly higher than the rest of the Nordic countries tbf, but with much bigger problems with organized crime and violence.
I'm also horrified at this general societal development, but I can see the merit of involving some of the military in more eyes-on-the-ground kinds of operations for a few years until we have more of a grip on the gang situation. I prefer that to visitation zones, harsher punishments and more generalized surveillance of non-suspects being allowed.
Yeah, I don't really disagree fundamentally with any of this apart from the fact that I don't think involving the military at this point is anywhere near warranted. We'll have to see what happens I guess, I think it could be mostly saber rattling. "Look how seriously we're taking this!".
But more police, and specifically more police on tasks that actually matter and aren't just being pursued to pad their stats? That's fine.
In Ireland we have the special criminal court, it allows for the views of officials to be taken as evidence. Absolutely ripe for corruption but so far it hasn't been used for that. It is a closed door court with only the accused and the verdict being open to the public.
I don't know man, my aunt got robbed and mugged in Norrland, of all places, like wtf. And as a culture we went from that being something you heard happening at 2 am in stockholm because a methead needed a fix asap. Now its something that has affected every family more or less in some way. I don't see a solution to swedens current crime cunundrum that does not include more "americanized" policing methods.
I'll bet you never wanted to talk about immigration without calling the person calling for less a "racist" or "ethnocentrist" until what? 5 years ago? When it started affecting you personally? Take your post-efterblivenhet and shove it up your ass. This problem has been created by hyper-racist, hyper-femenist, virtue signaling lefties who honestly believed that importing half a million illiterate, ignorant, idiots. Without language or job training. Was a good idea. As they would "auto assimilate" because swedish culture is just that superior.
I'll never forget or forgive you swedish commie bastards. Firebombed my car because I was a proud and outspoken anti-immigration proponent and the local sd youth speaker. The people who did it faced virtually no repercussions as they felt "threatened" by me. Existing.
I now live in a gated community in the US. Sweden will end up just like the NE US. You have, and the system protects you. Or you don't have and the system uses you. Solidariteten är över.
you're not outspoken anti-immigration proponent, you're a racist twat. so prideful of your country that when it needs help you ran away. keep your ignorant thoughts to yourself and let the adults speak.
This problem has been created by hyper-racist, hyper-femenist, virtue signaling lefties who honestly believed that importing half a million illiterate, ignorant, idiots. Without language or job training. Was a good idea
TIL Fredrik "Öppna Era Hjärtan" Reinfeldt is a virtual signaling leftist?
It's the typical Moderaterna playbook: increase load on the public services, and do a lot more privatisering to make it more "effective" (and line their pockets), as well as wage dumping for those few who were able to work well. As stuff started to get worse, they lose mandate. But new mandate can't clean up their problems very easily (and are too incompetent to do so), and so stuff keeps getting worse. People get tired, and they have awful memory, so they give power back to those who started the problem -- and suddenly they're interested in their "solutions" that lead to these problems in the first place and give up any freedoms left.
But keep pretending S started the problem. Their only fault was being too incompetent to fix integration and such from day 1.
As someone from the Northeast US that has lived here for the better part of 4 decades, people that live in gated communities are usually either retirees or twats scared of their own shadows.
Sug min importerade balle. Om du var en representant för svensk kultur så hade det förtjänat att dö. Men du representerar inte svensk kultur, du representerar en skara förlorare som inte har något annat att hänga hatten på än var de råkades födas. Dra åt helvete och hoppas att din art dör ut med dig. Såna som du är en skam för svensk kultur. Tack och lov så finns jag här för att berika det och balansera ut nollor som du. Du kan stanna med avskummen där borta, du förtjänar inte bättre.
These fascist fucks love to pretend that gang violence and poverty just appear out of nowhere, and their immediate recourse is always escalation of very same state violence that generated the unrest.
I mean the "venstre" party in Denmark are also teetering close to far right idealisms as well? The vitriol in your comment seems wildly misplaced for something that could have been otherwise politely explained.
The most recent increase is from one of the largest gangs splintering. Different groupings and gangs are attacking each other and each others families, trying to gain power. Is what the news seems to say.
On the larger scale, if you look to scientists, criminologists, and not politicians, there are a lot of contributing factors. Hardest anti-drugs laws in Europe, more or less, failing school systems, failing integration, gentrification. All contribute to create a high risk high reward enviornment that seem worth it to a lot of people compared to a more ordinary life.
Sweden has accepted a LOT of refugees over the last eight years. Now 20% of the entire country is foreign born. Much higher when you include second and third generation migrants.
What’s clear from the data is that not all refugees commit crime at the same rate. Refugees from Vietnam, for example, committed very low crime. Ditto for Ukrainian refugees. Syrian and Somali refugees, on the other hand, have sky high crime. Sweden has accepted a lot of refugees from these regions, among others.
Right now it's an internal gang conflict that has escalated to killing relatives, and at least one mom. It's become brutal enough to happen in the open streets in some cases, and there's been a few unrelated innocents caught in the cross fire as well.
The split seems to partly be over the use of younger and younger kids for the deeds, and the escalating brutality.
The gang in question is the Foxtrot Network led by Rawa Majid, who is funnily enough hiding in Turkey and has apparently had help by a high up turkey police official.
That's the very quick version, but there should be quite a bit of info if you google "Rawa Majid Foxtrot".
Curious too. Scandinavian countries have such a reputation for being modern and progressed nations with a perfectly working welfare state and high internal stability and ideally dutiful citizens.
just one example: out of all european countries sweden is the least integrative with the lowest number of migrants finding a job within 15 years of living in sweden. nationalisms way got paved by the laziness of the swede who rather throws money at a problem than brains.
STOCKHOLM (AP) — Three people were killed overnight in separate incidents in Sweden as deadly violence linked to a feud between criminal gangs escalated.
Hours later, one man was killed and another was wounded in a shooting in Jordbro, south of the Swedish capital.
Two gangs — one led by a Swedish-Turkish dual national who lives in Turkey, the other by his former lieutenant — are reportedly fighting over drugs and weapons.
Earlier this week, two powerful explosions ripped through dwellings in central Sweden, injuring at least three people and damaging buildings, with bricks and window sections left spread outside.
On Thursday, Anders Thornberg, the police chief, said the feud “is a serious threat to the safety and security of the country” of 10 million people that is often considered a safe place with a low crime rate.
Strömmer said that it was “not relevant to deploy the military,” but that he was prepared to listen to all parties when it comes to solving the wave of violence.
The original article contains 479 words, the summary contains 168 words. Saved 65%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
About twenty years ago, a black and female coworker moved to Sweden, because the culture was more accepting and offered her better work and wages. No place is safe. I’m very sorry to think of how she might be faring.
This happens when you have uncontrolled immigration from Muslim countries. They called it "cultural enrichment". Other countries can only learn from this. This is my home country and I don't want to live with those people here. They have no right to live in Sweden and behave like this.
Religion is a cancer. If you let religous people into a secular country they will metastasize. Yes there are some christians in Sweden, but only 1/3rd are even religious enough to bother baptizing their children(which is a requirement to not suffer eternal torture). I'd wager a fair number of those baptisms are a matter of tradition.
It's not a matter of their race, it's a matter of their backwards beliefs about a sky dictator that tells them women and science are evil.