Skip to content

Concord New Hampshire may purchase a military style armored vehicle

July 29, 2013

 Concord New Hampshire is in the process of using a Federal grant to purchase an armored vehicle. In an age when the Federal government is collecting data on our phone calls and our email correspondence,  and in an era where we will see 20,000 drones flying overhead by the year 2020, the obvious question is; why is the Department of Homeland Security, which has purchased billions of round of hollow point bullets, handing out grants to the cities across the nation for the purchase of such vehicles? 

  We need look no further than earlier this year in Boston. After the marathon bombing we saw defacto Martial Law declared and a militarized police force roaming the streets and forcibly (in some cases) violating the Constitutional rights of American citizens by illegally entering their homes without a warrant.

    Concord officials are claiming they want to purchase this vehicle to protect the police and the people in the rare event that there is a terrorist attack or a riot in the city. They claim that it will be used rarely, if at all, but the truth is, in my opinion, that this is not about protecting the people or the police, and is all about militarizing the police force. And this is going to happen all across the nation as cities accept this Federal money.

  Sure, the vehicle may be used sparingly at first but once people get used to seeing this on the streets the program will do what all government programs do over time–grow and expand to the point where seeing armored vehicles on the streets is commonplace.

  Boston was a test run and the government must be more than pleased with the results, after all, there was nary a negative word about the Constitutional violations during the manhunt even though it was an average American citizen who found the bomber and not the militarized police.

  Boston allowed these violations to take place and now we are going to see more and more of this type police action in the future for our own good. Boston Strong? My ass!

  People of Concord, I implore you to step up and stop this in its infancy! Between the data-mining, the drones, the targeting of political enemies, and now this, the country is already in a soft police state, the only question is; how long will it be before we are in a hard police state if we allow this to continue? Please remember that under the NDAA the United States has already been deemed a battlefield and the indefinite detention of American citizens has already been authorized.

39 Comments leave one →
  1. July 29, 2013 7:02 pm

    Of all places. Concord. Maybe they need to look back on their history.


    • July 29, 2013 7:05 pm

      Oop, I need to check my history!


      • July 29, 2013 7:59 pm

        LOL! No worries, Michelle Bachman made the same mistake when she was running for president while speaking in New Hampshire. She really didn’t know her history where you simply made a mistake. There is a big difference.


      • cmblake6 permalink
        July 30, 2013 5:20 pm

        Only a stone’s throw away, as the crow flies. No worries.


      • July 30, 2013 7:39 pm



  2. Petermc3 permalink
    July 29, 2013 7:23 pm

    Martha’s Vineyard could use a couple of those armored puppies for protection against the Marxist invaders due in from Washington DC. any day now.


  3. July 29, 2013 7:24 pm

    You are right to be concerned about this move Steve. Don’t know if you’ve ever thought about it, but have you wondered why southerners cling to their guns and bibles more than any other group in this nation? We felt the full impact of being a conquored nation in the years following the War between the States and know full well the weight of oppression that was on us from 1865 until 1876—eleven long years. With us resistance to a central government that’s out of control is in the blood. When one stops to think about it we, in the south, are the only part of the nation that has been under occupation since the american revolution. And we do not forget, althought that part of history is being hidden by revisionist. Sorry, but this hits a sore spot with me. I dougt a New Englander would understand.


    • July 29, 2013 8:02 pm

      You know I never really thought about it like that before, but I do understand because I happen to believe Lincoln overstepped his bounds was no friend to the Constitution. The South felt firsthand what the Federal government can do.


    • July 30, 2013 12:30 am

      I have been having a discussion with an unpleasant person regarding state nullification of federal laws and the Supreme Court as being final arbiter on Constitutionality of laws. This person makes some very vitriolic statements about nullification being racist, how the racist South used it to protect slavery, and that only racists believe in nullification. That is is actually treasonous to believe in nullification.

      I NEVER even thought of the idea of nullification as being able to be racist. People are racist, nullification is just a state protecting its people from unconstitutional federal laws. Have you heard of this idea? I realize that the REASON a state might want to nullify a federal law may not be moral, but that the IDEA of nullification is itself racist? I never heard of that before.

      His belief that the states have no recourse against SCOTUS upholding an unconstitutional law, seems to fly in the face of the ideals on which our Country was founded. He actually believes that if SCOTUS rules a law is Constitutional, that means it IS, final decision, no way to change it. His vehemence really kind of threw me, it was not a pleasant discussion.


      • July 30, 2013 3:48 am

        The idea of nullification came about as a result of the tariff of 1828. That protective tariff was placed on imported manufactured goods, primarily coming into the country from England. Its purpose was to protect young industries in the northeast from cheap foreign imports. Imports that the south relied on. Hence the conflict between those in the south and those in the north. This idea of nullification was advanced by John C. Calhoun of South Carolina. Calhoun who resigned his position of Vice President as a protest over the Tariff as the President Andy Jackson supported it. It’s a rather long story, which I don’t have the time to into now. Back to the point of nullification being racist—nullification was born of the Tariff and states rights and at that point in time when little or nothing was said about slavery in the southern states. Jackson was able to get a “Force Bill” through Congress which authorized him to use troops to enforce the tariff, but before that happen Henry Clay of Kentucky introduced a compromise bill that averted the conflict and gave those supporters of Calhoun’s position a way out. The Tariff was cut by some 10% over the the next 8 years. S.C. repealed the nullification bill and the “Force Bill” of Jackson was a moot point. The idea of nullification, and secession did not die as we all know and would lead in the end to the onrushing events of history and the “War for Southern Independence”—-We have never liked the term “Civil War” here in Dixie, HA!


      • July 30, 2013 5:47 am

        I think Ron nailed it, there really isn’t much I can add to that.
        I have heard people use the racist argument before because nullification was first used by the South prior to the Civil War. I think some people think that SC used it to protect slavery but as Ron pointed out it was actually going to be used for tax reasons.


      • lou222 permalink
        July 30, 2013 7:24 am

        Laura, I am starting to think that “racist” is brought out when they have nothing else to argue with. Usually it stops people in their tracks when that word is used, however, it is having less and less effect on people now. The race baiters, Sharpton and Jackson and yes Obama have overused it. Read again what Ron said, he has really laid it out well.


      • July 30, 2013 1:11 pm

        Thank you, Ron, for your explanation. Southern independence, I like that. 🙂

        Thanks, Steve and Lou, also.


      • lou222 permalink
        July 30, 2013 1:56 pm

        Laura, after I posted, it looked like I was telling you to “read” what Ron posted, again. What I meant was (I)Read, what he said again. It is hard sometimes to get your point across with just words. Hope you didn’t think I meant for YOU to do it again, haha!


      • July 30, 2013 4:05 pm

        lou, my friend, worry not another moment. When I read that sentence, my mind registered only your appreciation for, and agreement with, Ron’s explanation. 🙂


      • July 30, 2013 7:40 pm

        Ron is also fond of calling it the ‘War of Northern Aggression’ if I remember correctly.


  4. July 29, 2013 7:55 pm

    It is a dangerous trend we are seeing, Steve. I hope the people of Concord listen to you.


    • July 29, 2013 8:03 pm

      People seem to look at these issues individually and think they are no big deal, but when you put them all together it is a different story!


  5. lou222 permalink
    July 29, 2013 8:34 pm

    They will put the new vehicle in a parade, the people will “ohhhh and ahhhh” over it and be so proud to have it in their town. After all, it will be for THEIR protection, right? The kids will get to take a really close look at it and it will be instilled in their little brains that it is for their protection, as well. It will become normal. Boy are we in deep shit! Here in my town, we already have one similar to the one you are talking about…not cheap, but once again, for OUR PROTECTION! I feel so safe now! /s


    • July 29, 2013 9:35 pm

      Why does this make me feel less safe? You are probably right, the police will show this off every chance they get to make people accustomed to it, and once they are we can expect more of it in the future.


  6. Chris permalink
    July 29, 2013 9:48 pm

    Next it will be the Black Hawk helicopters, then drones etc. This is all part of the Federal government’s effort to turn the local police into a para-military units. All across America small communities have been the recipients of military hardware. The ‘police’ no longer have to follow the constitution according to the courts.

    American neighborhoods are increasingly being policed by cops armed with the weapons and tactics of war. Federal funding in the billions of dollars has allowed state and local police departments to gain access to weapons and tactics created for overseas combat theaters – and yet very little is known about exactly how many police departments have military weapons and training, how militarized the police have become, and how extensively federal money is incentivizing this trend. It’s time to understand the true scope of the militarization of policing in America and the impact it is having in our neighborhoods. Since March 6th, ACLU affiliates in 25 states filed over 260 public records requests with law enforcement agencies and National Guard offices to determine the extent to which federal funding and support has fueled the militarization of state and local police departments. Stay tuned as this project develops. ACLU website (finally


    • July 30, 2013 5:49 am

      They are doing it a little at a time so that we won’t realize how far they are going. People don’t seem to put all of this together so it looks like the plan is working.


    • lou222 permalink
      July 30, 2013 7:31 am

      Chris, I am seeing this in the city police department, but not so much in the county sheriffs department. Wonder what the difference is? I see much more of the “swat” activity when it comes to the city. They are the ones in the black uniforms, geared up and in the black vehicles.I will look further into it because I do not understand the difference in the two. They are both working out of the same building, but totally different routines.


      • July 30, 2013 7:43 pm

        I think it is because they feel the cities will be more accepting of this type of action than the rural areas. People living in cities are much more used to seeing increased patrols than those living in the country. Just a thought, don’t know if it is true but is seems reasonable. Of course it will not end in the cities and will eventually expand into the country.


  7. Chris permalink
    July 29, 2013 11:53 pm

    Steve what is happening in your state? Concord only wants to keep up with the Jones.

    “Police in New Hampshire received federal funds for a counter-attack vehicle, lying to the Department of Homeland Security about the need for terrorism-prevention tools and asking “what red-blooded American cop isn’t going to be excited about getting a toy like this?” Police in Keene, New Hampshire, received a fully funded BearCat, an armored counter-attack vehicle, in 2012. To explain why the police included the word “terrorism” on their application for federal funding for this purchase, a city council member said, “Our application talked about the danger of domestic terrorism, but that’s just something you put in the grant application to get the money. What red-blooded American cop isn’t going to be excited about getting a toy like this? That’s what it comes down to.”


  8. Petermc3 permalink
    July 30, 2013 8:35 am

    The precursor to this city, county and state black -ops crap was the introduction of the police stealth cruisers this past decade. Protect and serve morphed into sneak and summons. Of course we are able to adjust to this by driving like little old ladies but how does one cope with having one’s door kicked in by the SS for failing to observe the plethora of regulations being legislated down our throats almost on a daily basis? Armored personnel carriers in your rear view mirror coming soon to a town near you…


    • July 30, 2013 7:45 pm

      “Protect and serve morphed into sneak and summons”
      That is exactly right! The role of the police has expanded and the natural conclusion if for them to become militarized at some point.


  9. cmblake6 permalink
    July 30, 2013 5:26 pm

    Reblogged this on Cmblake6's Weblog and commented:
    And the comments! Oh! The comments!



  1. COVID-19, the Boston Marathon bombing, and Martial Law | America's Watchtower

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: