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.

But maybe I'm just naïve to the implications.

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.

Uh, America doesn't mobilize the fucking army when a handful of gang members shoot each other.

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.

It was the Social Democrats (Swedens' biggest socialist party) who suggested the use of the military.

But of course, you have no goddamn clue as to what the hell you're talking about and your ignorance shows.

And anyone up voting these sentiments: the issue is more complex, and please read up on the issue and build a complete picture.

Okay who the fuck downvoted you?

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.

Thanks for spotting this. Looks like the article changed its title and updated the text after I posted it the first time.