"It's armored. It's heavy. It's intimidating. And it's free"

[MTT TL]

Question - a lot of people have stated the departments should accept them and then sell them - who are they selling them to?

Depends upon the machinery and department. If it is a bulldozer it could go to a construction crew. A CUCV/ HWMVV might go to a private collector, NGO or a museum possibly even a a foreign nation if they want to pay shipping and fill out all the paperwork. There a lot of auction places out there:

http://www.municibid.com/detail.asp?id=17329

[Al Norris]

Originally Posted by MTT TL

BTW- 292 is below the average of 256 for the US as a whole. I imagine crime must be lower in your neck of the wood keeping the numbers down.

Oh come on! That average is skewed by including the big cities and you know it. Over here in Rupert, ID, we have 12 Officers for a town of 6000. And yes, our crime rate is way below the national average. But this is a rural farm town, so it is expected to be lower.

The fact that Wyoredman's town is only a 1000 more in population but has double the police says something. And that something is not good.

[Wyoredman]

http://trib.com/news/local/crime-and...f496504f9.html

Well, the three counties to the north of the county I live have received one of the MRAPS!

When asked by the reporter, one of the Sheriffs replied:

"We have to have it to nab the bad guys," Rakness said. "It's our hope we never have to use it. But it's free and we believe the taxpayers are getting some money back they invested in equipment."

A bit further along in the story another Sheriff opines:

"But if it saves one life, it's worth all the money we spend on it,"

Then,

"We have to have the means to win in any situation."

I, personally, support our local law enforcement and Sheriffs Departments, but can't get past the idea of them obtaining and using these military vehicles! This is WYOMING for gods sake! Why do they keep aquireing armored vehicles?

[csmsss]

"But if it saves one life, it's worth all the money we spend on it,"

More mischief and outright evil has been rationalized under this particular rubric than just about anything I can think of. Essentially, nothing is out of bounds if it can be argued that just a single life might be saved.

[johnelmore]

I am actually in support of the police obtaining such vehicles. The local police department is poorly equipped and poorly trained when compared to the National Guard or the Army.

Lets say there was an organized force of multiple attackers with rifles instead of the lone wolves we have seen in the media. Lets say there is a disaster. It seems like there are disasters every year. You would want the local police force having one of these things. It takes time to organize the National Guard and maybe this type of vehicle would be helpful in the meantime.

I know some of you love the SHTF threads...the type that are not allowed here. You love to prepare for emergencies when all hell breaks loose. Whats wrong with the local police preparing for when the SHTF. Some of you post about it on other websites. Whats wrong with the police preparing too? The local police are the first line of defense in a community and they are the ones who should be preparing for any scenario.

[MTT TL]

Oh come on! That average is skewed by including the big cities and you know it.

Maybe, maybe not. A lot of departments patrol outside of their town limits to a degree when allowed by law. Our local city department picks up a 30% increase in population for the three mile limit it patrols outside of. I can't speak to his situation.

"We have to have the means to win in any situation."

I wonder if he really believes that? Because it is not true.

[spacecoast]

Whats wrong with the local police preparing for when the SHTF.

You're assuming that we are all on the same side. Didn't Katrina demonstrate (to a degree at least) that that may not be the case?

[Fishing_Cabin]

Originally Posted by armoredman

Question - a lot of people have stated the departments should accept them and then sell them - who are they selling them to?

It would depend on the conditions placed on the item when it was initially disposed of or loaned by the military or feds. I don't know of any recent vehicles that have been available which can be resold, since most are on loan. The HMMWV and M35 type vehicles in my area obtained through this program have to inventoried yearly, and then turned back in (running, total loss, doesn't matter) when they are finished with the vehicle, same with the firearms. Will be up to the contract between each receiving agency and the source agency/department supplying the item which will spell out how it must be returned, scrapped, or sold.

ETA: In case anyone is curious...

Originally Posted by dla.mil

All controlled (DEMIL) tactical vehicles received through the 1033 program will no longer issued an SF 97. We are not allowed to pass title of controlled property to the Law Enforcement Agency. If you receive a controlled tactical vehicle, such as a HMMWV, that you need to get registered, submit the following worksheet along with the required photo's to the Tactical Vehicle Lead. Your agency will be issued a DLA Form 1928 "Certificate To Register Tactical Vehicle"

https://www.dispositionservices.dla....vehicles.shtml

Originally Posted by dla.mil

Items that need turning in to a DLA Disposition Services Site (usually DEMIL items) must be coordinated with LESO Headquarters as they occur so that LESO can generate turn-in documentation. The State Coordinator must complete the above request for turn-in template and provide to LESO Headquarters. LESO uses the information to create a turn-in document. The turn-in document is signed by the LESO representative and is faxed/scanned to the State Coordinator's office (DD Form 1348-1A) The turn-in document must accompany the property being turned in to the DLA Disposition Services Site.

Demil Items:

Demilitarization is the act of destroying the offensive or defensive advantages inherent in certain types of military equipment. Manual 4160.21-M-1, entitled “DoD Demilitarization Manual” governs all property that requires demilitarization.

source: https://www.dispositionservices.dla....o/turnin.shtml

As far as firearms...

Originally Posted by dla.mil

LESO reminds LEAs that weapons obtained through the 1033 program are on loan from the DOD and remain the property of the DOD. Trading, bartering or selling of the weapons is strictly prohibited by the Memorandums of Agreement signed between your state and LESO and your state and the U.S. Army Tank-Automotive and Armaments Command (TACOM). Any incidents of trading, bartering, selling, damage to, or theft of 1033 Program weapons will be forwarded to the DLA Accountability office who has special investigators, empowered with arrest and apprehension authority, for further investigation.

source: https://www.dispositionservices.dla..../weapons.shtml

[MTT TL]

You're assuming that we are all on the same side. Didn't Katrina demonstrate (to a degree at least) that that may not be the case?

If the NOLAPD had MRAPs they all would have been underwater anyway.

[johnelmore]

If a part of the country is in a state of disorder the government has the right to declare martial law. The state of Hawaii was under martial law for most of World War II only ending when the court declared it had ended.

This part of the Constitution is little known and least enjoyed...

[armoredman]

Ok, so these items are NOT being given, they are being "loaned". So these items, whether it be vehicle or firearm, can be called back into federal inventory at any time - I think I remember that applying to all US service vehicles, even WWII tanks...can't remember where I read that.
That changes a few things - they aren't being given, and cannot be disposed of by the recipient, only turned in when the so-called service life is ended or when Dear Leader decides he needs them again. In this case, I wonder how interesting it would be to see a map of where these vehicles are being sent, what locations have been approved for this pre positioning of equipment? Which locations/Departments have been turned down, also a question I wonder about.

johnlmore, would you please link to that portion of the Constitution, if you don't mind, and any court decisions that may have modified it, if you know of any?

[shortwave]

Ok, so these items are NOT being given, they are being "loaned".

IIRC, the city of Columbus, Ohio started receiving government surplus equipment somewhere around the late 80's or early 90's and were bought for a dollar. The city owned them.

I can remember the 1st two armored vehicles Cols, received, and the tax $'s spent on them in time/parts to prep them to the 'powers-to-be' specs.

Can also remember the televised, PR 'dog-n-pony' show put on for the public by the acting Mayor at the time ( a real glory hound with a long reputation of having 'short mans' syndrome to those that knew him that arguably became one of Cols. most embarrassing mayors)another story in of itself) that gave the public the warm and fuzzy feeling inside cause now, finally, the CPD had the equipment given to them free of charge to protect the city of all evil. Pure political grandstanding.

What he failed to inform the public was at the time of his speech, there had been enough tax $'s spent in the refurbishment/modifications of these two vehicles to go out and purchase one new one. ...and one of these vehicles broke down after the speech on the way back to its parking location.

Too, the continued maintenance cost which seemed to continually pile up as they stayed in the shop for repairs/maintenance was mind boggling. But again, nobody questioned the expense of these 'top priority' ranked, super fighting machines that had to be maintained at all cost as they had to be ready in a 'nanosecond' (an often favorite term used by this mayor )....and this equipment could NOT fail cause that of course would make our illustrious mayor look bad.

I will say that the later equipment the city acquired from the military was chosen with the input of some of the maintenance personnel and the city acquired better, more feasible equipment. The result was less tax $'s being spent on them but still expensive modifications non the less.

Having worked with, and know some of CPD's swat officer's, I will say that there have been a few situations(hostage situations mostly) in which the 'shock-n-awe' factor of an ugly blacked out, armored vehicle equipped with a massive battering ram arriving on scene was enough for the bad guy to surrender. When the LE negotiator tells the bad guy that the place is surrounded and he/she needs to give up peacefully and the BG looks out and see's the vehicle, it sometimes has a psychological affect on him....but boy what a hefty price tag.

[johnelmore]

Lets review the options of the government:

- Scrap the vehicles coming back from deployment.

- Place the vehicles in a storage yard or with the National Guard where it will be parked in a storage yard seeing little if any use.

- Give the vehicles to the civilian authorities for their SHTF scenarios which do happen on occasion.

The third option is the best and I do not see the local police having an armored vehicle as an infringement of rights. Like many of us they have their own worst case scenarios. When there is that SHTF scenario you will be happy the police have this. They are not using these vehicles to overthrow the President or to round up random people at will.

[Wyoredman]

Originally Posted by johnelmore

They are not using these vehicles to overthrow the President or to round up random people at will.

You are correct.

BUT, Policing seems to have become more militaristic in recent years. Some new recruits appear to be more Gung-Ho, for lack of a better description, and some of the old guard come across to me as callous and intolerant. There is most likely many, many reasons for this.

In my opinion, one of the major reasons is that as local agencies become equipped with more and more military based equipment, it has an affect on the officer. If a police person is driving a MRAP during his/her weekly training, it might create a superiority complex that is carried over to the street.

With that said, realize that I am NOT anti-police. I don't think too many of us here on TFL are. It is just that I understand the separation of local law enforcement from a National (or even State) sponsored military. It seems to me that with the National Military giving some of it's inventory to local police forces, the distinguishing characteristics of the police become blurred. And as a result of that blending of the military and the police, we are witnessing a negative affect on the local officer and the community.

Before 9/11, I don't ever remember seeing officers dressed in black fatigues, helmets and flack jackets roll up in HumVees on the streets of my town. Today, it happens at least twice a year. Why? I remember growing up that the local cops used their discretion and judgment in dealing with citizens. Now, for reasons too complicated to discuss here, discretion and judgment are removed from policing.

Seeing police act as MP's tends to lend credence to that theory.

Again, just my opinion.

[MTT TL]

BUT, Policing seems to have become more militaristic in recent years. Some new recruits appear to be more Gung-Ho, for lack of a better description, and some of the old guard come across to me as callous and intolerant. There is most likely many, many reasons for this.

I will see if I can find some articles from the post Vietnam era on this trend in policing.

Maybe even post War Between the States.

[Wyoredman]

MTT TL, You make a good point. Policing has been evolving since our nation was founded.

Yet we must still contemplate the question: How similar do we want our local police and our National Army? In many countries around the world, they are one in the same. Do we want that in the U.S.A?

[shortwave]

How similar do we want our local police and our National Army?

Bad as I hate to say it, there are certain areas such as Detroit, Mich. in which the gangs have all but taken over and got so far out of hand that I'm afraid we may need a police department very similar to a military army to straighten out.
And, these areas are getting worse every year.

[MTT TL]

How similar do we want our local police and our National Army? In many countries around the world, they are one in the same. Do we want that in the U.S.A?

You are confusing some equipment with everything else. The police have a completely different mission, mindset and tool box.

I can tell you beyond a shadow of any doubt that the military has way more of everything than the police could ever hope to muster.

I understand your issue. You look on the TV and you see guys in body armor with rifles riding around in a lightly armored wheeled vehicle. The police do it for a high profile drug bust or maybe a standoff once in a blue moon. The soldiers do it for a living every day.

One armor company with M1A1 tanks from the Army could defeat every police force on the planet equipped with armed MRAPs combined. So there really is no comparison with capability.

Appearances? I'd rather not have it too much of it (so long as it is practical) as it seems to alarm some of the citizenry excessively.

[shortwave]

The police do it for a high profile drug bust or maybe a standoff once in a blue moon.

And in these situations, IMO, LE should be able to use whatever means necessary to get their job done in the safest, most efficient way possible and should not hesitate to use every tactical, physical and psychological edge available to them.

[Wyoredman]

Actually, I don't need to "look at my TV", I , and many others in small towns all across the country, can see just what you described by looking out our front doors!

As for police having a different mission, mindset and toolbox; the lines are becomming more and more un-distinguishable!

[OuTcAsT]

MTT TL Wrote;

You are confusing some equipment with everything else. The police have a completely different mission, mindset and tool box.

While that may be somewhat accurate at the moment, the trend seems to be that if you begin to add military grade "tools" to the "toolbox" the mindset begins to veer toward using those "tools" more frequently. The other unintended consequence is "mission creep".

One armor company with M1A1 tanks from the Army could defeat every police force on the planet equipped with armed MRAPs combined.

Likely, you are correct however, the question is not whether the military could fare well against the local constabulary. The law enforcement guns are not usually pointed at the military.

[JimDandy]

Well Wyoredman, I'm not sure you're as not anti-police as you think you are given the tone of some of your other posts, presupposing malice on the part of a Chief simply because he has an MRAP, like the Anti's do with us just because we have a gun, or worse, carry it around in public.

As for your concern over National or State military, Posse Comitatus doesn't generally affect the National Guard under state control, as I understand. It also MAY not affect Nationalized National Guard. Much like War Powers, there's enough ambiguity so something can be done in an emergency. Still, the Governor is often well within his powers to use National Guard troops to enforce law. See Engbloom v Carey where the Second Circuit held National Guardsman were in fact troops, even while engaged in a police function (i.e. guarding prisons during a strike)

As we've been subject to State military troops acting in a police capacity for our entire history as a country. State Militias and Federal troops until Posse Comitatus in 1878, state militias until ~1903 ~1916 ~1933 an ~1947 when the State Militias as we knew them then morphed into the National Guard(s), and through today and tomorrow as the National Guard itself. As for me, I'd rather have police trained in civil rights law, than the National Guard trained in maneuver warfare unless we absolutely need the Guard. Bull Connors used firehoses and dogs, which was bad enough. National Guardsmen don't have dogs or firehoses, much to Kent State's peril.

[MTT TL]

I can see you guys are going to remain skeptical and that is fine. Skepticism is good really.

Just consider this: Police conducting military style operations are very rare. The last time the police mounted a company sized full scale attack with air and armor support was 20 years ago in Waco and that turned out to be quite the goat rope. It took weeks of planning, the cooperation of dozens of agencies and still went badly. The media fallout went on for years.

The military conducts that kind of operation on a routine basis.

[Wyoredman]

Originally Posted by JimDandy

As for me, I'd rather have police trained in civil rights law, than the National Guard trained in maneuver warfare unless we absolutely need the Guard. Bull Connors used firehoses and dogs, which was bad enough. National Guardsmen don't have dogs or firehoses, much to Kent State's peril.

I couldn't agree with you more!

Originally Posted by MTT TL

Police conducting military style operations are very rare.

And I hope it remains that way for another 200 years!

[MTT TL]

And I hope it remains that way for another 200 years!

On that we are fully agreed.