The continuing militarization of the police starting to gain press attention

[jimpeel]

While civil libertarians and activists have noted the rise of the militarization of the police, the phenomenon has been largely ignored by the mainstream media (MSM). The subject has garnered no small amount of attention on these boards as the subject has been discussed in numerous threads throughout the history of TFL both RECENTLY and HISTORICALLY.

Only recently has the militarization of the civilian police come onto the radar of the MSM along with questions about the federal government's willingness to equip the civilian police with high tech military gear. Anyone here remember when the BATF was in possession of 22 OV-10D attack aircraft equipped with FLIR, machine gun mounts and missile racks? They eventually, over public and congressional outcry, ceded them back to the DOD.

The civilian police are increasingly being manned by ex-military who go to the gun as a first line of defense instead of the last. They use their deadly force as the first line of defense when they are equipped with less deadly equipment at their disposal. Remember when the Washington, DC police they shot a man in a wheelchair who wouldn't drop a knife which was taped to his hand making it impossible for him to drop it? C'est la vie.

But Americans, and the American MSM, are finally starting to become aware of these excesses and they are not pleased. They see the militarization of the police as detrimental to American freedom and liberty. The most disturbing aspect of that militarization is departments of the government, such as the Department of Education and NASA, having SWAT teams.

Politicians decry the terrorists as a threat to American liberty while they, themselves, write the laws which lessen or destroy those liberties. In that instance, the terrorists have won.

Here is the latest MSM to come on board with this realization, The Wall Street Journal.

SOURCE

THE SATURDAY ESSAY
Updated July 22, 2013, 3:28 a.m. ET

Rise of the Warrior Cop
Is it time to reconsider the militarization of American policing?

...

The police tactics at issue in the Stewart case are no anomaly. Since the 1960s, in response to a range of perceived threats, law-enforcement agencies across the U.S., at every level of government, have been blurring the line between police officer and soldier. Driven by martial rhetoric and the availability of military-style equipment—from bayonets and M-16 rifles to armored personnel carriers—American police forces have often adopted a mind-set previously reserved for the battlefield. The war on drugs and, more recently, post-9/11 antiterrorism efforts have created a new figure on the U.S. scene: the warrior cop—armed to the teeth, ready to deal harshly with targeted wrongdoers, and a growing threat to familiar American liberties.

...

<MORE>

[Wyoredman]

It is even happening in my small little Wyoming town. Our police force just received several surplus M16's, combat computers and even a HMV! For the life of me, I can't figure that one out? There is absolutely no place in town that doesn't have paved streets! And the town cops are required to let the Sheriff's Department handle all out-of-town calls, unless requested by the Sheriff himself!

True!

[johnwilliamson062]

It looks great for the DOD finances though. Lending the stuff out rather than scrapping it I mean. Plus they can always take it back if they need it and don't have any maintenance in the mean time.

[Bartholomew Roberts]

My problem with that article is that it blurs the lines. I don't see police officers having body armor, uniforms based on 21st century military uniforms (as opposed to 19th century military uniforms), or modern firearms as "militarization." I would want those things if I were dealing with the same people officers deal with.

By conflating M16 rifles with OV-10 Broncoss, the author goes overbroad with his argument IMO.

[LewSchiller]

If the issue is a military mindset then I wonder how this is different from the 70's when police departments were taking in 'Nam vets.

[Conn. Trooper]

I would also think back to the 20's and 30's when cops carried Thompsons and BAR's. With very little training. I think you have to take that article with a grain of salt. Modern weapons are just a sign of the changing times, IMO. BDU type uniforms are cheap, and in todays budget minded agencies, cheap is better.

The BDU uniform I wore when I did CMV enforcement was less than half the cost of our regular uniform, and was machine washable.

[Evan Thomas]

This is the real point:

The civilian police are increasingly being manned by ex-military who go to the gun as a first line of defense instead of the last. They use their deadly force as the first line of defense when they are equipped with less deadly equipment at their disposal. Remember when the Washington, DC police they shot a man in a wheelchair who wouldn't drop a knife which was taped to his hand making it impossible for him to drop it? C'est la vie.

Police work has always been a popular career for ex-military. If there's a change in the mindset of ex-military police recruits, it likely comes from the nature of recent wars, particularly the war in Iraq, which was largely fought in much more urban environments, with a great deal of house-clearing and such. That would translate much more directly to police work than would slogging through a jungle.

I do think, as well, that the influx of surplus military equipment encourages this mindset: if you have the toys, you're going to want to play with them.

[iraiam]

I have been writing letters complaining about this for several years, Most recent was in Boston. If that was not clear evidence of police militarization, then nothing is.

People were forcibly removed from their homes so they could be searched during the door to door crap, clear constitutional violations being flatly ignored by the media, government and most of the populace.

[Mike38]

The following happened 20+ years ago in a small town (less then 1000 people) near me. Long story short.

A guy that lived in this nearby to me town, basically was a slob. Never mowed his grass, garbage got thrown out in the yard, a real eye sore not to mention a rodent / insect problem. Let me be perfectly clear, I do not condone his actions. He was warned in writing and in person by authorities to clean up his mess. His reply was it’s his property and he can do with it as he pleases. Finally the village took him to court and he was ordered to clean it up or receive stiff fines. Still nothing. Court again, ordered again, but this time threatened with jail. Still nothing. It was made public that the guy owned firearms and was said to store 1000’s of rounds of ammo. Why that had to be made public is beyond me, it describes most of the people reading this thread.

County decided they were going to clean it up for him. In pulls back hoes and dump trucks and started scooping up everything outside. Escorting the back hoes was the Sheriff’s Dept. armed to the gills. At that time the County Sheriff’s Dept. had M14’s. No, not M1A1’s but fully automatic military hand-me-down M14’s. They were wearing full camo BDU’s those black face masks, locked and loaded ready for action. The guy wasn’t home, but they remained on sight with the M14’s.

Guy got pulled over in his car in the next county that very day. No firearms on him or in his car. He has not been seen or heard from since, not in these parts anyhow.

So you see, the “militarization” of Law Enforcement is nothing new, just now more common.

[Evan Thomas]

I think it's no coincidence that the backlash against this trend is coming at the same time as a major shift in public opinion against other post-9/11 excesses such as the behavior of the NSA, the use of drones against countries with which the US is nominally at peace, etc.

Another consequence of the so-called "War on Terror" has been the glorification of all things military in way that this country has never seen, even during WWII, IMO. I've been concerned about this for years, and have argued against it here and elsewhere. This worship of all things military has encouraged the acceptance of quasi-military police forces, as well.

[johnwilliamson062]

if you have the toys, you're going to want to play with them.

There is more to this line of thought also. I live in a city with a population of 25,00 and a hydraulic platform(a very expensive ladder fire truck). The reason? We have TWO buildings that would "require" it if they caught fire. As a suburb one can get here from the city in 10-15 minutes. It is a nice toy though. The fire department pulls it out whenever they can. They use it as an aerial water tower at every structure fire. They lend it out all over the place for mutual aid calls. Often to communities that have more resources. At the end of the year, when they have to legitimize the high cost of maintenance and purchase price, they have a long list of times it was used. Really all they did was drive it around at a gallon a mile and waste even more money.
If you're paying a hundred thousand dollars a year for equipment and training of a SWAT team, above their normal salary(probably more), you better be able to come up with a list of times they were "necessary". That is how government works.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Another aspect is that the failure of police to act decisively at the Texas Tower and then Columbine - led to a change in paradigm from containing violence to attacking quickly. Read some of the active shooter training materials, they speak of the 'warrior' officer.

It is couched in terms of saving lives - which is good. But does it spill over into more mundane incidents?

[Brian Pfleuger]

Originally Posted by johnwilliamson062

There is more to this line of thought also. I live in a city with a population of 25,00 and a hydraulic platform(a very expensive ladder fire truck). The reason? We have TWO buildings that would "require" it if they caught fire. As a suburb one can get here from the city in 10-15 minutes. It is a nice toy though. The fire department pulls it out whenever they can. They use it as an aerial water tower at every structure fire. They lend it out all over the place for mutual aid calls. Often to communities that have more resources. At the end of the year, when they have to legitimize the high cost of maintenance and purchase price, they have a long list of times it was used. Really all they did was drive it around at a gallon a mile and waste even more money.
If you're paying a hundred thousand dollars a year for equipment and training of a SWAT team, above their normal salary(probably more), you better be able to come up with a list of times they were "necessary". That is how government works.

Very much truth, this is.

And when they send out SWAT, they don't wink and nod and say "Hey fellas, two street deputies could handle this but we need to justify your training so we're sending you instead, we just don't need you to be all "SWAT", just go arrest the guy." If they send SWAT, they act SWAT.

The city of Ithaca, NY, has a huge SWAT "mobile command center", spends big money on highly trained officers, all the latest and greatest. What do they do? They go to competitions. This is a place with nearly zero violent crime, certainly of the SWAT justification level. There were zero murders and about 19 rapes from 2006-2010, just for an idea of the violence level.

[Fishing_Cabin]

I cant speak to the larger metro areas, though the rural/semi-rural area I am, seems to have a lack of reasonable oversight, and long term planning, starting at the lower level, and going up into the elected ranks.

I know of a few folks who were in the military prior to becoming a LEO, but its about the same numbers as the 70's and 80's though. As I said, its just a few folks here. May be different elsewhere. Similar with equipment. There are a few local agency owned specialty vehicles in the area, but they are available in the greater area, not just one locality, then there are the state resources on top of that.

Can some things be better organized, and be better utilized? Sure, but then it would probably require another office, or atleast a sole official to keep track of and send things here there and yonder, who will also be subject to favoritism, etc.

While I don't buy in to the 'militarization of the police' I do feel there could be some better resource management in certain areas. It starts with the public electing responsible officials who will be able to make a difference.

Just to give you a couple of examples...Each major purchase becomes an emergency or crises, because no one planned, nor did they save money prior for a major purchase, such as a new engine, rescue truck, or command vehicle. Multiple neighboring departments using their own different threads on equipment, instead of standardizing on 1 style. One needs a bin full of adapters, and even then it may not get connected. End of the day, everyone complains, but nothing really happens.

[allaroundhunter]

I live in a college town, and am currently enrolled at a large university (more than 50,000 undergrads). Our local police department has a decent size SWAT team and also have an APC. In my opinion, the gear that they have is needed. Our university police department also issues an AR15 to each officer on patrol which, again, does not seem excessive to me.

In addition to keeping the school safe, the SWAT team also gets used plenty for non-school related threats. About a year ago we had a constable who was killed by a mentally unstable man after the constable went to the man's residence to inform him that he would soon be evicted. The second responding officer was then trapped behind his patrol car's engine block as the suspect shot over 40 rounds at him from an AK-47. That officer did not have an AR15 issued to him and was very undergunned. Even the third responding officer was met with a barrage of fire that pinned him down.

Before the suspect was killed he had killed another man and had seriously injured a mother.


In another instance, our SWAT team was making entry into a house after 6.5 hours of negotiation had led nowhere. The first officer to enter was immediately shot 3 times in the chest and the second officer stepped between the downed officer and the shooter and engaged the shooter while protecting the downed officer. At the same time as officer #2 was engaging the suspect a sniper on the front lawn on top of the APC shot and hit the suspect. Militaristic? Sure. But what would you rather them do?

Do police departments need drones or heavily armed helicopters? No, I haven't seen a reason for them to. But to have a SWAT team with modern weaponry, BDUs, modern 'urban' tactics, and APCs is not always an indication of a police force that shoots first and asks questions later. Of course, if the department is in a town of 200 people, then you can say they don't need quite as much as a department of a larger town.

I believe a proper threat assessment based on what a department faces is better than a blanket statement saying that all police are rapidly 'militarizing'.

[Kevin Rohrer]

1. Don't equate the federal government with the 'police'.
2. Local police getting free M16s has been going on since the North Hollywood Shootout (1995?). It is not 'Militarization', it is being cost-conscious (i.e Free = Good) and keeping up with the criminal element.

[Wyoredman]

2. Local police getting free M16s has been going on since the North Hollywood Shootout (1995?). It is not 'Militarization', it is being cost-conscious (i.e Free = Good) and keeping up with the criminal element.

Ok. So how do we explain the need for a military HMV and battle computers in my small (< 7000 people) Wyoming town?

This year alone, the "Team" has been deployed three times. Once to a drunk man's house who wouldn't answer the door. He was later found to be OK, no charges pressed. Once to the home of a teen who tried to burn down his girlfriends' parents' empty house. He was sent to juvy. And once for reasons that we can't figure out, as nothing is being said about it.

In each case, the police were all dressed in their battle gear, black uniforns, flack jackets, helmets, masks, goggles, M16s, command center, and HMV!

Talk about a spectacle! The rumor mill was grinding each time!

In the past, each of these cases would have been handled by a few cops on patrol. But I guess the world is a more dangerous now.

ETA: http://county10.com/2013/02/03/lpd-r...ding-a-humvee/

http://county10.com/2012/12/04/break...ton-swat-team/

http://county10.com/2012/11/09/detai...-hours-friday/

Now tell me local police are not becoming militarized!

[teeroux]

What is a battle computer?

[Wyoredman]

My term for military field laptops. You have seen them, I'm sure.

[Conn. Trooper]

Did you read the articles that you posted at all? The Humvee is not armored, it is being used to pull a trailer and for traversing rough country. I am not all that familiar with Lander, WY. But, I can bet a vehicle like a Humvee would come in handy.

Battle Computers? I would guess they mean Panasonic Toughbooks. They are a regular old laptop/MDT. They are just made very durable so police/fire/ambulance are able to take them out in adverse conditions and they don't break. They take the hot, cold, and bumps and bruises of being out on the road. They are not tactical, or armored, or used to kill people.

[Wyoredman]

Mr. Conn. Trooper,

Of course I read those articles. I live here. My daughter is sixth generation from this county.

I never claimed the HMV was armored! I just question the need, our streets are all paved! City cops don't travel the boonies!

I did say it was MY TERM for the computers.

Also, the department received "scopes". Wonder what they need those for? Sniper rifles?

My point being, Why does the little old town of Lander need all this "stuff" from the army?

ETA: Mr. Trooper, No disrespect meant to any who chose law enforcement as a career, the choice is most noble! I just simply find the idea of having small military type unit in the civilian police force very disturbing.

I assume you, yourself, are a state trooper. I thank you for the service to your community. I bet even you have seen the shift from policing by the local beat cop that knew the folks.

Did you see the pictures of the cops in full battle dress? Cordon off streets? Really? Militarization!

[Conn. Trooper]

Mr. Conn. Trooper,

Of course I read those articles. I live here. My daughter is sixth generation from this county.

I never claimed the HMV was armored! I just question the need, our streets are all paved! City cops don't travel the boonies!

I did say it was MY TERM for the computers.

Also, the department received "scopes". Wonder what they need those for? Sniper rifles?

My point being, Why does the little old town of Lander need all this "stuff" from the army?

Did you see the pictures of the cops in full battle dress? Cordon off streets? Really? Militarization!

The Humvee is supposedly being used to pull a trailer. Does it snow in Lander, Wyoming? Humvees go well in the snow. And go well off road. It is not armored, not armed. Its a 4x4 diesel truck, nothing more.

Scoped rifles equal a sniper. Really? I know lots of 80 year old "snipers" that go sniping deer in the fall.

I think you might need to take a step back and look at this realistically. If I was a small town chief or sheriff and the army was giving away scopes, a 4x4 truck, and MDT's, I would take it and use it. I just don't see that this equals militarizing the police.

[Wyoredman]

Stepping back.

[DieHard06]

I get somewhat what is being said here with this:

if you have the toys, you're going to want to play with them.

But isn't that the same argument that people use against anyone that carries a gun? "If a person has a gun, they are more prone to use it." I don't agree with them on that, but it sounds similar to me.

[Fishing_Cabin]

Been thinking (possibly dangerous?) and thought I would share this...I remember back in the early part of the 90's when I first got involved with emergency services, that most of the specialized stuff available then like, helicopters, armored vehicles, mobile command centers, etc, were state owned then, instead of having some owned at the individual local agency level. Availability of the these units were restricted more due to politics it seemed, then anything else. Now with a lot of grants that started coming in the late 90's through the 2000's it seems many agencies are purchasing these vehicles for their own use, instead of depending on the state.

Now with FEMA and the state EM groups trying to force some level of interoperability tossed in to the mix, it gets to the point of who is actually supervising everything, and stuff goes overboard. Plus with all the different levels of management, there is more levels of politics to pander to/with.

I think there will always be people who want any government agency to do the current job with 1920's cost and equipment, or at least it seems that way from my viewpoint. I know times change, and with the change in risks (real or imagined) new equipment is added. I don't see a huge issue myself, just think its more a matter of perception. Its been already pointed out here that in years past LE had full auto firearms and a host of other items that would be considered "military" today. Its strange though when I read back through old news articles/magazines/etc there isn't the complaint of "militarization of the police" there is today.

Also the only military hmmv here was a demo unit that somehow wound out with a near by LE agency. I do know of a FD with a civilian H1 though for a brush truck. Yep, the m37's are gone here, with a few m715's left. I guess folks could complain over the military m1008/m1009's though that LE has locally, though I haven't heard it. Guess that cheap white paint job makes them less military.

ETA: I guess the repurpose of equipment bothers some people instead of trashing it and buying new. Something as simple as a vehicle...I have never heard people complain about the older m37's and m715's causing the LE to be 'militarized' but somehow the hmmv does cause that. Me? Heck, Id settle for a m715 with power brakes instead of a hmmv. Im not hard to please.