Do you know what kind of militaristic organization your police or Sherif’s Department is turning into?
Scene from Anaheim’s 2012 “civil unrest.” And below, another.
The New York Times, in a story headlined “War Gear Flows to Police Departments,” reports that with the wind down of our military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, heavy duty and sometimes exotic military equipment is flowing to local law enforcement agencies throughout the country. And such equipment is often being put in place in our communities by law enforcement without the elected officials of the city or county even knowing about it, much less approving it.
The story reports that M-16 grenade launchers, 100 round magazines for M-16’s, night vision goggles, silencers, armored cars, large mine resistant vehicles, camouflage clothing and netting, and even aircraft are being made available to law enforcement agencies throughout the country, and are being snapped up and deployed in our communities. The article found a County Sheriff who did not even know that his department had received 40 silencers.
Anyone who has seen law enforcement in action knows, whether it is the sad occasion of a funeral for a fallen officer or a response to a mass shooting, law enforcement agencies have increasingly embraced military tactics, from their daily conduct to their tactics in enforcement actions, especially in mass shooting and hostage situations. Now, with the news that this military equipment is being deployed domestically, it seems that military presence and style is moving up a level or two in more and more communities.
Some are raising questions as to whether this is a positive trend for our safety, or a scary development that will help turn our communities into armed military posts. Is there a militaristic “command post” with land-mine resistant trucks in the future of your neighborhood ? Is this what we want?
Pretty soon LE will not even bother to roll out their toys in comparative secrecy. There will be Soviet-style parades to display the military hardware and overawe the lowly taxpayer. But it’s all in the name of War, doncha know? War on Terror, War on Drugs, War on Anybody Who Complains (they send six cops 40 miles to arrest you for making them look bad.)
I’m all for providing equipment that reduces risk of harm to LEOs while on the job. I think we’ve gone WAY overboard in providing equipment designed to inflict harm.
There is no situation that a local police department should require a one hundred round magazine or an anti-material rifle. If the state sees fit to ban a weapon for civilian use, it really ought to ban the same weapon from law enforcement use.
So, do you think that LE and citizens should have access to the same weaponry?
I think that’s a good barometer for a discussion.
I guess as a general principle, I have no problem with LE having a REASONABLE advantage in weaponry and equipment over an ordinary citizen. What that reasonable advantage amounts to, I don’t know.
Yes, LE has increasingly gone overboard in it’s use of weapons and equipment. But which came first; the more heavily-armed police, or the more heavily-armed citizenry? I’m not sure anybody can pinpoint an answer to that. And if each side simply continues reacting to the other, where does it all end?
“But which came first; the more heavily-armed police, or the more heavily-armed citizenry?”
Ask that question of the people at demonstration that is inflamed into a riot by cops with military hardware. At this point I see equipment and technique that has nothing to do with outgunning bad guys.
Umm, well I don’t think your example successfully answers that question.
And if I’m an objective person, why would I ask that question of only one side?
That’s because your question isn’t all that relevant. If we want to justify the militarization of the cops we need to ask a different question. I’ll help:
Why do cops needs to be armed and mobilized like an occupying army?
You may now provide an “objective” answer from the cops’ point of view.
“You may now provide an “objective” answer from the cops’ point of view.”
North Hollywood.
“Why do cops needs to be armed and mobilized like an occupying army?”
Because much of the citizenry has ALSO become armed and mobilized like an occupying army?
See where these circular perspectives are leading. EVERYONE is becoming more heavily armed. Where does it end?
Wrong, anon.
The current state of cop armament is not the product of an arms race with the bad guys -or with the citizens although the cops may see it that way or propagandize it that way. Just look at the pictures – cops in desert camouflage? Really?
nipsey, your point is taken, however I note that that incident was singular and it was17 years ago. And what we”re looking at here is the cop deployed as soldier in peace time – in a sense permanently quartered on us.
“…although the cops may see it that way…”
Yeah, that’s what I’m saying.
Nipsey, I’m unfamiliar with the “North Hollywood” reference (I’ve only lived out here about 10 years). Can you turn me on to that with a link? Thanks!
How the North Hollywood Shootout Changed Patrol Arsenals
http://www.policemag.com/channel/weapons/articles/2012/02/how-the-north-hollywood-shootout-changed-patrol-rifles.aspx
Here is an example of the weapons Anaheim police use just to enforce Curfew. This is what I stumbled upon after I left a Citizen’s Advisory Committee meeting at Anaheim City Hall. One of the officers carrying a rifle is Kelly Phillips, the officer that killed my son, Joel in 2012 and Caeser Cruz in 2009.
(Southern) California Departments have been taking GREAT advantage of the almost-free material, (In the last week, I believe news accounts surfaced of 2 drones being given to LA after purchase by an agency in a(nother) State where residents objected!)
http://www.bakersfieldcalifornian.com/local/x1538235626/Free-military-surplus-gear-a-boon-to-local-law-enforcement
http://www.sfgate.com/nation/article/Military-surplus-a-bonanza-for-law-enforcement-3449040.php
I could not delve deep enough in Google to retrieve an article about agencies SELLING the feds bounty, which is “only prohibited for items usable for Military offensive” although my lost article detailed a case where lax record keeping and control overstepped THAT line. I guess Asset Forfeiture has created an appetite for free resources that won’t be cured!
“I guess Asset Forfeiture has created an appetite for free resources that won’t be cured!”
One man’s appetite is another’s addiction. And speaking of addiction, local agencies have become hooked on “free” Homeland Security money and toys such as armored vehicles, speed boats, and of course lots of OT to play with them.
The OC Sheriff’s Department actually has an ocean-going boat care of DHS “Operation Stonegarden” even though we already pay for Customs, INS, DEA, FBI, NSA, US Navy and a Coast Guard.
“Hey, look! I’m on a (Sheriff) boat!”
when youre a hammer everything looks like a nail. These militarized vehicles, uniforms, and the attitudes they foster will soon be the norm. And they will be turned onto the general public on a daily basis without any provocation as they will become the norm. Demilitarize our municipal police agencies now!
The Zinger says: “… what we”re looking at here is the cop deployed as soldier in peace time – in a sense permanently quartered on us.”
Yup – An end-around posse comitatus.
Given the levels of police violence we see routinely they should be disarmed to the lowest level possible.
There’s a book about this, The Rise of the Warrior Cop by Radley Balko.
Bottom line is, whatever weapons you give them, they misuse. Non-lethal weapons become lethal in their hands. Taser deaths are through the roof. Pepper spray is deployed not for safety but for punishment. Police shoot first and then realize the suspect was unarmed later. They shoot at cars that are fleeing for no reason. They shoot fleeing unarmed suspects in the back. You want more of this kind of thing?
Policing should involve some risk but instead every measure taken is to decrease their risk, even if it threatens the safety, rights or lives of the public. The police don’t need military gear. It’s nothing more than a social welfare program for arms manufacturers and our slow descent into fascism.
“Police shoot first and then realize the suspect was unarmed later.”
Yeah but he was reaching for his “waistband.” And the media and DA and juries go for it every time.
That Balko book scared the crap out of me, left me shaking every night as i read it. But it explained a lot.
For instance, when a cop looks you in the eye and says, “Well ma’am, you know you don’t live in the best neighborhood” it can mean one of two things. Either they are trying to tell you to move because your area has been written off and you aren’t going to get help cleaning it up (been there) or worse, that you are living in an area they consider to be enemy territory, that their Homeland Security mandated training that comes with the new free toys has indoctrinated them with a mindset of an occupying army in a hostile land, and since you CHOOSE to live in this area you must be association PREFER gang members and drug dealers. You must be at least sympathetic if not one of them yourself.
How safe is your kid at that point? How safe are YOU at that point? In fact, even your dog becomes unsafe at that point, as the first order of business when kicking in a door is to locate dogs and shoot them just in case they get out of their closed dog run or off leash and become a safety issue.
Now thankfully we have NOT had that occur in OC but should we continue the military type training that action is headed our way. This is the new face of law enforcement, and if you object you must be one of the bad guys. How does one even begin to fight this?
When a gang of home invasion criminals brake into you home I think you would like to have a police force armed with more than sling shots and small stones.
See everyone — there’s room for compromise! I agree: definitely more than sling shots and small stones!
If they’re braking, a sling shot may suffice. 🙂
Joke aside, I don’t think the local PD will need to respond with a MRAP, two Barrett .50 caliber sniper rifles, 20 officers in combat camo carrying a combined 4000 rounds of ammunition, a helicopter support equipped with FLIR cameras, and a half dozen attack dogs.
I expect law enforcement to overwhelm criminals with force, when required, to preserve the peace of the community. I do not expect them to be prepared to overwhelm France through combined arms tactics.
We’re too close to the later for my taste. I’m not sure how many of you have seen the homeless man from New Mexico getting shot by a half dozen cops from a good 20 yards away with assault rifles. We can do more to emphasize PEACE officer vs. POLICE officer without jeopardizing the well being of LEOs.
Honestly, I think that they’re primarily preparing for social unrest — which seems inevitable.
If social unrest requires a military style response, it’s up to the governor to declare martial law and activate the state national guard.
It’s not up to the local police chief, who is not qualified through the ballot box to make such a decision.
That’s a good point. But then we have to be satisfied when a government who may be antagonistic to a given part of the state — maybe a liberal governor with OC, or a conservative with LA — decides not to act based on the judgment that the social unrest is insufficiently serious. What do the cops do then?
Their job.
That’s a bit flip, Ryan. Governor Brown would have been unlikely to call out the National Guard to support the paramilitary-style activity in July 2012 Anaheim — and that would probably have been fine. However, let’s say that there had been real danger of social disruption and the Guv thought that Anaheim was crying wolf. Then the disruption starts to occur — riots, fires, etc. What does it mean to say that the cops should do “their job”? Rightly or wrongly, they apparently thought that, with all the riot gear and the warfare equipment, they were.
I’m looking for an argument that makes sense to those other than the already convinced.
It’s an absurd scenario. Police officers will do their jobs to quell a riot without military style gear.
If military style gear is required to stop an insurrection, that’s the governor’s call. If Moonbeam wants to play the fiddle while Rome burns, the President has the authority to nationalize the guard and put military force where it’s required.
Anaheim shouldn’t have the authority to put an army the street. Period.
Sheriff are independent of orders from others and able to mobilize on the orders of their own department. That is why we saw tea party types demanding Sheriffs face off against Feds in the farmer water wars, because legally they CAN.
While I can understand the want for discussion. I for one am not terribly concerned about this subject as I have and likely never will be on the other end of a policemans weapon: I am white, Not mentally ill, not a gang member, don’t have a shotgun (with or without buckshot), I don’t smash my SUV through barriers with children in the care, I don’t run with gang members named “spidey” or “boomer, or from cops.
In other words I should be OK.
Now, if you want to have a discussion about the silly parades and inconvienient traffic snarls that happen every time a cop gets hit by a dump truck or has a heart attack, I am all in.
Nameless, as a white Republican woman with no criminal record, clean kids without records, an uber-white-law-abiding husband, a homeowner in a decent neighborhood, known to local Police as a supportive Neighborhood Watch block captain, I did not think I needed to fear Police either. Until I discovered that yes, I did.
MOST, I would say the vast majority of them, are good people fighting hard every day to do a good job. The very, very small minority of bad guys are unfortunately ignored by idiots who want to buy the theory that cops are exempt from the law of averages and every population will have its good guys and bad guys. So there is no real system in place to weed them out of the force, making all cops less safe when the bad guy with a gun doesn’t know if this is a good cop or bad one, and shoots rather than take their chances.
Sorry to bust in on your reality bubble, Nameless, I once thought like you, that these guys must have done something to “deserve” what was happening, and life does not work like that. Some of these guys let the badge and gun go to their heads, instead of upholding the law they believe they have BECOME the law unto themselves, and if you get in their way they will label YOU a problem too.
I get your point, but, aren’t you being a little over dramatic?
Did the police somehow intimidate you with heavy weaponry? I have been the vicim of harassment by police and people of “authority”, but it NEVER has risen to the level of armed confrontation. I can’t imagine what in the world you could have done to incite that? Therefore, you are dealing with a rouge cop.
If we are argueing unchecked police powers, that’s a different story. I believe that we should abolish POA’s, strip them of many of their ill gotten gains and restrict their ability to unionize. Further, the way we have allowed politicians to cater to law enforcement is a problem. But, taking away their toys is what OBNO is talking about.
If you are afraid of an armed confrontation with law enforcement, you must be rattling a lot more cages then I read in the Register.
I don’t think those two little old ladies who were mistaken for Chris Dorner thought they were going to have a violent confrontation with law enforcement.
You really think that one needs to do something to provoke an excessive use of force? I’d love to know what that seventy year old woman did to justify being shot at over one hundred times.
This is a rhetorical question, but…
Is “an excessive use of force” the same thing as, to use your phrase, a “military style response”?
I’m thinking of the Kelly Thomas case, which is clearly an excessive use of force, but was it a “military style response”?
Just thinking out loud, cuz I’m seeing lots of different terminology being used during this discussion.
No.
Good clarification though.
Good point. But, in the end, they were barely hurt and are now in the money.
I’d take a slug for $4.2 million. Hell Zenger wants a Million for being made fun of and fired!
Point is, the police armorment didn’t do that it was overzealous untrained poor shot cops.
Zenger, let me know if I should spike the anonymous dig at you.