Militarization of Police Departments

So we really ARE talking about scary clothing.

The problem lies when concerns for officer safety morph into an attitude of "us vs. them" instead of community policing. That's when the MRAPs, ACUs, and face masks become the marks of an occupying force instead of a group of people trying to help their local community.
Click to expand...

Whenever the police develop an "us vs them" attitude, it is a problem. But it's not a function of the clothes they wear. It has happened in the past when cops walked the beat with a night stick and a 38 revolver.

The "marks" of an occupying force are the actual actions of the occupying force and the oppression that ensues. It is not the clothing and gear. And let's bring the conversation back to reality... Any casual study of 20th century history will enlighten us on what TRUE oppression looks like. There are countless examples of authoritarian governments that brutally ruled their people. Talk to an immigrant from Russia, or Croatia, or Nicaragua, or just about any African nation. There is just no way a person can talk about US police as an "occupying force" if they are familiar with true oppression.

So I am sorry that the Cop's scary black clothing frightens and offends some folks. I am sure that my AR-15 frightens and offends some folks too.

Certainly there are examples where the police used tactical gear and weapons when it was unnecessary. Certainly there are examples of the police using absolutely poor judgment. But it is not the gear that is the problem, it is a lack of competence. Competence problems can be solved by selectively firing the poor performers. Don't blame the tools which 99% of cops use appropriately.

In Afghanistan, we were specifically forbidden from wearing bacalavas, covering our mouths with our ever present Keffiyehs unless the wind or sand was really bad. In dealings with local leaders, we doffed our kevlar. Just saying.
Click to expand...

In Afghanistan, you were dealing with a population that was largely illiterate, tribal, and in many ways primitive. I am not surprised that this population was overly sensitive to appearances. But American Citizens are above that, or they should be...

Jim
 
Last edited:
Ok when was the last time you saw an MRAP patrol your community? You will never see them on patrol because they are horrible to drive, terribly uncomfortable and require lots of maintenance. The MRAP will only be taken out in special situations which call for it. As for patrol, the everyday officer wants a Ford Explorer. They dont want to drive an armored vehicle because its terrible to drive.

I know the county where I live owns armored vehicles, but I have never seen one.
 
Now you have a surplus armoured veh to be used in times of unrest, at the cost of maybe a dollar to the department.
Click to expand...
This is absolutely false. The maintenance on many of these specialized heavy vehicles, especially outside the normal military supply chain. These vehicle have to be extensively modified to interface with police communications and electronics. One local department got a "free" MRAv that ended up costing a couple of hundred thousand dollars the first year.

On those rifles converted to semi-auto, it may be $75 in parts to convert, but the armory doesn't run on hopes and dreams. I don't believe it is mandatory to convert. In fact I know of several departments with rifles that are still full auto.
 
Johnwilliamson,

Your statement regarding something I said as being false, was in itself false. If you have no personal experience with such things, then you have no room to make such an uniformed FALSE claim.

A cost to procure any piece of equipment is just that, the cost. Maintaining or modifying that equipment is another story. Get your facts straight before you imply other people are making false statements.:cool:
 
I think you are both missing the point that this particular argument is not actually about "rights," since police agencies do not have them.
Click to expand...
I fully understand that rights are for individuals. It is in that context that I asserted that police have a right to whatever defensive equipment necessary to keep them out of harms way. This right is no less applicable for a police officer than any other individual. It is a human right to defend one's person that isn't diminished because one is a police officer. That's all I'm saying.
 
Madcap_Magician Wrote;
From past discussion, I gather that you feel that police officers should always be personally civilly and criminally liable for all actions taken on duty, regardless of whether it was in accord with policy and law and regardless of whether the action was undertaken in good faith.
Click to expand...

This is exactly how I feel. If the officers bore the same burden of scrutiny in their actions as any other citizen, their actions might be a bit more "measured" in some instances.

The "immunity" enjoyed by Police is a huge part of the militarization debate IMO.
 
The "immunity" enjoyed by Police is a huge part of the militarization debate IMO.
Click to expand...
I really hope the ensuing civil suit* bankrupts Habersham County. That might wake some people up.

*ETA: Habersham County refuses to pay the medical bills of a baby they almost killed with a grenade a couple of month ago in a botched drug raid -- that found nothing illegal.
 
Last edited:
That right there is the problem. Many of you have made your decisions based on the media reports which are terribly one sided or not accurate. Why not wait until the facts are hashed out in official reports and the courts? Obviously these agenda oriented reporters are not going to deliver the truth.

No one knows both sides of the story. The one real fact is that if the law was obeyed and the officer was not assaulted than this would not have happened. If you assault an officer, Im not going to feel any pity for you. Just stand still and be quiet. How hard is that?
 
That right there is the problem. Many of you have made your decisions based on the media reports which are terribly one sided or not accurate. Why not wait until the facts are hashed out in official reports and the courts? Obviously these agenda oriented reporters are not going to deliver the truth.

No one knows both sides of the story. The one real fact is that if the law was obeyed and the officer was not assaulted than this would not have happened. If you assault an officer, Im not going to feel any pity for you. Just stand still and be quiet. How hard is that?
Click to expand...

Are we talking about Ferguson? I was talking about civil and criminal immunity.

My *initial* reaction in Ferguson was that the cop murdered Brown, but it wasn't racially motivated. I wasn't married to that opinion, and I've come to believe it was a justified shooting, *also* not racially motivated. Might change my mind again before it's all over :rolleyes:
 
Quote:
Society is getting more dangerous all the time ...

Not so. US violent crime is down dramatically:
Click to expand...

This is another facet of the problem. We are being told, and shown on screen 24/7 how violent and dangerous things are, and yet, the crime statistics from official sources are saying just the opposite.

I believe only one can be true. But which?

A scary, dangerous world is good business for the media, and for the people who make and sell things to use in that world. Means money for police, and everyone one else with a finger in that pie.

On the other hand, would the FBI lie to us about crime statistics?

When the assault weapon hysteria first peaked in the early 90s, the official crime statistics did not support the image of terror that the anti gun bigots wanted, so were simply ignored. Statistics showing how only something like 1.5% of the crimes were committed with rifles, and only about 1.5% of those crimes were done with what could be loosely called an assault weapon, simply didn't fit their master plan.

What we had was a tiny number of highly publicized mass shootings. And, of course the murder of children. Shown and talked about over and over, and over until the overall impression is that these things are happening constantly, day in and day out all over the country. Which was simply not the truth.

But we got more restrictive laws, anyway...
 
The real issue here is not the military equipment being procured by depts. around the country, but more about the attitudes displayed. The fact is that around the country violent crime is down. The fact is that since 9/11 nearly 5,000 US citizens have been killed by police around the country. SWAT teams were used more than 50,000 times last year for things as mundane as raiding farms that produced natural milk, to issues concerning unpaid student loans. There are the raids at wrong addresses where innocent people have been killed. These things should not be, period. There is no reasonable excuse for the death of a single innocent life. It seems as though, once given all the big boy toys, most will jump at any chance to use them. This points to another major problem I see, and that is oversight, or better the lack of it. Very strict guidelines should be issued concerning the use of extreme force, and unerringly adhered to. As also pointed out, there is also the problem of immunity, which has been discussed and should not exist. Police should be held to the same standards as any other citizen. My greatest fear is that we are heading for, if not already immersed in a de facto police state, and the procurement of military grade weapons of war by police departments around the country does nothing to allay those fears.
 
On the other hand, would the FBI lie to us about crime statistics?
Click to expand...

Why not? The DoJ has made a habit of falsehoods re: Fast and Furious ..... The IRS claims all of their e-mail records (on several servers!) relating to the targeting of conservative groups) went poof at the same time ..... the State Department said the Benghazi Consulate attack was a demonstration against a youtube video that got out of hand ........ I don't trust the Feds on much of anything anymore.
 
Are we really making the argument that the presence of tactical gear at the police station causes the police to become more "militaristic"... The mere possession of a scary looking weapon can change a persons behavior for the worse?
Click to expand...

I think that all the .mil hardware is not the cause of the problem, but a symptom of it.
 
SPEMack618 Wrote;
The problem lies when concerns for officer safety morph into an attitude of "us vs. them" instead of community policing. That's when the MRAPs, ACUs, and face masks become the marks of an occupying force instead of a group of people trying to help their local community.
Click to expand...

This is precisely one of the issues. The gear alone is not a problem, but when you take a group of "peace officers" ( This is what they were for most of my life until a few years ago ) And change their role to "Law Enforcement Officers" That was, IMO the beginning of a change in attitude.

To give an example, many years ago, when I was a teen, the officers in my town would patrol around looking for "activities" that might lead to a problem like, a bunch of teens standing around in a parking lot drinking a beer or, other similar activities. Their response was normally dictated by how the teens behaved. Usually, they would tell you that you could not drink (etc) in public and, have you pour the offending substance out on the ground and, ask you to disperse, with the understanding that "next time" would be a different story.

Likewise, we knew that, if we ever had a problem or, knew something bad was going down somewhere, we could flag down an officer and, be assured that the officer was there to help. There was a level of "Mutual" Trust and, "Mutual" Respect.


Now ? The cavalry (and their dogs) show up, everyone is searched, their cars searched, and, most likely, everyone goes to jail for various "charges".
The result ? Teens no longer trust the Police. Flag one down now and, even that might just result in your being searched and, "charged". This has built a generation that has had a great deal of adversarial encounters with police. The net result? no more mutual trust or respect.

"Peace officer" vs. "Law Enforcement". A complete change in method and perception that has put the LE community at odds with "us".

Take that LE "attitude" and, put them in BDU's , outfit them with military-grade hardware, and you now have something that, in no way, resembles a "Peace Officer"

If it: Walks like a Military organization, is outfitted like a military organization, trains in military tactics, and has clearly demonstrated that it has an adversarial attitude toward anyone who is not "them" what do you have ?
 
Last edited:
The 1970s and 1980s were a very violent time in Americas history. In New York City, I was reading the highest number of shots fired from NYPD pistols was 2510 in 1972 whereas today its around 400. Keep in mind the population of NYC is much higher today. Back during the 70s and 80s, the police were armed with little more than a six shot revolver or Joe Bidens shotgun. They didnt have armored vehicles or any of the equipment they have today.

I attribute the lower violent crimes to the better response and better equipment the police have today. If you are some troublemaker who wants to shoot at the police or anyone for that matter you wont get a few guys with shotguns showing up, but an entire platoon of officers outfitted with armored vehicles, military grade body armor and automatic rifles. I have no problem with the police responding in this manner to these violent troublemakers who commit crimes against people in the community. These troublemakers deserve it. They deserve a monster MRAP riding across their lawn and a bunch of well armed officers invading their homes. It shows these people this is what you get if you decide to commit crimes here.
 
Outcast, well said. As a retired LEO, I worked in a time when we were Peace Officers as well and use LEO because it is a generally understood term.

I too believe and have posted in this thread that it is all about attitude. I must say that the few times we have had to call out the Sheriff out to our home in far reaches of the county in a rural area, we have been pleased with their attitude.

What gets me is they seem very offish in passing whether off duty or in passing on the street.

In my retirement job I drive around two counties, and in passing there are a couple communities that the guys waive at me when they drive by and others who ignore me when walking by into the local gas station.

Attitude is everything in LEO work. If you are in a situation with someone that is drunk and angry, your attitude will dictate much of how the outcome will be. The equipment not so much!

Normally the patrol officers will be driving around in a patrol vehicle, in our area trucks are common, chargers, Impalas, Ford Taurus, Jeeps, and yes even a ton of unmarked cars like cobalts, Mustang HOs, and others. I heard that they use the best stuff that they get from RICO cases. The weapons they have in their cars are what they may need, the standard carry is a Glock in .40 and a taser, pepper spray, and an ASP. I am glad to see these men and women wearing vests under their uniforms. They have families to go home to just like the rest of us.

I see the need for all this surplus equipment as an emergency response tool and they should be able to use this!

It is my firm belief that we the people should elect our officials and demand they make sure our departments understand that 90% of the population are on their side and they should be friendly to them!

Programs like shop with a cop and cops at the schools giving presentations and such are very helpful. Their involvement in community programs like neighborhood watch and other citizen advisory groups go a long way to get rid of the us vs them attitude.

When we are speeding down the interstate, we get that same attitude. We are looking for them so we can slow down and not get a ticket, when we should just drive the speed limit and not have the trouble in the first place.

Traffic tickets are a major source of revenue for many agencies, so they have to work it. Besides if they didn't traffic would go unchecked and people would get hurt and even killed.

I don't really want to rant or ramble on, so I'll just end by saying, the attitude of militarizing of the police force is kind of a double edged sword and we the civilian population do play a major role in it in one way of another.

Mel
 
It may be a bit off-topic but, I think it is germane to the discussion:

The huge change in "attitude" over the years has had a dramatic effect on the way LE is perceived by the very public they used to exist to protect.

Another example comes to mind : A couple of years back, my Son (18 or so at the time ) and a few of his other musician friends, were using my basement studio to record some tracks for a disc they were going to use as a demo to book gigs. One of his friends is diabetic and, forgot to bring his insulin. He began to feel ill and, needed to take his meds. Since my truck was parked behind all of them, my Son asked if he could borrow my truck to drive his buddy home to get his meds. I tossed him the keys, no worries. A few minutes later, I get a call from a LEO asking if he has my permission to search my vehicle ? I told him I do not consent to a search and, he hangs up. Approximately 30 minutes later, my Son, and his buddy return. Apparently, the LEO had pulled them over and asked for license, registration, etc. due to "careless driving" no definition was given of the allegation. He asked my Son if he could search the vehicle, My Son did not consent. The officer then told him that , since it was not his vehicle, he could not refuse, The Son insists that he should contact me for permission. Being un-satisfied with refusal from both My Son and, myself, he threatens to "bring in the K-9"
Son tells him, "no problem, bring him out" and sits on the tailgate to wait. Apparently, there was "none available" and he let the Boys go with a citation for "careless driving".

Fast forward to the court date, I attend to observe, Officer testifies that My Son was "weaving all over and, even struck the curb" Son asks to see the dashcam evidence. The tape is played and, clearly shows the vehicle traveling within the lane, no sign of "weaving" or contact with the curb. Case is dismissed as the Judge could find no evidence of the allegation.

My point is this: It seems that nowadays, officers tend to simply "throw charges" at anything just to see if they can make something stick. They don't seem as interested in deterring crime so much as "make arrests" Like they have some sort of "quota" to fill. Incidents like this do nothing to help prevent crime or, protect the public safety, they are "fishing" for anything that will "stick" It's like a game to see how many charges they can file in a shift. It creates a huge void in Trust.

ETA: Serving on a Grand Jury was an eye-opening experience as well, it is incredible the number of these "fishing expeditions" that happen every month and, the number that are No-Billed.

Again, the Mindset, and attitude, are just as key to this issue as the equipment. IMHO.
 
Last edited:
It seems that nowadays, officers tend to simply "throw charges" at anything just to see if they can make something stick.
Click to expand...

Certain kinds of people in law enforcement have always done this. And when its only your word against the cop, they usually get believed over you.

Today, (mostly thanks to technology, like the dash cam, etc.) we are a lot more "slippery" than we used to be. Some still throw the BS charges, but its less likely to "stick".

Here's another point (and one the cops are not directly responsible for), the media. TV shows, particularly the "reality" shows like COPS. It's a perception thing, and I know the shows are only "entertainment" and so emphasize drama and action, but watching these shows leaves some of us with the (subconscious?) feeling that if we even TALK to a cop, we will be body slammed against the hood of their car.....etc.

People getting their attitude about police from fictional cop shows is bad enough, but a constant repetition of actual incidents (heightening the effect) can't be good for us.
 
I have watched the metamorphosis occur starting with the "War on Drugs". Growing up right behind the Watts riots was one thing but the Crack epidemic was a game changer. LAPD and LASD militarized and so did most of the suburban PD's. Now it is extremely common for LEOs to refer to us as civilians. I happily ask them if at this particular time whether they represent the US military of (insert LE organization name here). When they respond the latter I inform them that they are in fact civilians too. Many try to argue that they are "different". In one respect they are and I have a problem with that difference. In Kali, there are quite a few laws (penal code mostly) to which THEY are exempted. This includes the personal ownership of "assault" weapons, full and extra capacity magazines, off list firearms, etc. Legally, they have been made into a special privileged class which furthers the Us vs. Them mentality.

Cover ups of crimes that when exposed (on or off duty) mostly result in disciplinary action or dismissal for them where were WE to do the very same would result in charged with a crime. I have seen this played out in the papers and media far too often throughout the years. This also plays into the mentality.

Now give them the toys and ask (not tell) little Johnny Law to play nicely with them. ;) There is a reason that the Mayor Tom Bradley mobile door knocker was taken out of service years ago. Linky We had it then, you have it now.
 
Fast forward to the court date, I attend to observe, Officer testifies that My Son was "weaving all over and, even struck the curb" Son asks to see the dashcam evidence. The tape is played and, clearly shows the vehicle traveling within the lane, no sign of "weaving" or contact with the curb. Case is dismissed as the Judge could find no evidence of the allegation.
Click to expand...

And the judge didn't care that the officer was caught lying under oath. That's part of the problem too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top