The continuing militarization of the police starting to gain press attention

Status
Not open for further replies.
Comparing a used, stock, horrible to drive Humvee with a (new?) F250? There's a fair comparison. What about the auction/salvage price of the Humvee versus the cost of a used/at-auction early-2000's truck?

If it's unpleasant to drive, why are they using it? Do they think it's a good idea to have civilian law enforcement grumpy after driving around in an uncomfortable vehicle right before interacting with citizens?

The agency having a Humvee that they got for free is fine with me. It could be the agency mascot. But once they start using it and maintaining it, that seems like it would incur a variety of direct and indirect costs that end up being worse than buying a used truck.
 
MLeake said:
A Humvee is also slow, extremely wide, and impractical for most parking spaces and narrower streets.

A 2500 or F250 would provide similar utility, at a more practical size and with much lower maintenance.

The only advantages to the Humvee would be:

1. Serious off-roading - which is not likely for most departments (and even where it is, the 22 degree incline capability may be undermined by a width too great for most wooded areas aside from logging roads;

or

....................................................


Edit: Besides, Conn Trooper, you are comparing new Ford/Chevy cost to a used (and most likely abused) DOD vehicle. Why not compare to a used F250?
Click to expand...

MLeake you bring up some good points.

Serious off roading? I guess that depends on a persons view of serious off roading. Here with grown up logging roads, and pine thickets, a hummer is a joke. There are 3 locally (2 fd, (1 is a military hummer, the other an H1) and 1 LE up armored hummer). None of them leave a grassy field at worst. Why? A hummer has a fiberglass hood which gets tore to pieces easily when drove through a pine thicket (1-2.5 inch trees). The older m715 and m1008 type vehicles with winch and heavy steel bumper never have a problem going forward. Backing up? I don't care what your driving, better grab the chainsaw and get ready to work a bit. Worst to happen with a m715 or m1008 is you have a dent to beat out and grab a rattle can of paint. With a hummer its order a new hood, then wait for a long while, when it comes in, fit it, then new paint etc. Why? OMG its a 'hummer' we have to keep it looking 'puuuurrrty'

Also I don't think always comparing 'price' vs 'free' is a really fair. To be honest, most agencies get state pricing, which will generally drop the price down a good bit. Also you are correct on the cost to "refurbish" or at least keep it in good repair. Its not as cheap to keep a hummer up as a solid axle 1 ton 4wd.

tyme said:
Comparing a used, stock, horrible to drive Humvee with a (new?) F250? There's a fair comparison. What about the auction/salvage price of the Humvee versus the cost of a used/at-auction early-2000's truck?

If it's unpleasant to drive, why are they using it? Do they think it's a good idea to have civilian law enforcement grumpy after driving around in an uncomfortable vehicle right before interacting with citizens?
Click to expand...

I think it would be difficult to compare the price of a used military hummer to a used f250/f350. Why? Most will have a demil code which will require destruction, and most f250/f350's will be for sale on a used lot. Most legal ex-military hummers go for a fair amount (around 25k last I looked) vs the scrap value of buying one that requires being demilled.

just a quote from the following website:

http://olive-drab.com/od_mvg_hmmwv_howtobuy.php

Buying Military HMMWVs

Unlike the WW II jeeps which were sold as surplus to the general public by the U.S. Government, the policy regarding the HMMWV has put them mostly off-limits to civilians. The reasons for this policy are not completely clear. Officially, the problem is DOT. The US Department of Transportation has a lot of requirements for what a civilian motor vehicle has to be and the HMMWV (military model) does not meet them. Things like doors with side-impact protection (basic HMMWV has just a web strap), lighting (military lighting falls short), and padded impact-absorbing dashboard (Army issues bare metal).
Click to expand...


I could argue the unpleasantness to drive one after having spent many a winter night in a m37 and m715 with a rag top, and a hope of a heater. In all honesty though. I am starting to wonder why the national guard has hummers, etc... When we get a big snow here, usually the national guard will come out to do road condition checks, and basic welfare checks (at times even bringing, GASP, groceries) to eldery in need.

eta: Link above about buying military hummers in response to tyme.
 
Last edited:
Well I'll just say this about our humvee. Its armored and is used to suplement the bearcat as an armored transport for the tactical unit. Second to its use as a tactical unit vehicle when it floods in rural parts of the parish there are only 3 vehicles in the arsenal that can traverse the area. Our 2 Humvees, the 2 Deuce and a halfs, and our boats. So there is definately a non military need. Just last year there was a flood and a natural death occured down one of the flooded roads and we needed the deuce to get deputies and equipment in.
 
I might feel a bit more comfortable if the DOD had given the Humvee in my town to the local Sheriff's posse/search and rescue, rather than the city police department!

See the links I posted earlier. In the last year, it has been used only for "interventions" were all the cops suited up in their gear and ran around parts of town with their M16/M4's. Oh, and It was in the parade on July 4th!

The Sheriff's posse/ Search and Rescue team, still uses horses, atv's and helicopters!
 
We need to be careful about banning civilians (i.e. police officers) from being issued scary-looking equipment. That obviously works against us.

I think the problem is police using military tactics, not military-style equipment. I know there's a fine line here between SWAT and military. But the officer with his rifle trained on the photographer of the photo in post 47 is way over the line, as is any other officer that came to someone's door with weapons drawn and aimed. Those are military tactics, not something that should be tolerated in USA.
 
I think police should be limited to the same equipment it's legal for the rest of us to have. If it isn't legal for us to have fully automatic weapons then neither should they!
 
Glenn E. Meyer said:
Somewhat related - the move to a country where you have to stop and show your papers is slowing down a touch.

Bloomberg's Stop and Frisk - just fell. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...cs&ir=Politics

Clearly antigun hysteria and clearly racially based. Bloomberg himself has said so. One could easily see with some national gun ban that such a policy could have been extended across the country.
Click to expand...
Great news ... although the judge's choice of a monitor apepars at first glance a bit like appointing a fox to guard a chicken coop.

I guess we know who WON'T be joining Ms. Sotomayor on the SCOTUS, though.
 
I think the problem is police using military tactics, not military-style equipment.

Exactly! I want the cops to have good equipment and overwhelming force when needed. Unfortunately they are using SWAT equipment and tactics for every minor little call-out these days.

What ever happened to actual policing?
 
motorhead0922 said:
We need to be careful about banning civilians (i.e. police officers) from being issued scary-looking equipment. That obviously works against us.

I think the problem is police using military tactics, not military-style equipment. I know there's a fine line here between SWAT and military.
Click to expand...

I do agree we need to be careful about trying to get items banned to be used by law enforcement, because its a good way for certain groups to divide and conquer to get their goal reached.

The fine line between say a SWAT teams actions and the military... Many will disagree with me here, I am sure (I don't mean any offense to veterans at all either). With using the military in more of a 'global police' role (not my term, I hear it used regularly) it becomes more difficult to separate what would be allowed and not allowed. Why? It would be very easy for foreign and American media to spin and turn people against us. It could become, "see, they don't even allow that done to their own citizens by their police, but they do it to (enter nationality) when they are 'policing' us."

By continuing to push for restricting law enforcement under this anti-"militarization of the police" I believe it will have other negative results.

I would feel better with supporting folks who want to increase a reasonable level of supervision in areas like SWAT, grants etc. I am all for a law requiring that the results of all grant programs be published to the public. Im 100% for it. As with other acquisition programs, whether it be a loan from the military or feds. I think most people would be totally shocked by what some of the facts are.

My ideas instead would be:

1. Requiring all grant programs and purchases with grant money tracked for the duration of the program, and published upon the end of the grant online for the public to see, and criticize.

2. Require all of the loan programs to be completely public knowledge. There is no reason that the Feds destroy good say Glock 23 (just an example) because some beancounter doesn't want to keep track of the pass down to local agencies.

3. Possibly have a study to try and compare various agencies, and see what is needed either nationwide, or regionally, and what is just fluff.

4. Inspire some real investigative journalist who will be a watchdog of sorts and bring out all the inconsistency. Instead of wondering, "hmm why did Podunk town of 1500 people win a grant for a armored vehicle, but the large metro area didn't win a grant" the journalist could look at it and say, "Hey, turns out the Chief at Podunk is brother in law to the Grant Committee Chairman of the Board"
 
Last edited:
I guess we were all fooled by those photos of them in Desert Storm right there with Bradley Fighting Vehicles and M1 Abrahm tanks.

A Humvee is not an instrument of war unless when it is unarmed, unarmored, and not used to make war on anyone or anything. It is a big diesel truck. Nothing more. If a bog diesel truck intimidates you, you should never leave the house. Painted black, blue or hello kitty pink, it is a big diesel truck. Nothing else.
Click to expand...
 
That military equipment and grants given to LE agencies aren't "free". There's always strings attached.

Last year, one of the excuses given for raising my property taxes was the federal grant given to the local PD to hire 50 more officers. Nothing says stupid like acquiring ongoing expense with one time money. One of the options floated was letting the 50 officers go, but we were told if they did that, the entire grant would have to be paid back, so that wasn't an option.
 
I guess we were all fooled by those photos of them in Desert Storm right there with Bradley Fighting Vehicles and M1 Abrahm tanks.

They also had bulldozers and front end loaders to clear the berms Saddam built up. Bulldozers and loaders are instruments of war? How about a 5 ton truck ( deuce and a half)? They are instruments of war? Cause I know a ton of farmers that use them every day, and they are not at war. An unarmed, and unarmored Humvee is not an instrument of war when it is not used that way.

Mount an M2 on it, sure it can be used for warfare.
 
Someone posted this photo earlier, and since this was in my hometown I can add some insight. What you are seeing in this photo is not our police department. FBI and Homeland Security were all over our town in an all out manhunt. The reason the town was locked down is because the town is only 4 square miles yet the population is 35,000 people. It would have been impossible to conduct any type of search as it can take 15-20 minutes sometimes just to cross town in traffic, and with so many LEO's running around even longer. Not only is the population 35,000 but their are bus lines running through the entire town and the town is a cut through to two different sections of Boston, so traffic is a PIA.

Now here is the thing that really ticked me off and I did not agree with. They were doing random mandatory searches of peoples homes for the suspect. Now I can just imagine what would have happened if they knocked on my door to do a search and I answered with a shotgun in my hand and a pistol on my hip, because god knows during that time I was not answering unarmed. I would have probably been thrown to the ground with a gun to my head while I was disarmed and my house was searched. Not only that but I sort of resemble the suspect, I have black curly hair and I am part Armenian, aka I have features that could pass off as Russian/Chechnyan/Middle Eastern. I would not have been a happy camper if I had to succumb to a search of my home and myself against my will while being forcefully disarmed.

Another thing I will add is the LEO's in my towns department need some serious target practice, because they riddled the whole neighborhood where the major firefight happened with dozens of rounds. Even peoples roofs were littered with bullets, and in that part of town EVERY home is a 2 story house. So for them to get rounds anywhere near the roof is pretty pitiful. There was a photo where a police officer shot a stray round into the second story of someones home, where the bullet struck dead center in the head rest of a computer chair. If they had been sitting at their desk they would have been killed.

As far as military style equipment being issued to them, none of the officers were able to get at their rifles. Our Chief of police is very anti gun, and had some crazy confusing tripple locking system on all the rifles in the cruisers. An officer I know personally who was on the scene, after not being able to get to his rifle due to the confusing locking system put the cruiser in drive and sent it towards the suspects to direct fire away from the officers. To show how much of an scumbag the chief is, for misuse of department property he was put on administrative leave and reamed out for destroying the cruiser. What he did potentially saved the lives of every officer on the scene as he directed fire away from them.

15ho21x.jpg
 
Last edited:
@Dragline45

I am in 100% agreement with you and your displeasure with the situation.

On a side note, am I the only person that sees 2 ridiculously powerful aspects of the picture?
1. The gunner in the humvee is aiming at the photographer taking the picture... and the photographer is in his own home.
2. The side of the humvee says: "military police"
 
On a side note, am I the only person that sees 2 ridiculously powerful aspects of the picture?
1. The gunner in the humvee is aiming at the photographer taking the picture... and the photographer is in his own home.
2. The side of the humvee says: "military police"
Click to expand...

I did notice the soldier in the Humvee pointing his rifle at the homeowner snapping the photo. Although in hindsight, could you blame him? Just the night before an all out firefight ensued that included the use of IED's.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top