POLICE MILITARIZATION: is it a Positive or Negative trend in America today?

SCPO Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 26 Apr 2017 11:31:09 -0400

Having spent a second career in law enforcement, I've commented a number of times on RP on various police-related posts, usually to the castigation by those who know absolutely nothing about police work. Please enjoy this discussion.

http://inhomelandsecurity.com/police-militarization-america/?utm_source=IHS&utm_medium=newsletter&utm_content=police-militarization-america&utm_campaign=20170426IHS

police-militarization-america

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 26 at 2017 11:34 AM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 26 Apr 2017 11:34:49 -0400

SCPO Private RallyPoint Member don't know that it can be classified as either. It is a direct response to the use of force that has been used against officers. As the use of increased force against police has gone up, the use of like, or "one step higher" force has been utilized by police forces. Just like the Use of Force Continuum states, The officer shall use force one step higher than that being used against them.
SWAT didn't start using high-powered rifles until the LA incident, in which SWAT teams had to go to civilian gun shops in order to get weapons powerful enough to stop the assailants, who were clad in body armor from head to toe. SWAT didn't start using entry vehicles until they started coming under fire from those barracading themselves.
So, it is a positive for the responders as it is in direct correlation to what they have been facing. But it is also a negative because it reflects the direction society has gone.

Response by SGT Kevin Berman made Apr 26 at 2017 11:39 AM

SGT Kevin Berman — Wed, 26 Apr 2017 11:39:02 -0400

I think this statement most will agree to: "As a retired U.S. Army Military Police officer and as a former deputy sheriff, I do not generally support the militarized policing model. However, I certainly support efforts to ensure officers can effectively dominate armed encounters."

Picking on the photo - if that is a picture of a SWAT team I don't have much issue w/ the equipment, though not sure they need to BDU's. If a 'regular' sheriff unit not sure they need what appears to be the latest in military equipment.

Skip the BDU's and stick with Police 'Blue' colors - maybe just clothing, but does change the 'image' civilians first see. In the picture, the only thing that person can tell that this is not a military unit is the Sheriff on the vest.

Response by SSgt Gary Andrews made Apr 26 at 2017 11:39 AM

SSgt Gary Andrews — Wed, 26 Apr 2017 11:39:05 -0400

Sometimes it seems they have gone a bridge too far......but then I remember that incident in North Hollywood several years ago when the police were horribly outgunned. That shouldn't happen....so I think departments should have a "military" capabilty for certain contingencies, but should not deploy it in situations that can be controlled by normal police procedures. I'm no expert in these matters.....just my opinion as a layman.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 26 at 2017 11:45 AM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 26 Apr 2017 11:45:39 -0400

Hi, Senior Chief.

I've had this conversation before, and I always brought up the North Hollywood incident. Those perps started it all.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 26 at 2017 11:51 AM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 26 Apr 2017 11:51:26 -0400

There are times when police to respond a little too forceful for some situations, but then there are other times when they have to respond heavy as criminals nowadays are more heavily armed than what they were back in the day.

Response by CPT Jack Durish made Apr 26 at 2017 11:52 AM

CPT Jack Durish — Wed, 26 Apr 2017 11:52:39 -0400

I can't imagine that anyone would want militarized police in their community if they watched an infantry platoon in action. When in action, the infantry destroys targets and kills people. It attacks with a level of aggression that will insure its success by using overwhelming force. Policing is nothing like that, nothing at all. Policing is about the investigation of crime and the apprehension of criminals. I have often told of my experience while living in Honolulu of the terrible record the police there had in shooting suspects. The city invested in advanced training in alternate methods of personal combat as well as psyops for police officers. Shortly after the first police graduated, there was an incident when two officers were attacked by perpetrators they had interrupted in the commission of a robbery. Once officer was wounded and the other, rather than drawing his weapon, talked them down and arrested them. It was an incredible demonstration of the effectiveness of properly training officers of the law.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 26 at 2017 11:58 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 26 Apr 2017 11:58:36 -0400

Local police are going to be, in most cases, the first to arrive on a scene. If I'm not mistaken, this "militarization" of police started after that bank robbery incident in Los Angeles where the LAPD were outmatched by 2 men with body armor and AK-47s. The threat now to local police is greater than it has been since the days of gangsters in the early to mid 20th century, if not ever.

Do I think they should get Anti-Tank weapons, M1 Abrams, or M2/M3 Bradleys? No. I don't see a problem with them getting surplus MRAPs or wearing body armor though. These are the people that are our first line of defense against gang violence, drug dealers, terrorists, and all those other threats to our safety and security.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 26 at 2017 12:00 PM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 26 Apr 2017 12:00:35 -0400

I've worked on the local, federal, and military levels of policing and currently work for a public defenders office and feel the militarized policing has its place, however, it shouldn't be used daily. The daily policing model should be similar to the community policing model with the ability to use tactical teams or riot squads as necessary to help protect life and property. Police should not be prevented from using protective clothing and equipment to protect them self, however an effort should be made to prevent the officers from appearing to be military members. I'm also not opposed to armored vehicles for use by police because they have many purposes such as transporting personnel through a dangerous situation safely, however, an effort should be made to keep the paint scheme as the patrol cars.

Ultimately, I am in favor of the trend law enforcement has recently followed because it is in response to current threats they face, however, an attempt should be make to prevent the militarized appearance.

Response by SSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 26 at 2017 12:00 PM

SSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 26 Apr 2017 12:00:53 -0400

I did a paper on this for one of my law enforcement ethics classes. I'll have to post parts of it here later today/tonight.

Response by MCPO Roger Collins made Apr 26 at 2017 12:03 PM

MCPO Roger Collins — Wed, 26 Apr 2017 12:03:17 -0400

Same answer as before, we should be equipped to meet the bad guys with more lethal weapons than they do have. Also, some of the excess vehicles can be used for emergency purposes as well as protecting the LEOs. They don't scare you if you are not doing something unlawful.

Response by SSgt Boyd Welch made Apr 26 at 2017 12:14 PM

SSgt Boyd Welch — Wed, 26 Apr 2017 12:14:41 -0400

As a former LEO (many years ago), I've seen what happens to community policing when over zealous officers shoot at little or no provocation. Any movement by the suspect is not a "I felt my life was threatened. (case in point the officer that shot an elderly man during a traffic stop when he was asked to step outside the vehicle and he reached back inside to get his cane. To the officers horror he saw the cane fall to the asphalt after he shot the gentleman. Swat tactics with "no-knock" raids on simple drug busts when the family pet is shot for barking at the intruder when a daytime warrant and arrest would have sufficed. I myself had to stop a swat officer from shooting a suspect coming down the hallway onto the front porch with his hands up. (wrong address on the warrant on that one). It's why I did not continue in Law Enforcement. Unfortunately small towns of 5,000-15,000 population feel the need to use the toys they've gotten from the federal government under the 1033 program whether the justification exists or not. Posse Comitatus was supposed to keep the military from being used against US citizens. However, the cities are creating their own armies not under federal jurisdiction. They wear BDU's, camo paint, Kevlar helmets, bloused boots, plate carriers, military style rifles and weapons, grenades(flash bangs), possess helicopters and drones and are trying to get weaponized drones for use in policing.
Too many homeowners shot by officers breaking in at 2 am when a groggy resident tries to defend themselves against an unknown intruder. To quote a saying: "The First Law of the Instrument states that if you give a boy a hammer, he suddenly finds that everything needs pounding......" Just an old guys opinion....

Response by Sgt John Steinmeier made Apr 26 at 2017 12:30 PM

Sgt John Steinmeier — Wed, 26 Apr 2017 12:30:38 -0400

In my area the police pretty much look run of the mill. The local agencies do have their Emergency Services Teams and use them in situations that require them. They look scarey with their kit and evil black rifles. However maybe that is a good thing they look like that every once in a while. In this day and age where a street corner in Anytown USA can turn into Fallujah (ie San Bernardino, Orlando), the police need to be ready for a near military like response.

Response by SFC Jim Ruether made Apr 26 at 2017 12:42 PM

SFC Jim Ruether — Wed, 26 Apr 2017 12:42:23 -0400

Definitely a negative trend. Obviously the local Sheriff's Dept or PD has no respect in their own jurisdiction which needs to change and change quickly.

Response by PO3 Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 26 at 2017 12:58 PM

PO3 Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 26 Apr 2017 12:58:38 -0400

Negative trend.
All it means is the turning of America into Europe.

Response by SFC J Fullerton made Apr 26 at 2017 1:51 PM

SFC J Fullerton — Wed, 26 Apr 2017 13:51:59 -0400

There are two sides to this issue: 1. Police forces using military weapons and tactics giving the "appearance" of a Militarized Police Force.
2. The high number of military veterans hired into law enforcement giving the "appearance" of a Militarized Police Force.
A liberal watchdog group called the "Marshall Project" has made so called studies to try and link veteran cops with PTSD to police violence and excessive force. About a month ago there was a big article in USA TODAY about this. The article was trying to point out that many law enforcement agencies actively recruit veterans, and portray that as the "militarization" of police. It pissed me off because it was clearly degrading veterans as being "unfit" to be cops. Pure garbage.

Response by CSM Charles Hayden made Apr 26 at 2017 2:52 PM

CSM Charles Hayden — Wed, 26 Apr 2017 14:52:08 -0400

SCPO Private RallyPoint Member Just a comment: why do any civilian LEOs need bloused, combat boots?

Response by SrA Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 26 at 2017 8:43 PM

SrA Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 26 Apr 2017 20:43:43 -0400

Just like in the military as technology and threats evolve so to must law enforcement. So my answer is: militarization isn't positive or negative, it's necessary!

Response by COL Charles Williams made Apr 27 at 2017 11:20 PM

COL Charles Williams — Thu, 27 Apr 2017 23:20:44 -0400

SCPO Private RallyPoint Member Positive. As you know, there are actual bad guys in the US and around the world. Security forces must evolve to keep pace and stay ahead of those potential threats... That is what is going on today.

I want to know that if bad people appear, our security forces can meet them, and defeat them decisively. Police carried shotguns years ago, to use when the revolver was not the answer. Today, (and for many years) we need assault rifles and armor (and much more) to deal with the many potential threats.

Police, Courts, and Prisons (The Rule of Law) is all that keeps us on the up side of anarchy like many places around this world.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 28 at 2017 12:46 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 28 Apr 2017 12:46:42 -0400

Yet we rarely hear anybody crying about criminals that equip themselves with mil-gear. 12 years infantry and now as a cop. A police department would have a very hard time mirroring an infantry unit by definition. Different purposes. However, with the threats that CAN and sometimes do face today's police on the street, what's wrong with street cops having access to the equipment that will ensure their safety and their ability to mitigate a legitimate theat thus serving and protecting their communities. If the bad guys can get it and use it, why shouldn't cops be able to. Cops have much higher training requirements than hehe bad guys do don't they? Duh. But we're worried about the cops Having the equipment? Since when are police somehow more scrutinized than the offender? Let's keep in mind a LOT of today's law enforcement are prior military. Who better to be trained with the equipment, than those already used to the gear.

Response by SCPO Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 28 at 2017 10:48 PM

SCPO Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 28 Apr 2017 22:48:26 -0400

The man, who cold-bloodedly executed Delaware state trooper Stephan Ballard recently, eluded police until he was cornered in a two-story home. HE continued to fire upon police who responded to scene. He was so heavily armed that police brought in a militarized battering ram to aid in the assailant's quicker exit from the house. This picture shows what police encountered. Armored vehicles serve a very valuable purpose...protecting the police as they try to neutralize deadly situations. Surplus military equipment aids them in this constant challenge to protect and serve the public.

Response by SSG Edward Tilton made May 17 at 2017 3:36 PM

SSG Edward Tilton — Wed, 17 May 2017 15:36:36 -0400

WaaaY too much, If a Policeman can't walk his beat he is an occupier.