What are your thoughts on “Militarizing the Police?”

The police are not disciplined like the military. So until they are, they don't need to use the same weapons as we do. Now, if they go through say Basic like we did, they can use military grade weapons. That's my thought on it.

LTC Yinon Weiss Sir, I am certain this opinion may not be popular, but as a career law enforcement officer in and out of the military, there is a place for military style tactics. The rests and resides with Crisis Response Teams, Special Weapons and Tactics Teams, Hostage Rescue Teams, etc. For the average patrol officer a professional appearance in a uniform without bloused trousers is not only a more clean appearance, but also one which can diffuse a situation.

The first step in use of force is officer presence and I am one of the first to say that a military or tactical look can actually increase anxiety in persons and may result in a poor response. Contrary to that, is the officer who has a professional appearance in a uniform which does not appear tactical or military in nature.

Are special vehicles such as MRAPs or other armored vehicles needed by police? Again, yes for tactical and special units, but not for patrol. Having the ability to remove the door to a residence without exiting a vehicle is a huge benefit and saves lives, not only law enforcement but the persons being assisted. Being able to get close to an armed individual without placing officers in danger is also a benefit as you can utilize this equipment as a crisis negotiation platform.

Further, may criminal elements, whether street gangs, drug organizations, organized crime, and even individuals, have assault weapons and as a law enforcement officer you must plan for every contingency. Tactical officers, most often, are only utilized in high risk situations. Consequently, having the support of military style weapons, vehicles, body armor, and equipment is a necessary evil in the 21st century. Even the British Metropolitan Police, which have been unarmed for their entire history, have now armed many police officers and have added tactical response to their repertoire.

I am not a "Die Hard" conspiracy theorist, but I always keep this movie in mind when I hear about rioting and calling for a militarized police presence. It makes you think.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TMCKe_EpJJk

It is a lot easier for me to identify with the struggles of law enforcement and the safety of our Nation than the civil rights of people throwing molotov cocktails and people running out of stores with property that is not their own. Criminals and activists will demand that police have video cameras implanted up their butt while maintaining their own freedoms shall never be infringed. I have no problems with cameras, scanners, drug sniffing pooches, and I would even put a visible ID card on my chest if asked. However, that is the mentality of most people who put the service of others ahead of their personal freedoms. Military, police, first responders, and the likes give and give and yet they are the most scrutinized and underpaid. Very frustrating.

Arming and equipping the police as a paramilitary force makes no more sense than arming and equipping the military as police officers. Their missions are entirely different. Police enforce the laws to help maintain a civil society and investigate crimes. The military destroys an enemy's capacity to make war. One helps maintain a society while the other must necessarily tear it apart. That sounds harsh, but those who study war know that "innocent civilians" are as much strategic assets as are military forces.

Training and equipping the police as paramilitary forces has exacerbated community problems, especially those related to race relations. Police standing around in armor and carrying automatic weapons are not as approachable as beat cops once were. Police lines dressed in riot gear forming at every hint of a problem tend to inflame passions rather than defuse them.

Let me tell you a story...

When I lived in Honolulu, the police force there accumulated a sad record of shooting deaths and critical injuries while pursuing and apprehending suspected perpetrators. The city responded by investing in additional training for the officers in nonlethal combat and psychological methods of disarming perps and defusing tense situations. The proof of their success came in one incident wherein an officer talked down and arrested two bank robbers who had wounded the officer's partner during the initial stages of the confrontation.

We are now moving into a new era with new threats, terrorist threats, and the federal government, beginning with George Bush, has taken the approach of telling citizens to hunker down and let the professionals defend them. The problem is that they have begun to use this approach as an excuse to eat away at our liberties. The truth is that our fearless defenders can't be everywhere at once. I believe that they should have taken advantage of the fact that many Americans are still fiercely independent and proud of their heritage of self reliance. They should have reconstituted Civil Defense to train and organize communities to help with damage control, search and rescue, fire fighting, emergency medical care, etc. Individual communities should have been encouraged to formalize militias using veterans to provide training and leadership.

Sadly, our fearless leaders in Washington and our state houses are more inclined to throw money at problems than solve them.

The police need the proper tools to perform the mission they are called upon to do. Those tools include equipment and training.

The reason the police are "militarizing" is because the criminals (and the population as a whole) are militarizing. Nobody, except for the criminals, want the police to be out-gunned.

As criminal enterprises get more and more sophisticated, armed and organized, the police must equip itself and train to counter that threat. Although it may be troublesome for some to understand, that means that, to effectively counter the threat the police must become more like the military. That does not mean that they must enter every situation like a Ranger Seal Team on a mission. But it does mean that they need to have the tools and training available in the event they encounter a situation that needs it. They simply do not have the time to wait for help from someone else to counter the situation.

Is there potential for abuse? Of course. I, for one, think that would be the exception, not the rule.

The militarization of the Police, has been brought to us by the weaponry many criminals have access to, this started in the 80's when L.A. gangs and the Colombian Drug Cartels were popping each other off like it was the national past time. Many Police were in the line of fire, and were seriously outgunned. When street gangs had access to armor piercing rounds, there tends to be a huge problem. The problem has persisted, the Police Tactical units are trained in a Military fashion for just such happening, and then with the everything after 9/11, things have spiraled to where we're at now. This has been common practice for some time now, and the Media Circus that is Ferguson brought it further into the light. What many people are not doing is looking at this militarization from a historic perspective, what led to this? Ferguson was a media fiasco, many things were broadcast in National News, that was the furthest thing from the truth. The Media wants everyone to go along with their agenda, and not question them, and many sheep follow the news blindly, not seeing anything other than what the media shows. But, if you scratch the surface, and go beyond what the media divulges, you will find more truth, than what the media presents. The Media lies about everything, and the do it in the name of sales and marketing, drama sells and the media will lie to make that sale. Always fact check. There are many things the Mainstream Media left out of the Ferguson debacle. This was not racially motivated, this was not a matter of an innocent black youth was shot and killed while he was surrendering to the police, this was not the Community Rioting... So many things were stated by the media that was not true. Truth be told, The Community is 60% Black, and the city is more than willing to hire anyone of color, if they just applied. The shooting occurred as the suspect did a strong arm robbery, he was not giving up to the police, his hands were not up, and he did not say "don't shoot." He was stopped, he assaulted the officer repeatedly. His 22 year old friend, the "witness," lied about the circumstances and then recanted. The suspect was not shot in the back, autopsy shows all 6 shots were found in the front. The community called for piece. The rioting started the night it happened, a Quick Trip store was burned down, many local shops were looted and robbed. The St Louis County Police responded after two days of this, and brought out riot control. Out of 163 people arrested, only 7 were actually from Ferguson, the others were from surrounding communities, and they came out to destroy the neighborhood and steel what they could. The day Monday after the rioting started, Ferguson Citizens tried cleaning up what the looters and rioters destroyed, only to be called racist slurs. Ron Johnson, a local resident and Police Captain advised the media to stop stirring the pot, bear in mind, Captain Johnson, is a man of color, and grew up in the vicinity, knows the neighborhood and graduated from a local High School. The list goes on, about what the national media did not cover...

I think this is just a ridiculas media ploy. SWAT has used up armored vehicles for decades, I'd rather they get our unused MRAPs than the Afghan military or other nations. IMO SWAT isn't "overused" they go on high risk calls that beat cops aren't equipped for, maybe it's less that they are over used and more that the number of high risk calls has increased, let's not tell them how to do their job, and focus on ours.

The police are supposed to serve and protect, the courts are supposed to try determine guilt or innocence. The prison system should administer the sentence determined by the courts. IF OUR COURTS WOULD DO THEIR JOB, criminals would reform, move, or be incarcerated. The police would have little need for more then one swat team, and they would probably not be needed full time. I feel strongly that we are fighting two wars we need to quit fighting. In the 20's and 30's we were fighting the war on a drug(alcohol) gang wars were rampant citizens were dying in the streets. We repealed prohibition, the gangs disappeared and the smugglers disappeared, alcohol was controlled, legal, taxed, and cheap. No profit for the gangs. We have a "new war on drugs" enormous profits, encourage the cartels, and gangs to violence to expand their profitability. The U.S. confiscates and destroys what drugs they intercept. We need to legalize marijuana inspect and tax it. Control it like alcohol with severe penalties for using it and driving. Like tobacco and alcohol licence and control the sale of marijuana, with strict enforcement and enforced penalties for sales to minors. Many of the laws relating to alcohol and tobacco are not enforced, and the penalties are a mere slap on the wrist. To make marijuana unprofitable, search for and confiscate undeclared and untaxed marijuana shipments. turn them over to a licensed distributor, for a fair price. The distributor would check for quality, package it for sale with the tax paid and the stamp applied. This would generate revenue to pay for the drug searches, and lower the price to make it unprofitable for the cartels to smuggle it. Licence growers/distributors in the U.S. and have licence distributors in foreign countries to collect process and ship to the U.S. with a legal destination to legally process and distribute the product in the U.S.. This would eliminate the major need for the "militarized police".

The local government should never have war powers against it's own people. The words of Thomas Jefferson comes to mind.