Lawmakers aim to curb military surplus program for police after Ferguson

[TechMan]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/08/15/lawmakers-aim-to-curb-military-surplus-program-for-police-after-ferguson/

The startling scenes this week of heavily armed police clashing with protesters in a St. Louis suburb have galvanized a bipartisan push in Washington to challenge a controversial Pentagon program that gives away free military gear to local law enforcement.

Concerns about the so-called “militarization” of local police have been simmering for some time. But the clashes in Ferguson, Mo., over the death of an unarmed black teenager illustrated precisely what lawmakers have been worried about – police using a “military response” to subdue civilian riots and protests, and potentially escalating the situation in the process.

Well it is about time, but I believe it is to late.

[Tuco]

edit to be less inflammatory.

If this demilitarization comes to fruition, the Ferguson situation will illustrate the level of involvement required to cause said change.  Sadly, the type of motivation required is painful and significant, and the televised tantrum is what sparked legislation. 

[Battle Monkey of Zardoz]

edit to be less inflammatory.

If this demilitarization comes to fruition, the Ferguson situation will illustrate the level of involvement required to cause said change.  Sadly, the type of motivation required is painful and significant, and the televised tantrum is what sparked legislation. 

This^

Curb. Curb. How bout ELIMINATE ALL OF IT. I just hope they actually DO something, and are not making jerk off gestures.

[fifth_column]

It may very well be too late.  However, the media coverage is necessary for generating the will to make the needed changes.  There are more and more people carrying cameras and posting police tactics to the internet.  Awareness of the issue is growing, mostly through social media, and the MSM is starting to catch up.  I expect, as more people become aware of, and start protesting the abuses, that the .gov response will become more and more severe.  Police departments have had an "us against them" mentality for a long time, and it's an attitude that is fairly entrenched in the LE institutions.  The people running the institutions want to secure their existence for the future, expand their influence, and increase their power.  And these are large organizations, with a lot of power already.  They won't willingly reduce their influence.  People, on both sides, tend to act badly under the kind of pressure that is occurring in Ferguson, and other, similar neighborhoods.  I'm sure things will get worse, I just hope they'll get better in time.

The Rutherford Institute has a lot to say about the police state in our country:

Remember, a police state does not come about overnight. It starts small, perhaps with a revenue-generating red light camera at an intersection. When that is implemented without opposition, perhaps next will be surveillance cameras on public streets. License plate readers on police cruisers. More police officers on the beat. Free military equipment from the federal government. Free speech zones and zero tolerance policies and curfews. SWAT team raids. Drones flying overhead.

No matter how it starts, however, it always ends the same. Remember, it’s a slippery slope from a questionable infringement justified in the name of safety to all-out tyranny.

[TommyGunn]

It's been going on awhile ........


Every once in a while you hear about a police department somewhere finding a Thompson SMG or two or whatever in their armory, and if they're properly registered they will auction them off for perhaps thousands of dollars.  Do you know how many M-4s that $$$ can buy?
The main point being the Thompson was never a commercial success way back in the '20s, and anyway whatever success it may have enjoyed ended in 1933.
But even back in the 20s few people wanted to shell out $200.00 (WAY LOT of $$ back then!!!) for a heavy awkward gun that chewed through ammo like cr@p through a goose.  It wasn't until the military took interest and especially WW2 that the Thompson found a really needful customer. 
That was militarization back 1946-7 style.
In fact even pre WW2 their were advertising posters printed out showing police motorcycles with a Thompson mounted on the handlebars pointing ahead. 
 Now the MRAPS and body armor and sniper rifles and the attitude .... THAT, is really pretty recent .....

[Phantom Warrior]

I have seen some interesting psychological commentary about the effect on crowds of being policed by faceless armored automatons versus guys in regular uniforms.  The idea being it encourages more anger and violence.  I'm not sure whether I buy that or not.

I'm not as worried about the equipment as I am the attitude and tactics.  You can violate someone's civil rights just as effectively with a revolver, a nightstick, and a water hose as you can with an M4, taser, and armored vehicles.  The problem is the apparent willingness by many police departments to do anything to ensure officer safety and catch the bad guy.  No matter what the consequences are or what civil liberties are infringed.  Which results in things like no-knock raids for non-violent crimes, violating a guy's rectum because the cops thought he might have drugs up there, the tendency to immediately go for a gun over a less lethal option, and all the other bad behavior we've seen lately.

Reducing the military surplus program might help change the attitude of many police.  But I think the root problem is not the equipment, but the attitude.  Anymore than the root problem with a school shooter is the AR-15 rather than their own mental issues.

[brimic]

But I think the root problem is not the equipment, but the attitude.

+a millionty.
I'd rather have cops with M1 Abrams tanks, and Apache helicoptors who take their oath to uphold the constitution seriously, than thugs with nightsticks who worry about officer safety first over people's rights.

[Fitz]

Well , the good news is, we have cops with military equipment who worry about officer safety first over people's rights.

[lupinus]

+a millionty.
I'd rather have cops with M1 Abrams tanks, and Apache helicoptors who take their oath to uphold the constitution seriously, than thugs with nightsticks who worry about officer safety first over people's rights.

Agreed.

But, I think in a lot of ways they feed into each other. If you've got the toys, damnit you're going to put the toys to use.

[griz]

I thought throwing a stun grenade in a crib with a baby in it would be enough to point out the militarization of our police forces.  But if it takes TV coverage of them looking like a totalitarian state trying to crush dissent, so be it.

[Tallpine]

I thought throwing a stun grenade in a crib with a baby in it would be enough to point out the militarization of our police forces.  But if it takes TV coverage of them looking like a totalitarian state trying to crush dissent, so be it.

Not to mention martial law / military invasion just to find one teenager 

I'm still pissed about the destruction of a classic wooden boat 

[Brad Johnson]

I'm still pissed about the destruction of a classic wooden boat 

Pffft... You probably think automotive technology peaked with wood spoked wheels. 

Brad

[Tallpine]

Pffft... You probably think automotive technology peaked with wood spoked wheels.  

Brad

Danged horseless carraiges

[roo_ster]

Danged horseless carraiges

A passing fashion (if the lefties get their way).

[Jamisjockey]

Not to mention martial law / military invasion just to find one teenager 

I'm still pissed about the destruction of a classic wooden boat 

Truth.  You'd think that the invasion of Boston would have woken people up....instead, the police state was cheered.  Because, after all it was an alert citizen that spotted the Tsarnev brother, not the occupying forces of Boston.

[lupinus]

Truth.  You'd think that the invasion of Boston would have woken people up....instead, the police state was cheered.  Because, after all it was an alert citizen that spotted the Tsarnev brother, not the occupying forces of Boston.

But but...teh terrorists zomg! !!

[Ben]

Truth.  You'd think that the invasion of Boston would have woken people up....instead, the police state was cheered.  Because, after all it was an alert citizen that spotted the Tsarnev brother, not the occupying forces of Boston.

I was hoping to see some good come out of Ferguson with what looked like the beginnings of a national conversation on militarized police. After the goings on last night, thanks to the dumbass looters, I'm seeing, on the interwebz at least, a shift to "this is why we need military gear for LE".

I can't necessarily disagree, even being anti-militarized police. Last night's example (at least what has been portrayed on the MSM) was a good reason to have the stuff for specific situations (I still think the requirement should be for it all to be painted pink, possibly with teletubbies painted all over the outside), but that one example may very well shift the conversation to a race for every podunk LE agency to soldier up and escalate the misuse of the equipment. I really hate looters. About as much as I hate the "safety above all else" conservatives that applauded what cops did in Boston and what happens in our airports on a daily basis.

[lupinus]

I was hoping to see some good come out of Ferguson with what looked like the beginnings of a national conversation on militarized police. After the goings on last night, thanks to the dumbass looters, I'm seeing, on the interwebz at least, a shift to "this is why we need military gear for LE".

I can't necessarily disagree, even being anti-militarized police. Last night's example (at least what has been portrayed on the MSM) was a good reason to have the stuff for specific situations (I still think the requirement should be for it all to be painted pink, possibly with teletubbies painted all over the outside), but that one example may very well shift the conversation to a race for every podunk LE agency to soldier up and escalate the misuse of the equipment. I really hate looters. About as much as I hate the "safety above all else" conservatives that applauded what cops did in Boston and what happens in our airports on a daily basis.

I still think if there is a situation that requires that level of force the chief should have to get on the line with the governor and request national guard to assist with the big toys. It's a pain in the ass. It's slow. And it's entirely possible for the governor to instruct the chief to go pound sand.

IMO that's a good thing. Deploying such toys against citizens should be a pain in the ass, slow, and have to go through a few layers of oversight that could say no. Police have no business being their own private little army's. There's nothing here police can't handle without breaking out the riot gear.

[White Horseradish]

An APC is about 50K. A wearable camera ruggedized for police use is about $900.

Seems to me outfitting 50 officers with cameras is money better spent.

[Ben]

IMO that's a good thing. Deploying such toys against citizens should be a pain in the ass, slow, and have to go through a few layers of oversight that could say no. Police have no business being their own private little army's. There's nothing here police can't handle without breaking out the riot gear.

No argument there. At all.

[Tallpine]

No argument there. At all.

I have an argument.

It should be "armies" not "army's" 

[Phantom Warrior]

An APC is about 50K. A wearable camera ruggedized for police use is about $900.

Seems to me outfitting 50 officers with cameras is money better spent.

Except the cameras come out of the departmental budget.  The APC probably doesn't.  Military surplus, federal grants, whatever.  Not defending it.  But that's the math.

[fifth_column]

Truth.  You'd think that the invasion of Boston would have woken people up....instead, the police state was cheered.  Because, after all it was an alert citizen that spotted the Tsarnev brother, not the occupying forces of Boston.

You're assuming people are capable of being woken up.  People will continue to follow the latest topic in the MSM, or on facebook, or whatever source of distraction they prefer.  Not that it's surprising.  As far as totalitarian states go, this one is damn comfortable . . .

I have an argument.

It should be "armies" not "army's" 

That's not an argument . . .

[KD5NRH]

An APC is about 50K. A wearable camera ruggedized for police use is about $900.

"Ruggedized for police use?"  What, a regular $300 GoPro helmet mount kit can't handle the fumes in the bathroom?

[KD5NRH]

I can't necessarily disagree, even being anti-militarized police. Last night's example (at least what has been portrayed on the MSM) was a good reason to have the stuff for specific situations (I still think the requirement should be for it all to be painted pink, possibly with teletubbies painted all over the outside),

All balaclavas required to be lavender with baby pink lace trim.  All other tactical clothing color schemes subject to approval by Richard Simmons.