The militarization of the police

Discussion in 'Off-topic' started by Thorsen, Jul 25, 2007.

  1. Thorsen

    Thorsen New Member

    4,226
    0
    0
    In another thread I made a statement concerning the militarization of the police and how all Americans should be concerned about this subject. While experiencing my nightly bout of insomnia and surfing the net, I came across this Cato document on the subject.

    It is long and is in pdf format, but if you have the time it is well worth the read. If you don't want to read the entire thing, I would suggest skipping to the last section and reading just the cases of erroneous entry done by the police.

    According to Cato, the militarization of the police and the increased usage of these paramilitary units has led to unnecessary death and hardship. Additionally, there is an unacceptable percentage of no-knock entries being done on innocent people due to the weak requirements to obtain these warrants.

    One of the things that I especially noticed is that if a citizen was not killed outright by the police when they defended themselves with a firearm, they invariably were brought up on charges. Police, on the other hand, regularly are given a free pass in instances where they use their weapons in a bad entry situation.

    When I did some additional research on why people would be charged if the police were in fact prosecuting an illegal arrest when they enter their home on either erroneous information or simply because of negligence, I found that contrary to what I thought, except for only twelve states you are prohibited from resisting an unlawful arrest. The article I found stating this is located here.

    Thankfully for us, Georgia is one of the twelve states that still recognize a citizen's right under common law to resist an unlawful arrest.

    Read both of the links I have posted. If you have the same reaction I had, first you will be astounded, then you will start to get really, really pissed off.
     

  2. lsu_nonleg

    lsu_nonleg New Member

    824
    0
    0
    Works real well in Dekalb, they just make sure you're not alive to testify.

    It's not just the war on drugs; just look at any group that gets demonized with a lack of direct evidence proving that someone is actually a danger to the public (ie, someone with a BAC of .09...) Cops by and large have a distorted view of what their role is. Some see themselves as crusaders (see the cop named Stacy? that prides himself on over 500 DUI convictions or pleas in a calendar year). Others see themselves as worker bees who will cheerfully follow orders that even they know are unlawful for the "court will sort it out later" (that was a scenario rehash of New Orleans confiscations from a chick that had just graduated the academy, look out Dunwoody!)

    Law enforcement has put itself in the same position as everyone else in my mind: Useless and probably dangerous until proven otherwise.
     
  3. lsu_nonleg

    lsu_nonleg New Member

    824
    0
    0
    Slightly OT for militarization in particular, but backs up my earlier statements.
    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,290662,00.html
    Just relax and take it, baby. Cause that's what I want to do when someone is trying to forcefully push my face into bricks, let alone the sidewalks in the French Quarter. Especially in a town where the cops are known for their virtue and honor. Hospital noted facial fractures on the old man, of course it's not clear when they occurred.

    All of this started because he asked a cop what time curfew started. Please also note that battery charges were filed by the DA against one of the cops who saw the camera man filming this beat down. Hm. If you're a paratrooper in Ramadi and you see an AP stringer, it's OK to trip him. But if you're a cop in the US, you're only doing this because you feel a little guilty on the inside.
     
  4. tj2000

    tj2000 New Member

    397
    0
    0
    Yeah, but they get to wear and use such coooool gear.
    :shoot:
     
  5. Thorsen

    Thorsen New Member

    4,226
    0
    0
    Folks, I want to be clear here. I am not demonizing the police at all. The vast majority of police are decent people just doing a job. What I am pointing out through the Cato article is that the two decade old policy of gradually militarizing the police is bad policy that creates the potential for the abuses the Cato study documents. This is confounded by the reversal in most states of a citizens long held common law rights to resist an illegal arrest with violence if necessary.

    A recipe for disaster and one that has played out far too many times as shown by Cato.
     
  6. lsu_nonleg

    lsu_nonleg New Member

    824
    0
    0
    That's something I slide into real fast, it's not your fault. However, I don't think you can cleave cleanly asunder the militarization aspect from the "attitude" issue.

    To me, they're intertwined like Kudzu and wait-a-minute vines (along with judicial and legislative activism at cross purposes with liberty).

    It's hard to get your force to be officer friendly from Mayberry when you're instilling into protocol that you armor up to the nines and bring in tactical vehicles because someone is purported to have some guns in the house. Use that statement in the 50s, and people (I'm guessing) would look at you blankly and say, "So?"

    Overwhelming force has become the default because of the availability of cheap or free equipment and training, regardless of the actual risk. Either here or on Kim's site I pointed out the website of the Gadsden, AL Tactical Team with their equipment pics. Someone may only have two pounds of weed and a rusty .38 in their doublewide, but why not go in with flashbangs, shoot the dog, beat up the wife, and generally make a nuisance of yourself? It's about force protection after all. Lawdog wouldn't need all that stuff :)
     
  7. tace

    tace New Member

    1,981
    0
    0
    In all due respect, I believe you are confusing two things.

    One is the trumping of citizens rights, carried out in forms of no knock warrants, etc. Courts allowed this in the first place when it should have never been seen as constitutional. Of course this whole war on terror stuff gave the Bush admin all the excuse they needed to erode whatever other protections we were granted under the constitution or law.

    Second is the militarization, which grew rapidly after the incidents like the LA Bank shoot out and the Miami FBI incident when the LEOs were badly outgunned by the crooks. I can't say I blame them either since, just a couple of months ago, some drug dealer felon was caught with a (IIRC) full auto M16 (or maybe AK) and bullet proof vest, in Gwinnet county.

    The LEOs have a reason to gear up, but they have NO excuse to execute a no knock warrant and shoot at me for defending my family and house.
     
  8. lsu_nonleg

    lsu_nonleg New Member

    824
    0
    0
    Me?? :shock:

    Detail, please, in a different thread, exactly what sections of the much maligned patriot act, etc. to which you refer. This is the same strawman argument that my mother uses, and it doesn't fly intra-family either. Please refrain from theoretical quotes lifted from the NYT and CBS, and use actual laws, regulations, cases, etc.

    And a shootout in LA obviously requires a podunk town (I actually kinda like podunk AL towns) in Alabama to have tacticool equipment, including vehicles, helicopters, "assault" rifles, and dedicated tactical teams just like their big cousins in Birmingham. If the LA incident had happened in Mississippi, four guys in pickup trucks could have pulled a rifle off the rack, been deputized, and made an easy 150 yard shot.

    Let's do a shoutout to the FBI statistics that show LE deaths, the one our fearless leaders used at the discussion over car carry in the state (L) forum. If zero cops are killed by firearms in a calendar year, and we're averaging less than five per decade, how much "offensive" equipment does that justify to be used against the populace?

    I just don't buy the emotional arguments as a justification for going balls to the wall with equipment, SMGs, shotguns, rifles, choppers, tactical teams, APCs, in every metro area with more than 1,000 people in it. State Troopers/Texas Rangers can keep the keys to the "big stuff" and basically have the sole HRT/Tactical teams, keeping that stuff out of the hands of localized PD, and creating a higher bar for employment of such tactics and weapons. Yeah, the state Tactical team would have a couple of offices in Atlanta Metro, but there's still a separation of powers and duties that I think is valuable in that.
     
  9. Thorsen

    Thorsen New Member

    4,226
    0
    0
    Actually the militarization of the police is a direct result of the war on drugs. Read the Cato report.
     
  10. ptsmith24

    ptsmith24 New Member

    8,809
    0
    0
    Yea, it's nuts. I got a OMB Express Police Supply catalog the other day in the mail from when I ordered some mags...It was full of all out gear...
     
  11. ber950

    ber950 Active Member

    3,563
    3
    38
    Its one of the causes not the only cause. It would have occurred without the war on drugs. Maybe not as fast. Frankly I think the Anti-Terrorism bandwagon is the biggest problem right now.
     
  12. Malum Prohibitum

    Malum Prohibitum Moderator Staff Member

    63,395
    395
    83
    That judge sickens me.
     
  13. Malum Prohibitum

    Malum Prohibitum Moderator Staff Member

    63,395
    395
    83
    :shock:
     
  14. Malum Prohibitum

    Malum Prohibitum Moderator Staff Member

    63,395
    395
    83

    This was the guy who did not want it filmed.


    You may also remember the officer who was using a horse to block the camera.

    If you are proud of what you are doing, then you should not mind it being recorded for all to see.

    Just remember if you visit New Orleans, you may run into these people.
     
  15. Malum Prohibitum

    Malum Prohibitum Moderator Staff Member

    63,395
    395
    83
     
  16. lsu_nonleg

    lsu_nonleg New Member

    824
    0
    0
    This happened on BOURBON Street. Suspicion of being drunk? BOURBON STREET. I've been drunk on BOURBON at 9am on a Tuesday and never been "stopped."

    Sorry for dragging you into this tangent, MP :) Didn't think it was going to go this far.
     
  17. AV8R

    AV8R Banned

    6,624
    0
    0
    [/quote:33qzn743]

    Me, too. Many times, in fact. :drink: