The growing militarization of civilian police

[Trigger]

Sorry for being late to the party gents.

After 14 pages one thing is clear: There are huge misconceptions among a few of you regarding what a 'normal' patrol officer looks like, acts like and carries on a routine basis versus a SWAT or SRT officer. Some of you seem like you are just mis-informed, others have very strong prejudices. I respect all of your opinions, so don't get insulted if I tell you that you're wrong about some of this stuff. My perspective is that of a patrol officer with several years on the job. I won't speak for the police forces of other nations. I am not familiar with their particular rules and regulations.

For starters I think it should be called a 'moderization' not a 'militarization'.

Some of you are under the impression that the police are some kind of foreign entity in the areas they patrol. (Flagg) mentions talking to the locals whilst wearing sunglasses as if it's some kind of cultural no-no. We live and work in the cities and counties we patrol. Everyone from toddlers to grandmothers are wearing sunglasses. None of them give a damn if I am as well. (VFM) mentions smartly pressed uniforms to impress the citizens. A well kept uniform is important but in the modern world of patrol, we spend a great deal of time climbing in and out of vehicles, searching buildings, climbing fences and in my case a good amount of time in desert scrub and cactus. When we show up at the 'missing child' call or the 'lost hiker' or the 'guys stealing copper' the citizens don't care if my pants have perfect creases. They care if I catch those idiots who are victimizing their neighborhood.

With the exception of the 'Hercules Team', which sounds like a specialized unit created as a feel-good show of force by the NYPD, I don't know of ANY regular patrol unit that walks around with a rifle or shotgun or sub-machine gun as a standard practice. Those are (by regulation) kept in the car unless circumstances call for their deployment. Some of you have gone batsh!t crazy thinking we like to brandish these things for fun.

BDUs: The only officers who wear BDUs are SWAT officers or K9 officers (in my department). They are considered a 'utility' uniform. The rest of us wear standard, department authorized shirts and trousers ($60 and $90 each thankyouverymuch)

Re: camouflage BDUs, just google 'SWAT officers'. Half of the image results show SWAT units wearing black. The other half is a mix of green or assorted camo. So not everyone wears black. Again these are specialized units, not routine patrol units. You have to acknowledge the difference.

'Intimidation': Put bluntly, it's nonsense. Are there bad apples among police officers? Absolutely yes! Are there badge-heavy cops who have made it onto the force? Yes. Some or maybe even many of you may have dealt with someone like this which understandably led to your opinion of police in general. I can assure you that the vast majority of cops on the street are honest, well mannered, conscientious men and women.

It seems to me that the people screaming loudest about intimidation tend to put themselves in situations, associate with people or conduct 'business' that requires police intervention. If I'm intimidating criminals then I'm doing something right.

[BogT]

In short, we want the police to have the equipment they need to do the job, but we don't want them in plate carriers, helmets, ballistic goggles, carrying ARs, with smoke and flashbangs on their vests on a day to day basis for no palpable reason?

Yes!


@Skippy_Doolittle: Your comments are overall valid. Just take my point of view as that of a bystander (the fact that I am in Europe makes also a big difference). Two members of my immediate family are cops (one more 'classic': when interacting with people "always leave room for good day!", the other one from the militarized branch: riot cop and more). Even though I have some insight, that does not make me a cop... so my point of view is that of a civilian taught not to fear cops and to feel comfortable approaching one if needed (don't take 'asking for directions' to literally ).

...
We get enough flack for working the hours we work, let a lone an all night containment on a house... my mind wonders with that whole last paragraph...

That paragraph you mentioned may not be the best point I ever made. But in essence was about making sure that 'softer' methods are used as default and 'strong' methods are used only as a last resort (I remember the news taking about a police raid at the wrong house a while back).

In the end, Police in North America have a thin line between appearance, perception, effectiveness, professionalism and safety. We are subject to more scrutiny than any other profession, which I believe is fair as I still believe in my heart that Police should be and are held to a higher standard. There is a time, though, where Police need to take on a soldier's role, be it riots or active killers, and take the fight to the bad guy. For this we need vest, rifles, shotguns, helmets, and gear that 30 years ago no one would have thought possible for the Po-Po.

What can I say to this... you are right!

Maybe 30 years ago we did not thought this would be the case and we allowed for this, little by little. But maybe we can take some time today and think about the path we are laying down for our police forces. The answer may lay somewhere else, like spending more tax money on more people rather than better arming a core few. If we chose the second option, maybe we should spend more time mitigating the unnecessary negative perceptions the public has about 'armored' police (like Flagg mentioned, just taking off the sunglasses makes a big difference).

Again I'll resubscribe to my answer to Corrupt's question at the beginning of this post. I don't think anyone here wants to send cops in harms way without proper protection, but at the same time we don't want ED-209 in our streets.

[Trigger]

Actually it does solve more crime, so much so that the science of forensics is even solving crimes from hundreds of years ago. The gun shot detector even at its infancy allows the Police to react faster making apprehension more likely. So does proper crime scene investigators and that is through mixing science and building your raporrt to the people, not scaring the bejeesus out of them.

Our cops went the exact opposite and spends most of its budget in building up its APC units and Arsenal that it can literally stop an Army... does **** in controlling criminality though. Random murder will not wait for an army to go en masse, its the perp not having rest till he is caught that prevents it. Knowing that sooner or later you will be caught and be in prison is whats stop crime, not an MK19 Grenade launcher, no matter how fun that is.

This kind of thinking while hopeful, is not reality. Solving crimes through forensics is a long tedious process. It rarely deters criminals who now take measures to limit the amount of forensic evidence they leave behind.

The gun shot detector? please. Is there one on every corner? Along with a patrolman standing around waiting for the sound of gunfire so he can react? It is a fantasy.

What stops crime/criminals are good citizen observers who make immediate reports and get vital information like descriptions and license plates and directions of travel.

[KoTeMoRe]

Paradigm issue again. There is a clear rift in Policing between the US and Western Europe. There is a clear rift when regarding criminality between the US and Western Europe. But that is not some kind of militarization per se. It is simply a different way of reassuring the population. Now as for the video...that is an isolated case and I would like first to have a study on what the responses are to similar situation state wide, nation wide before jumping to conclusions. The view of the director was a good one if it was only to raise awareness, which was not really the point.

About the militarization of the Police, the examples that should have been raised were Brasil, Mexico, Honduras, Guatemala, which see a real militarization and some times outright take overs from the military. There is a trend, far more classical of militarization (JJ gave one) and often those countries have chronical or punctual issues with their social structure. That is not (yet?) the case for the US. However in comparison the US sometimes gives me the image of a far less conservative nation in the use of lethal force.

[Trigger]

Please define necessary
Law enforcement is different from a battlefield.
You can't and shouldn't provide every cop an assault rifle.
Why ?
* Because you need a specific formation
* Because LEO are working in a specific environment i.e urban, high density of population areas mostly
A 5.56 or 7.62 military grade bullet has enough kinetic energy to kill somebody passed 1 or 2 km. They can perforate usual walls (mind you our modern buildings are rarely hardened concrete anymore). And they can go through several layers of bodies.
Hence the risk of colateral damages
That's why most of the police worldwide choose submachineguns (MP5, Berettas and like) as back up weapons
AR are reserved for special trained units most of the time (at least in Europe, don't know in other parts of the world)

Now in front of a group of thugs with AK47 is a MP5 enough ? not
But you have to understand that a balance have to be found between each risk probabilities (i.e making an encounter that needs to take the submachinegun out, an encounter that needs an higher firepower than a submachinegun and the every day's work of a LEO)

Are you under the impression that policemen issued with 5.56 rifles are not trained to use them?
Let me assure you there are severe restrictions on how, when and where they are used. Officers must qualify twice a year under day and night conditions.
We are not idiots on a spray and pray frenzy.

[Laconian]

Does militarization of the police mean equipment, TTPs employment or perception? Or all three?
Equipment: wheeled armored vehicles are not tanks. They also can serve many useful purposes for police and public safety, from mobile command posts at critical incidents, to providing cover to special responders in rural operations. Ballistic helmets and out wearing body armor when the situation calls for it they can be quite necessary. As far as utility style uniforms vs the traditional dress style uniform, the utility is more comfortable, more durable and more practical. It can look just as professional if it is kept in good repair. In truth I am not a fan of bloused boots, it does present a militaristic look. Plus most cops that blouse boots don't tuck the laces in and THAT drives me batsh1t.

TTPs:contact/ cover is not fire and manuever. Civilian LE, even SWAT, use very few military style tactics. A raid done by a warrant squad may LOOK like a raid or assault on a structure done by an infantry squad, but they are completely different in terms of technique and goal. Anybody associated with the actual application and/use of a SWAT style element will tell you that the success of the team is NOT measured by uses of force, but rather by resolution without using force (beyond them actually showing up). I've never met one cop, from patrolman to full time SWAT ninja that wanted to get in a shooting. Please don't confuse the need or the desire to train for the eventuality of an event with the desire to do it.

Perception: cops in full "battle rattle" can look intimidating and that can be a problem, but it is also the intent. It is also part of the intent of a patrolman's standard uniform. The idea of "no better friend, no worse enemy" is part of the idea. Bad guys or potential bad guys should look at a patrolman and get the immediate impression that taking on that cop is going to result in them getting their a$$ handed to them. Good folks should look at a cop, take note of his command presence and appearance and feel they are protected. I worked patrol in high crime neighborhoods for quite a bit. At times when dealing certain folks you gave off the impression that if they felt foggy and leapt you would be more than willing to accommodate them and crush them. At other times when dealing with other folks you presented a soft, more caring, friendly side. And I was dressed the same way.

In order to promote that agencies should provide disclosure about the gear they have and how they plan on using it. Hold multiple "open houses" showing off the gear and how it will be used, run civilian police academies to educate the citizenry in the policies and duties and responsibilities of officer use of force. It is a public relations issue.

I see Flagg's point. Cops standing around in that gear can be over the top, especially if the wearers look out of place in the gear. Plus it's a pain in the back. I did not necessarily agree with the detective's comment about scaring people. Again bad guys should get the impression of thinking twice before taking on the good guys and the good folks should feel confident that the cops are there to protect them.

[DrEnzo]

Cops should use equipment for the task in hand, and specialist teams for certain roles. As gun ownership and gun crime is basically non-existent in most of the UK, and where I live the Police don't need guns despite my region having the highest gun ownership in the UK. In my area 90% of the cops work seems to be enforcing minor driving matters, a "speed gun" not a real gun is essential kit.

4 IRA bombs have gone off within 20 mins of where I live and we manage just fine, guns would not have stopped the bombs, and when you arm the cops they tend to create more issues. Like shooting suspects in cars.

Cops should be approachable and when they look like they have come from the battlefield they become the 4th Armed service, something most in the UK don't want thank god.

[Connaught Ranger]

We are suffering from a rash of shooting by police. The latest one occurred this morning.

http://www.adn.com/2012/08/03/257044...allegedly.html

"The man then stopped running and advanced on three troopers with a raised bat."

suicide by cop, plain and simple.

Read more here: http://www.adn.com/2012/08/03/257044...#storylink=cpy

[Connaught Ranger]

LAVs, APCs, up armored humvees armed with 50 cals, and other armored military vehicles is what I meant by 'tanks'.

here are direct examples of police using excessive force and military gear to kill civilians,

http://www.thefreemanonline.org/feat...erican-police/


The rights that we lose is the people getting killed by gung ho cops armed with military surplus gear, departments are spending billions on military gear while crime rates have been dropping over last 2 decades. You can also feel it on the street, in many ways it feels like a police state. Cities with low crime rates and no credible threat of terrorism are spending millions on police and military gear. The town where I live has cop cars on virtually every street, even though the crime rates here have always been very low.

the police, in essence is supposed to be the community itself, made up of fellow citizens who keep law and order within their own town. What is happenign now is that there is a growing para-military force instead of a basic police force. This creates tensions and innocent people get killed because the cops have tremendous firepower at their disposal. There will be a point soon, where you wont recognize what is an army, and what is a police force. They will look the same.


http://www.forbes.com/sites/bradlock...-local-police/
Thank Department of Homeland Security grants of $3 billion per year and drug busts for such extravagant spending by local police departments. Items such as BearCats are deemed “necessary tools” to quality for federal grants (just cite disaster response or crime fighting to ensure they are covered by assorted programs) while federal law says that money from drug seizures can’t be spent on worn-out patrol cars and departmental operating costs, so big-ticket and otherwise cost-prohibitive items become no-brainers.
What is equally mind-boggling is the reality that crime rates have been dropping year-to-year for well over a decade. Los Angeles hasn’t seen so few homicides since the 1960s. So, in justifying purchases like the BearCat, tanks and Predator drones (yep, coming to your neighborhood soon, too) and other equipment designed for battle instead of keeping the peace, law enforcement officials often cite a single instance, say the sniper in Tyler, Texas, last October who killed his neighbor, so the BearCat was brought in, taking at least 35 rounds from an AK-47, until a police sniper took out the gunman. You will hear that story a lot; or maybe how a similar vehicle was used to disperse protesters downtown, “Occupy” as another excuse for the militarization of local law enforcement.
...
Under the guise of the “War on Drugs” (a $15 billion federal budget item, and a minimal figure, given clandestine military operations in Mexico and throughout South America) the Posse Comitatus Act has been gutted. President Reagan’s Military Cooperation with Law Enforcement Act of 1981 then George W. Bush’s shortsighted but broad-sweeping powers enacted post-9-11 have blurred the line between domestic policing and military action. Bill Clinton doesn’t get off clean, either, with 1.2 million military items given to law enforcement under his administration, including 3,800 M-16s, 185 M-14s, 73 grenade launchers and 112 armored personnel carriers. While the general sentiment that U.S. troops shouldn’t be patrolling the streets of America still holds somewhat true, their weapons are another matter entirely.

Nice copy & paste job, thanks for the link to . . . cough "THE FREEMAN" you can taste the bias in that article its so strong,
it also goes to show where you took the idea for your thread title from, you could not come up with something original or link to this article in your first post kid?

Major Fail.

The town where I live has cop cars on virtually every street, even though the crime rates here have always been very low.

lol, you live in a one street town by chance.

3,800 M-16s, 185 M-14s, 73 grenade launchers and 112 armored personnel carriers.

spread throughout the US that not very much is it! M.73 routinely used to shoot CS gas grenades by the police, how many anti-personnel rounds have been deployed in an urban environment by the police? How many bursts of .5 have been fired from your "tanks" by the Police in an Urban Enviromen??

The rights that we lose is the people getting killed by gung ho cops armed with military surplus gear, departments are spending billions on military gear while crime rates have been dropping over last 2 decades. You can also feel it on the street, in many ways it feels like a police state.

(1) Still no concrete figures to back up your claims.

(2) Pure melodrama, with nothing concrete to back it up.

Whats up were you one of the “Occupy” members who had their moment of glory rained upon?

You are clearly anti-anything that gives the Police an advantage to do there job, yet make no comment about the weaponry (some of it military grade in nature) that's commonly available to the criminal fraternity, and not just those who live in large urban areas.

Sorry, but your "claims" just dont stand up to scrutiny, its plain there is no program of "militarization of the police" in the USA unless you belong to some tinfoil-hat wearing OMG FEMA's got death camps for all of us" community.

Connaught Stranger.

[Hisroyalhighness]

For those putting down armored Vehicles as impractical:

__________________________________________________________________________

Don’t be surprised to see an Army tank rolling down a street near you.
The Cobb County police department has refurbished a donated Armored Personnel Carrier for officers to use in SWAT situations.
The vehicle, which retails for $500,000, is a Light Armor Vehicle that was used by the U.S. Army in Panama. The county paid $45,000 to upgrade the vehicle for police use.
Equipped with thermal sensors, computerized tracking devices, night vision, tear gas launchers and other gadgets, the all-black six-wheel unit can hold up to nine SWAT officers.
It has a new engine and transmission, which will allow it to reach a speed of 60 miles per hour.
“In these times, you don’t know what you are facing,” Cobb police chief George Hatfield said. “We want the maximum safety for our officers and the public. We want to be prepared for whatever comes up. This is another tool that will allow us to be quicker and faster in our response.”
Since 2000, SWAT has used a Peacekeeper vehicle on calls. The APC will allow SWAT officers to get closer to dangerous situations and transport citizens out of them. If officers are tracking a suspect, they can do so from within the vehicle. So far this year, Cobb’s SWAT team has responded to about 50 calls.
Walker County is the only other police department in Georgia with a similar vehicle. Gwinnett County and the state patrol use the LENCO vehicle, which resembles an armored truck.Clayton County has a Peacekeeper vehicle.
“You always hope that you don’t have to use it, but this is becoming a fact of life,” SWAT commander Lt. Joel Preston said. “You have to be prepared and make the situation safer.”
Once SWAT members complete training on the APC, the Peacekeeper will be refurbished for future use.
“These two units will eventually work in tandem,” said Det. Steve Brawner, who has overseen the project.
Beginning at 10 a.m. Saturday, the APC will be on display at Marietta’s town square.

Link

[Mordoror]

Are you under the impression that policemen issued with 5.56 rifles are not trained to use them?
Let me assure you there are severe restrictions on how, when and where they are used. Officers must qualify twice a year under day and night conditions.
We are not idiots on a spray and pray frenzy.

I don't know for your location (and btw never implied that LEOs were stupid spray and pray so please, don't put these words in my mouth). But some of our police forces in Europe that are short in training even in handguns, not even talking about back up SMGs for patrolmen
Level of training is very different depending of the function of the LEOs concerned (of course a special anti-mafia team will be far better trained than a street on-feet patrol)
And i am afraid that it will be the same thing if we (and that was the point of my post) generalize ARs.

'Intimidation': Put bluntly, it's nonsense. Are there bad apples among police officers? Absolutely yes! Are there badge-heavy cops who have made it onto the force? Yes. Some or maybe even many of you may have dealt with someone like this which understandably led to your opinion of police in general. I can assure you that the vast majority of cops on the street are honest, well mannered, conscientious men and women.

I ll come back on this. I have read the 10 past pages and i admit that i agree with Flagg.
I explained it on my previous posts : as a law abiding citizen i can admit that seeing a blue with heavy equipment is triggering a slight reaction of concern and anxiety because i ask myself what is happening to need such kind of show of force
I can admit that special task units (SWAT, CT, anti drugs, anti organized criminality teams) need a heavier equipment
A street patrol (which is in contact with the civilian crowd in a everyday familiar and familial environment) in order to protect and serve maybe not. That's probably a culture problem (again difference between Europe and US) and as i explained Soldiers patroling the same spots with assault weapons don't trigger the same anxiousness.
Guess that we are more used to see soldiers with AR than policemen
And i can ad that our soldiers don't wear battle helmets nor heavy body armors and that they are always accompagnied either with a policeman or a gendarme.

[valtrex]

Paradigm issue again. There is a clear rift in Policing between the US and Western Europe. There is a clear rift when regarding criminality between the US and Western Europe...

And there is a clear rift between European states as well (Europe is not a single homogenous entity), e.g the Paris Fire Brigade is armed because if I'm not mistaken they are an Army unit, (I remember I was very surprised when I watched on TV5, almost a decade ago, my first Bastille Day parade and realised the Firemen were carrying FAMAS!) while for a Greek it's inconceivable to have armed Firemen.
In general I agree with Mordoror, all special Police units tasked to deal with terrorism, drug trafficking or organized crime, have to be heavy equipped and well trained.
Greek EKAM (AT type unit) operators:

vs
Greek Police Patrolin' the streets 24/7:

[KoTeMoRe]

Off course...however the rift is mainly anecdotical/historical rather than a task related. IE European police forces looks really cohesive in their practices (off course bar the Astunomia and their rioting friends ).

ESI



24/7 PolBru

[Mordoror]

the Paris Fire Brigade is armed because if I'm not mistaken they are an Army unit, (I remember I was very surprised when I watched on TV5, almost a decade ago, my first Bastille Day parade and realised the Firemen were carrying FAMAS!)

Indeed. La brigade des Sapeurs Pompiers de Paris is a military unit as is the brigade des Marins-Pompiers de Marseilles. Hence the parade with FAMAS (although it is quite recent because previously they paraded with MAS 49/56). However teye are never issued (obviously) their weapons on fire intervention
The rift is rather that in Europe we have plenty of "policized" military units (Gendarmeries in France, Portugal, Romania, Guardia civil in Spain, Carabinieri in Italy) rather than" militarized " police units

[Connaught Ranger]

Militarization, it all started back here , its so obvious :-

During WW2


Immediate post WW2.

because of people like this:-




Connaught Ranger.