This past Monday, President Obama pushed for a re-examination of programs that have equipped law enforcement departments with military-grade gear. Obama stated, "There is a big difference between our military and our local law enforcement, and we don't want those lines blurred," This was in response to the recent use of police force in dealing with the unrest in Ferguson, Missouri where police officers were seen carrying military-grade equipment.
This raises the question, "Is this necessary?" Many argue that the police should be using a proportional response and that Ferguson is an example of overwhelming force, a military doctrine. However,there is also the argument that the issue lies not only with the use of military equipment, but the lack of training and discipline that is seen in the military. The desire to give the police maximum protection is understandable and the Posse Comitatus Act limits the use of military personnel in enforcing state laws except under the most extreme circumstances. Therefore, providing military-grade equipment to state police departments provides a way to circumvent the issue, but does giving a much less disciplined and experienced group these kind of weapons really help in keeping order?
The psychological factor of having armored trucks and completely armed police officers must also be taken into account. Won't this just aggravate the population even more?
What are your opinions: Is this amount of force necessary? or will it just escalate the issue?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
I believe the local law enforcement should be equipped with the necessary gear to maintain peace and prevent riots. If that includes military gear then so be it. The Rodney King Riots in 1992 is a great example of why this is necessary. Local police were unable to control riots following the acquittal of police officers on trial regarding a videotaped police brutality incident. As of result there were over 2,000 injures and 53 deaths in the riots that followed. Local police were simply not equipped to deal with the problem. As of result the National Guard and Marines had to be called to deal with the problem. These law enforcers had the proper equipment to quell the riots and maintain peace. This example shows how law enforcement should be equipped with military gear if they deem it necessary.
You have nothing to fear if you have nothing to riot about. Or you're a grandma and a dozen or so armed and armored shooters with live rounds break your windows with flash-bangs, bust your door down, and shoot your dog in the middle of the night because they got the address for their no-knock warrant drug raid wrong. There's always that.
To Spencer Larsen, I understand your point that better equipment might make law enforcement a better peace keeping force especially in extreme cases like the Rodney King Riots. Better equipped police might have prevented more injuries and deaths. However, I would like to ask a question about the alternative. What about the possibility that giving the police military equipment,equipment designed to kill, actually adds to the injury and death count? Putting more guns on the street does not always solve the issue. Recently, police officers in Ferguson were recorded raising their weapons at and threatening to kill unarmed civilians.
Completely armed police officers? What would you suggest instead, only giving officers half of their gear when they go out on patrol?
Nitpicking aside, I'm fine with properly equipping local law enforcement with the correct tools for the job. It's better to have a greater capacity to repel those savages than to not have the ability to protect the private property of the community.
Wesley, all weapons (aside from specifically non lethal weapons such as tasers) were designed to kill, not just the current military standard. Any firearm that any cop has is in fact designed to kill, regardless of how common such a firearm may be in militaries today. Cops around the country have been using different models of the semi-automatic Armalite 15 civilian sporting rifle (you may know this as a black evil baby killing full automatic assault weapon machine gun of mass destruction, as it has become common to refer to them in mass media) as patrol rifles for some time now, and many cops already have much better pistols than the military standard. Maybe better equipping local law enforcement could add to the casualty count, but I'd rather have a living officer and a safe community than a lawless community ruled by a mob of lowly rioting savages.
That incident that you point out is very alarming and should be taken very seriously, as it was. That officer was promptly removed from the situation and later suspended and removed from his duty. I don't believe this one incident should represent the police force as a whole. These police officers are on the front lines of the protests every day with people who are constantly yelling, screaming, touching, and even spiting on them and the police just take it. Unfortunately this officer snapped, but even if he had no military gear and had just a pistol there would still be outrage and I believe he would have still been removed from duty. The military gear/Assault rifle he had didn't make much of a difference. This incident doesn't change my view that law enforcement should be equipped with military gear if they think its necessary because the better equipped the police are, the less likely protests are going to turn into riots.
In my opinion, the problem of police brutality is three fold: not only are police loaded with an extreme arsenal deadly weapons, they are also poorly trained and poorly hired.
I'm sure many people have heard about Eric Garner, who was killed in a chokehold by an NYPD officer after repeatedly saying "I can't breathe." After hearing about that incident, I wondered how a police officer could be this aggressive and heartless. It turns out that police departments purposefully hire officers under a certain IQ threshold in order to facilitate split-second decision-making, and the courts approve of this hiring practice. (http://abcnews.go.com/US/court-oks-barring-high-iqs-cops/story?id=95836).
The fact that police officers are picked and trained to kill at a moment's notice worries me--no matter how crucial this skills can be in stopping criminals. The strength of a police department should come from diversity of thought, not from a place of conformity and consistency. I believe that the amount of deadly weapons they are allowed to use should be severely limited in addition to revamping police training and hiring practices.
Post a Comment