President Obama Rolls Back Some Police Militarization... Police Flip Out

from the really-now? dept

We've had a bunch of stories lately about the increase in militarized police and what a ridiculous and dangerous idea it is. As we've discussed in the past, much of this came from the Defense Department and its 1033 program, which takes decommissioned military equipment and gives it to police. This results in bizarre situations like the LA School District police having a bunch of grenade launchers. The program is somewhat infamous for its lack of rules, transparency and oversight.

So it was great to see President Obama this week issue an executive order that greatly scales back the program. You'll be happy to know that no future LA School Districts will get grenade launchers (though, to be fair, after bad publicity, the school district did give the ones it had received back):
Grenade launchers, bayonets, tracked armored vehicles, weaponized aircraft and vehicles, firearms and ammunition of .50-caliber or higher will no longer be provided to state and local police agencies by the federal government under Obama's order.

[....]

In addition to the prohibitions in his order, Obama also is placing a longer list of military equipment under tighter control, including wheeled armored vehicles like Humvees, manned aircraft, drones, specialized firearms, explosives, battering rams and riot batons, helmets and shields. Starting in October, police will have to get approval from their city council, mayor or some other local governing body to obtain such equipment, provide a persuasive explanation of why it is needed and have more training and data collection on its use.
For police departments that already have the now "banned" items, they will have to be returned. You'll notice that one of the biggest symbols that people point to of overly-militarized police -- the MRAP -- is not included in the banned list. There are some other limitations here as well. And a big one, as the guy who literally wrote the book on militarized police, Radley Balko, notes: the 1033 program is no longer the biggest supplier of such things to police:
Since 2003, for example, the Department of Homeland Security has been giving grants to police departments around the country to purchase new military-grade gear. That program now dwarfs the 1033 Program. It has also given rise to a cottage industry of companies that build gear in exchange for those DHS checks. Those companies now have a significant lobbying presence in Washington. I suspect that presence will now only grow stronger. So if the Obama administration really wants to roll back police militarization, this program needs reform, too.
Still, as Balko also notes, there is still a lot of importance in the symbolism of the move made this week:
From what has been reported, this new initiative addresses these concerns as well and seems to indicate that the Obama administration understands and appreciates that the symbolic component of police militarization is just as important as the practical component. I’m uncomfortable with any military vehicles going to local police. Free societies tend to draw a clear line between cops and soldiers. Blurring that line indicates a failure to appreciate its importance. But this initiative is moving toward reestablishing that line, not moving it or further blurring it. Federal programs are pretty difficult to disband, so a blanket ban was probably never in the cards. Conditioning the acceptance of this gear on increased transparency, accountability and a move toward community policing seems like a good compromise. We’ll either get less use of this military-issued equipment, or we’ll get more and better information about how it’s used. Either outcome is progress.
Balko gives some additional (fantastic) background on why President Obama made the announcement in Camden, New Jersey -- a city that had serious problems between the local police and the community, and basically figured out a way to restart from scratch (closing down the local police force and letting the county take over) while creating a much stronger community tie between police and the community, rather than the all-too-common adversarial relationship that has grown up in many places (which is often made worse by the militarization).

Not surprisingly... there are already loud complaints from police representatives, who complain (misleadingly) about how this move puts them all in danger:
The nation’s largest police union is fighting back against a White House plan to restrict local police forces’ ability to acquire military-style gear, accusing President Barack Obama’s task force of politicizing officers’ safety.
Other police are hilariously arguing that this move will actually increase military presence, because police without this equipment will no longer be able to contain crowds, and thus the National Guard will have to be called in more frequently. Of course, all of that seems to assume that violent protests are the norm, rather than a semi-rare occurrence -- and, it also ignores how militarized police often seem to exacerbate such situations, rather than calm them down.

This move doesn't end the militarization of police, but it does take a step in the right direction. As Balko notes, if we believe in a free society, we shouldn't have militarized police. This move is an important step up.

Filed Under: 1033, barack obama, police militarization, president obama


Reader Comments

The First Word

Speaking of which

Of course, all of that seems to assume that violent protests are the norm, rather than a semi-rare occurrence -- and, it also ignores how militarized police often seem to exacerbate such situations, rather than calm them down.

That's exactly how things went down in Baltimore. Police issued a nebulous, unsupported "threat report" that local gangs were uniting in order to target police. They provided no basis, no evidence, nothing to back up this report -- and they issued it during Freddie Gray's funeral. Shortly thereafter, they ordered Frederick Douglass High School to dismiss early, closed the nearby transportation hub (at Mondawmin Mall) that most of those students use to get to/from school, and confronted these children with a massive number of heavily armed police in riot gear -- ordering them to "go home" when they'd just cut off their means of doing so.

There was no "situation" to escalate until police created one. There was no escalation until police provoked it.

Worth noting is that -- as of today -- there is absolutely no evidence in the public record showing who started the fires that night. (And I doubt that anyone directly involved in street action broke off and drove several miles across town to torch an under-construction nursing home.) Of course the story being peddled on CNN and Fox and elsewhere is that rioters did so...and perhaps they did. But there is no proof. Even though anyone and everyone carries a cellphone with a camera, even though there are surveillance cameras (city-operated and otherwise) everywhere, there doesn't seem to be a single frame showing who started the fires.

Also worth noting is that many days of protests proceeded and followed that night. Despite further police provocation, including targeting legal observers for arrest, targeting journalists/media/photographers for arrest, pepper-spraying/macing unarmed citizens standing still, etc. those protests have remained peaceful to this day.
—Anonymous Coward

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • icon
    James Burkhardt (profile), 19 May 2015 @ 2:41pm

    You'll notice that one of the biggest symbols that people point to of overly-militarized police -- the MRAP -- is not included in the banned list.
    Wait what?
    Obama also is placing a longer list of military equipment under tighter control, including wheeled armored vehicles like Humvees

    Wheeled vehicles that are armored against IEDs and ambushes are not "wheeled armored vehicles"?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 19 May 2015 @ 2:54pm

    The officers' safety will be impacted if they don't have tanks and grenade launchers. Um...okay.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 19 May 2015 @ 4:50pm

      Re:

      ...and we might see the National Guard more often if the police can't carry the same arsenal.

      Well I for one would rather see that equipment in the hands of the National Guard who are fully trained in how to use it, and only called out when warranted. The uneasiness doesn't come from seeing the military, it comes from seeing a policing force acting like the military.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 19 May 2015 @ 2:55pm

    Speaking of which

    Of course, all of that seems to assume that violent protests are the norm, rather than a semi-rare occurrence -- and, it also ignores how militarized police often seem to exacerbate such situations, rather than calm them down.

    That's exactly how things went down in Baltimore. Police issued a nebulous, unsupported "threat report" that local gangs were uniting in order to target police. They provided no basis, no evidence, nothing to back up this report -- and they issued it during Freddie Gray's funeral. Shortly thereafter, they ordered Frederick Douglass High School to dismiss early, closed the nearby transportation hub (at Mondawmin Mall) that most of those students use to get to/from school, and confronted these children with a massive number of heavily armed police in riot gear -- ordering them to "go home" when they'd just cut off their means of doing so.

    There was no "situation" to escalate until police created one. There was no escalation until police provoked it.

    Worth noting is that -- as of today -- there is absolutely no evidence in the public record showing who started the fires that night. (And I doubt that anyone directly involved in street action broke off and drove several miles across town to torch an under-construction nursing home.) Of course the story being peddled on CNN and Fox and elsewhere is that rioters did so...and perhaps they did. But there is no proof. Even though anyone and everyone carries a cellphone with a camera, even though there are surveillance cameras (city-operated and otherwise) everywhere, there doesn't seem to be a single frame showing who started the fires.

    Also worth noting is that many days of protests proceeded and followed that night. Despite further police provocation, including targeting legal observers for arrest, targeting journalists/media/photographers for arrest, pepper-spraying/macing unarmed citizens standing still, etc. those protests have remained peaceful to this day.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    That One Guy (profile), 19 May 2015 @ 2:55pm

    How will they ever survive?

    If the police aren't allowed to use rounds designed to punch through armored vehicles, armored vehicles of their own to serve warrants or just to drive around and feel like big boys, and weapon mounted knives to deal with pesky people who get too close, how in the world are they supposed to survive their day to day interactions with the public?!

    Police have had all of those tools since they were first formed in the US, and the presence of such gear is the only reason they were able to do their jobs without suffering massive casualties on a weekly basis, so clearly taking away their ability to field such items without providing reasoning as to why they need them will lead to a bloodbath of unprecedented proportions!

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 19 May 2015 @ 3:12pm

    That's a red flag

    >objects to a measure that would require police departments to get permission from city governments to acquire certain equipment

    What's so bad about police being governed by the communities they represent? The fact that they could get whatever they wanted from the Federal government before is the real cause for alarm here.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      sigalrm (profile), 19 May 2015 @ 3:25pm

      Re: That's a red flag

      "What's so bad about police being governed by the communities they represent?"

      Well for starters, it's generally considered bad military doctrine to allow the enemy to know the full extent of your capabilities.

      Also, the communities might say "No." Can't have that...

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    HMTKSteve, 19 May 2015 @ 3:26pm

    bayonets?

    Why would police ever be given bayonets in the first place?!?!

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    velox (profile), 19 May 2015 @ 3:28pm

    Of course there is squealing when the spigot of taxpayer funded free stuff is turned off.
    Meet the new welfare queen -- your local police chief.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Maxwell (profile), 19 May 2015 @ 3:50pm

    In other news, police departments are now turning to the NAVY, not subject to the banned list of items to buy tomahawk missles and decomissioned battleships in order to provide much needed strategic level protection for LEOs.

    /s

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 19 May 2015 @ 4:14pm

    police without this equipment will no longer be able to contain crowds, and thus the National Guard will have to be called in more frequently


    Is this really a bad thing though? I would imagine it takes a lot more hoops to jump through to get the national guard to come out, and they'll have a different set of oversight and rules than the local yokels. It would certainly prevent unnecessary escalation of force, but the option would be there when warranted.

    Besides, it seems the national guard has to keep getting called in to clean up after some of these police forces with their big officer safety toys.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      jupiterkansas (profile), 19 May 2015 @ 5:32pm

      Re:

      We have to use the National Guard for something, after all.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        You are being watched (profile), 19 May 2015 @ 7:31pm

        Re: Re:

        The NG should really only be used for natural disaster recovery and in case of homeland invasion (and the occasional massive riot brought on by sports), not used to indiscriminately mow down people like the police want to but don't have a technically legal law to abuse yet. Creative interpretation of the law does not count.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 19 May 2015 @ 9:59pm

      Re:

      Yep. There just might be fewer crowds that need containing if the police could, I dunno, maybe murder fewer unarmed citizens.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 19 May 2015 @ 9:37pm

    I am proud of my country

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 20 May 2015 @ 3:17am

    Not Enough

    "Grenade launchers, bayonets, tracked armored vehicles, weaponized aircraft and vehicles, firearms and ammunition of .50-caliber or higher will no longer be provided to state and local police agencies by the federal government under Obama's order."

    Oh, gee, what a restriction.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    me, 20 May 2015 @ 4:22am

    Next Move in the right direction

    1) Outlaw Police Unions
    2) Require each officer to have either a license or liability insurance, preferably both.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 20 May 2015 @ 4:59am

    Without this vital war making machinery, how will Texas defend its self from the Jade Helm invasion?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      JEDIDIAH, 20 May 2015 @ 5:44am

      You don't even want to go there.

      Texans? They are already armed well enough with small arms and explosives. They have better gear, more training, and better motivation and morale.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    jimm, 20 May 2015 @ 8:43am

    some read but do they understand?

    The police really shut down the local services, the police shut down the schools? Really? Not the school board? Not the transportation director? Police may have advised, but do they control? If they control, why? Otherwise a lack of control by (who)? All that rioting because some crook/bully died? He wasn't the angel protraied. But you scare the local patrolman enough times, he will react. Probably wrongly, like that one.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    pouar (profile), 20 May 2015 @ 10:53am

    I do support the 2nd Amendment, but I also believe that tanks and grenade launchers are colossal overkill. I agree with Obama on this (and I don't even like Obama)

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Jack, 20 May 2015 @ 1:15pm

      Re:

      Well, I'm so relieved you were able to overcome your visceral partisan default of disagreeing with someone on the other side - it only took banning your local PD from getting attack helicopters, tanks, M2 machine guns, and grenade launchers for free from the government...

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 21 May 2015 @ 12:51pm

    A.C.A.B.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Close

Add A Reply

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Techdirt Gear
Show Now: Takedown
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.