General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsPres. Obama orders review of govt’s outfitting of police depts. with military weapons & equipment
WASHINGTON Jolted by images of protesters clashing with heavily armed police officers in Missouri, President Obama has ordered a comprehensive review of the governments decade-old strategy of outfitting local police departments with military-grade body armor, mine-resistant trucks, silencers and automatic rifles, senior officials say.
The White House-led review will consider whether the government should continue providing such equipment and, if so, whether local authorities have sufficient training to use it appropriately, said senior administration and law enforcement officials. The government will also consider whether it is keeping a close enough watch on equipment inventories, and how the weapons and other gear are used.
The review, coupled with proposed legislation and planned congressional hearings, opens the possibility for significant changes in Washingtons approach to arming local law enforcement agencies. Following the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, the government regarded the police as the frontline forces in a new war. While that role for local law enforcement is expected to remain, changes may be ordered to the system under which federal grants and a military surplus program have sent gear and money to police departments, often with no strings attached, to prepare for a terrorist attack.
Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr., in a statement released by his office on Saturday, said this equipment flowed to local police forces because they were increasingly being asked to assist in counterterrorism. But he also said that displays of force in response to mostly peaceful demonstrations can be counterproductive, and so it makes sense to take a look at whether military-style equipment is being acquired for the right purposes and whether there is proper training on when and how to deploy it.
read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/24/us/in-washington-second-thoughts-on-arming-police.html?smid=tw-share&_r=0
Comrade Grumpy
(13,184 posts)bigtree
(85,996 posts). . . good government. (I mean it.)
Drunken Irishman
(34,857 posts)jwirr
(39,215 posts)have to come from the people in each locality.
Lurks Often
(5,455 posts)Even if DOD stops providing the equipment, police departments are perfectly capable of going out and buying silencers, weapons capable of fully automatic fire and body armor.
They are also able to buy armored vehicles similar to what they got from DOD: http://www.lencoarmor.com
Trillo
(9,154 posts)If "if DOD stops providing the equipment", with middle-people corporations in the middle, militarizing should be significantly more expensive.
bigtree
(85,996 posts). . .after all, one of the justifications the President weakly offered when commenting on it this month was that it's a response to terrorism. Forcing the federal government and the military to come clean on their own acquiescence in this will go a long way in exposing the complicity of others and isolating them for further scrutiny and redress..
Lurks Often
(5,455 posts)If DOD stops supplying equipment, it will affect the smaller departments a bit more, although I don't see a ban on body armor, or other equipment like as night vision, clothing, generators, office supplies and other relatively non-controversial items.
Any ban would probably be on the MRAP's and firearms and a ban on the firearms is unlikely to have a significant effect on the police departments. Those departments that got the M-16A1's that were declared surplus, probably had the full auto option removed. As for the MRAPS, I doubt most police would buy them, although you would still see similar vehicles in the larger cities such as LA or NYC which had those vehicles before the MRAPS became surplus.
In other words pretty much anything the miltary gave them was already available to police departments
mcar
(42,329 posts)For doing the right thing.