Militarization of the police in the United States

[Doktor]

UK has armed police for those situations where firepower is needed. Well, US has SWAT teams formed with the same premise in mind, just it seems they are not so special anymore.

[omon]

yet in related news, gangs have increased 40% since 2008, legal gun ownership is getting sticks in its wheels. who exactly are they getting militarized against?

Gingrich: Gangs Have Increased By 40 Percent Since Obama Was Elected | RealClearPolitics

[zraver]

Just over the past couple of days from the police misconduct reporting site run by CATO. Nor are thes eeven close to all of them, just some tasy tidbits going back to about July 11.

PoliceMisconduct.net | The Cato Institute's National Police Misconduct Reporting Project


Varnell, Georgia: An officer pleaded guilty to first-degree vehicular homicide and reckless driving. He was off-duty when he slammed his police cruiser at 104 mph into a newspaper delivery car and killed the man using it. He was given 10 years probation, 300 hours of community service and a $2,500 fine. ZR- kill someone through wanton disregard/ careless and endangered and get community service...

North Charleston, South Carolina: A police officer pleaded guilty to a charge of misconduct in office. He was ordered to pay a $750 fine for the incident. The officer wrongfully detained and then physically assaulted a man before leaving him stranded. Former North Charleston cop fined $750 for misconduct in office - WMBFNews.com, Myrtle Beach/Florence SC, Weather ZR- Note if a civie did that it would be felony kidnapping

Corpus Christi, Texas: A police officer, who was suspended, has retired. He had been suspended for using excessive force on a prisoner already in handcuff: ZR- he got to retire on the tax payers dime instead of a cell on the taxpayers dime....


New Rochelle, New York (First reported 11-12-12): A police officer was sentenced to 5 years “shock probation” on charges related to disseminating indecent material to a minor. He has a sex offender hearing coming up. He is alleged to have given videos of himself engaged in a sexual act to what he believed to be a 15-year-old girl. ow.ly/mSByVs and then lying to internal affairs about what happened. ow.ly/n5MJq ZR- he brutalized a citizen and now gets a tax payer funded retirement ZR- probation for a sex predator because he was a cop.....

Some stats for 2010- 232 officers (14.7%) were involved in firearm-related excessive force complaints resulting in 91 fatalities. But cops also beat/choked 19 people to death ad killed 11 more with tazers in 2010...

[tuna]

Before someone talks about that stats above just being the "bad apples" that you find in any bunch, these may be the bad (or rotten) apples, but they have been protected by "the thin blue line" for so long that the whole bunch is bad. I'm more angry at those who enable this type of action by looking the other way, helping out a brother or outright lying than I am at those who do these actions.

I really don't think I'm jaded when I say that I believe that 5% of cops give the rest a good name.

[zraver]

This cop was fired for doing that, now claims he was emotionally scarred and needs workmens comp...

His action is obviously an assault on all those people, his own department with its vested interest in ruling against the people it claims to protect fired him after all..... Yet he is facing NO CHARGES. I dare a citizen to unleash a pepper spray assault on a bunch of college students without cause and not catch charges.

[bonehead]

This cop was fired for doing that, now claims he was emotionally scarred and needs workmens comp...

His action is obviously an assault on all those people, his own department with its vested interest in ruling against the people it claims to protect fired him after all..... Yet he is facing NO CHARGES. I dare a citizen to unleash a pepper spray assault on a bunch of college students without cause and not catch charges.

That beats releasing the hounds on them. Any details of this incident?

[cyppok]

Mostly I agree. However many of those with even a couple of plants are armed and more than willing to defend them so police have been shot and killed serving such warrants. My line of thinking is that the police are no longer doing much investigative work and are using SWAT teams to make up for that. Sure Tommy weed grower might be armed while in the home but he also goes to the local 7-11 every Tuesdays and fridays to pick up munchies. He also has a job at the local car wash. Wouldn't those be better places to nab him? Nah just send out the SWAT team and have done with it.
There are a couple of other considerations. First cops really like swinging their dicks. They love the concept that if they see you as a perp they can nab you anyplace anywhere and at the home is more personal for some extra sting. Secondly, A SWAT team carries some extra expense on the budget so the police force has to justify that expense....usually by sending the SWAT team out more often and artificially creating a "need".

The guy who grows a few plants has to go out and shop for food its far easier to take him outside the home then inside. Why raid the house with guns drawn where he has the most chance of defending himself? Its not just stupid it draws casualties on both sides.

Whomever decides to storm the house is responsible for the blood shed not the guy defending his house. It does not matter if what he is doing is legal or illegal that is not for the SWAT or Cops to decide, its for the Courts... Playing Judge Dread (Judge Jury Executioner) games leads to scenarios where people militarize themselves in response so much that all these raids lead to progressively asymmetric responses. I can totally see somewhere in the future a SWAT team busting into a house that is mined for protection and being blown to smitherines, because they thought it was wiser than presenting a warrant by someone somewhere safe. Justifying even more aggression after that fact won't make their job safer, easier, or more lawful according to constitution.

P.S. In some sense I feel the SWAT teams are competing for Darwin awards

[zraver]

That beats releasing the hounds on them. Any details of this incident?

Peaceful non-violent protest by the occupy movement.

[Gun Grape]

Just over the past couple of days from the police misconduct reporting site run by CATO. Nor are thes eeven close to all of them, just some tasy tidbits going back to about July 11.

PoliceMisconduct.net | The Cato Institute's National Police Misconduct Reporting Project


Varnell, Georgia: An officer pleaded guilty to first-degree vehicular homicide and reckless driving. He was off-duty when he slammed his police cruiser at 104 mph into a newspaper delivery car and killed the man using it. He was given 10 years probation, 300 hours of community service and a $2,500 fine. ZR- kill someone through wanton disregard/ careless and endangered and get community service...

Maybe because thats what the family of the victim asked for. It was done in a plea deal. Not some evil "Thin blue line " looking out for each other.

Try to research the case instead of getting snippets from a "Bad Cop" site.

"[Thurman's] family did not want him to go to prison," said Conasauga Circuit District Attorney Bert Poston, who prosecuted the case.

Instead, Smith will serve 10 years' probation, do 300 hours of community service, pay a $2,500 fine and court fees -- and won't ever work in law enforcement again. That's under a ruling Thursday by Whitfield County Superior Court Judge Cindy Morris after Smith pleaded guilty to first-degree vehicular homicide and reckless driving.

"It was a negotiated plea between the two sides based on the family's request that it be resolved that way," Poston said.

So it has nothing to do with him being a cop

[zraver]

Maybe because thats what the family of the victim asked for. It was done in a plea deal. Not some evil "Thin blue line " looking out for each other.

Try to research the case instead of getting snippets from a "Bad Cop" site.

So it has nothing to do with him being a cop

Citizens don't get that chance...

The families of the victims are not supposed to have a role in the prosecution for all sorts of sound legal and ethical reasons. Family involvement was a smoke screen.

[Gun Grape]

Citizens don't get that chance...

Yes they do. It depends on what state you live in as to how far it goes.

https://www.ncjrs.gov/ovc_archives/b...lletin7/2.html

n at least 22 states, the victim’s right to confer with the prosecutor requires a prosecutor to obtain the victim’s views concerning the proposed plea.6 Whereas the laws in some of these states do not address how victims will make their concerns known, others specifically provide for written input. In Georgia, a victim’s impact statement “shall be attached to the case file and may be used by the prosecuting attorney . . . during any stage of the proceedings against the defendant involving . . . plea bargaining.”7 State’s attorneys in Illinois are required, where practical, to both consult with the victim and consider a written impact statement, if one has been prepared, before entering into a plea agreement.8 South Dakota victims also are permitted to provide their views both orally and in writing.9 Not only do victims have the right to offer written input into whether a plea bargaining agreement is proper, but also prosecutors must make a reasonable effort to provide them the opportunity to comment on the agreement terms. In New Jersey, victims have the right to assistance with preparing and submitting to the prosecutor a written statement outlining the impact of the crime and any sentencing recommendations they feel are appropriate.

Funny how you get up in arms about cops using pepper spray but think that a private citizen killing an unarmed kid because he got his nose broke is just fine.

[zraver]

Yes they do. It depends on what state you live in as to how far it goes.

https://www.ncjrs.gov/ovc_archives/b...lletin7/2.html

Families should not direct the prosecution and that is from your source.

Funny how you get up in arms about cops using pepper spray but think that a private citizen killing an unarmed kid because he got his nose broke is just fine.

The cops was fired... after review and union intervention and all the other layers of protection he enjoyed in California he was shit canned for going way too far. Yet he wasn't charged with multiple counts of felony assault...

An unarmed kid with a history of organized fights and violent outbursts shot in the midst of committing a violent felony against a person who had been thrashed and disabled, where even the states witness admits he was motivated by criteria that elevated his attack to that of a hate crime....

See the connection? I don't really care what bad things happen to people who commit felony assault on other people.

[erik]

Since I am training to be a police officer, I have bias, but here is my take:

I agree that SWAT teams should not be so militarized. More specifically, I do not like the fact that some departments have their SWAT teams wearing military camouflage uniforms such as the Marine MARPAT or the Army's Camo that is new and issued for deployments to Afghanistan. I think it should stick to the blue, black, or olive drab colors.

This:



No


This:



Yes


I do believe that SWAT teams are needed. Just look at the Hollywood Shootout. .40 cal and shotguns just don't cut it against criminals who are armed with 7.62 or 5.56 and body armor. I was on a SWAT raid once and the place we raided was being run by 3 guys from Detroit and Flint who were cooking their own mix of drugs (pills, meth, crack, heroin) putting them into needles (used and new) and selling them around the neighborhood and area. What was their choice of protection for their house (that had the girlfriend's name under everything possible) from anyone? Ak-47. You can't just expect to go against someone with an AK with pistols and shotguns and expect a good outcome. I also talked to an officer who killed a man with his police issued AR-15 and said if it wasn't for the range of the AR, he probably wouldn't be talking to me now. The story behind that one is that the man was beating his wife to death to get officers to come and respond and was sitting on his porch with his hunting rifle waiting for the police to come to shoot at them. Suicide by Police.

[Monash]

You of course realize that excessive force would likely be a criminal act, battery or assault depending if a civvie did it, it should be for a cop as well.

If no one was harmed, no foul unless we are talking menacing with a firearm where a reasonable fear of serious injury or death is created. But where there is injury- don't just fire prosecute.

Z - firstly you have to define what you mean by "excessive" and then you have to outline examples of situations where it might apply or this particular discussion will go nowhere. I keep pointing out that any use of force now matter how slight can be regarded as "excessive" from different perspectives. Merely touching someone on the shoulder (say move them away from the vicinity of a an accident is technically battery if the person touched does not give at least tacit consent. As a result an "excessive use of force" complaint could be lodged against the officer concerned and not just by the person touched, the complaint can come from anyone who witnessed the incident.

Furthermore when it comes to the arrest process itself it is bordering on impossible not to inflict some minor degree of injury even when the person involved is basically compliant. If you'd ever been handcuffed (other than for fun of course - real cuffs don't have fur linings :)) you would know that it is very hard to get them on someone without inflicting at least some minor injury. Add even the slightest degree of resistance which incidentally doesn't have to be aggression, just fear/nervousness/intoxication etc and you will often inflict small cuts, abrasions or localized swelling on the person being cuffed. Add any degree of proper physical resistance and it becomes extremely difficult to cuff someone by yourself without injuring them. When full resistance is used it is impossible to cuff someone by yourself unless you use a force option to incapacitate the POI. I know because we practice on each other during training and even at 50% effort it its dam near impossible to cuff someone without assistance and we end up injured when we role play as the suspect.

So force is force and it ranges from simple physical contact through to a bullet and people can and will complain about any degree of force employed by LEO's even if they were bystanders and not victims of the incident. None of the above means I'm advocating some kind of blanket proscription against UOF complaints nor am I suggesting officers are never guilty of using excessive force. What I am saying is that unless you have either :

a) a clear and persistent pattern of minor UOF complaints against one particular officer; or
b) evidence of some kind of significant physical injury (e.g something requiring at least a check-up by an medical professional)

Then firing a LEO for inflicting any kind of injury under any circumstances where someone complains will mean that eventually you would lose all your officers - unless they never choose to arrest anyone.

When you'd excuse a cop using excessive force on a citizen.

I'm not excusing anything. I have in the past and will again (if required to) investigated matters where the final recommendation has been that the officer concerned be fired/dismissed. And there a host of matters they can go down for - not just for excessive use of force complaints, officers can be and are fired for failing to follow procedure, dishonesty/theft ,giving false evidence (including lying to me or a colleague while under investigation) and drug related matters. If there is enough evidence to warrant criminal charges then they get the "double dip" (i.e. lose their jobs and get a criminal conviction).

Most citizens don't realize how many officers do get dismissed because the process is done in private (like any dismissal). They usually only become aware of it when criminal charges are involved as well. It may be stating the obvious but the number of times Police suspect someone might have committed a crime has no bearing on if/how often they are charged. You need to be able to prove (or expect to prove) that a person has committed a criminal offence before you can charge them. The same rule applies to Police officers, you can only charge if you have the evidence and it is just as hard to prove a charge against them as it is against anyone else. So in some cases you fire them for disciplinary breaches you can prove even if you suspect they might have committed a criminal offense. You want better than that then I suggest you click your heels together three times and move to OZ.

What I do want is good clear evidence of the type of force involved and the circumstances in which it was applied before I potentially ruin someones career and reputation. You on the other hand seem to be demanding perfection when it comes to professional standards in PD's and are setting the bar so high no-one could be expected to get over it unless they just stayed in the office. I would at the very least think you would be consistent and would demand those same high standards from every other trade/profession and person you might meet in your local community - there are lots of jobs out there that can kill someone if not done properly.

Not a problem, take it out of the swat budget, stop buying so many battle rifles and stop making every cop car look like an f'ing spaceship. Hell a single license plate scanner is $2500.... Police departments spend a lot of money that could be slimmed down.

Wouldn't even begin to cover the cost, tactical ops share of any modern PD's total HR and capital budgets is tiny. Keeping one cop on the road can cost 100K or more a year . I could outfit him and give him time off to train for a fraction of that, especially since only a small % of LEOs need to be trained up to SWAT level (and there are different levels of tac ops training which make it even cheaper depending on the type/level of ops you are expecting equip/train them for.)

And what happens when a cop who just put a beat down on a citizen, who is claiming brutality says oops i forgot to turn it on.... If its always on, no oops.

By "beat down" I assume you mean inflicted serious injuries upon? I would expect the PD he worked for to be professional - "oops" wouldn't cut it. Give a valid reason that can be corroborated or face the consequences. If you dropped the ball while in the army and someone got injured would you expect to get away with "oops"? well neither do most PO's I know of.

I want privacy in my private life, behind my curtiledge and under my roof. In public it is a different set of rules.

Well under your rules you wouldn't get it. If I show up on your property even if it's only canvassing the neighborhood for information about a crime in the local area and you have no info - you and yours are going to be recorded. If you take your family to the beach - your kids are going to get videoed as well unless you start marking out special "exemption zones" and then watch how quickly they multiply. Your way is to messy, complicated and to intrusive. I'll turn my camera on when and where I need it for evidence and I am not going to be some kind of walking surveillance post monitoring my neighbors and fellow community members.

Mind you if Zimmerman had been rigged up with a permanently "on" camera we'd all know what really happened wouldn't we? Although I guess you would counter that only Police officers carrying firearms need to be monitored - civilians can of course be trusted to do always do the right thing when carrying a gun in public can't they?

Oh BTW, are they hobnailed?

No they've got taps - so I can dance around the truth when I'm in court

[zraver]

Since I am training to be a police officer, I have bias, but here is my take:

I agree that SWAT teams should not be so militarized. More specifically, I do not like the fact that some departments have their SWAT teams wearing military camouflage uniforms such as the Marine MARPAT or the Army's Camo that is new and issued for deployments to Afghanistan. I think it should stick to the blue, black, or olive drab colors.

Do they need so many guns.... the guys in black have double stacked mags going into an assumedly residential area....

I do believe that SWAT teams are needed. Just look at the Hollywood Shootout. .40 cal and shotguns just don't cut it against criminals who are armed with 7.62 or 5.56 and body armor. I was on a SWAT raid once and the place we raided was being run by 3 guys from Detroit and Flint who were cooking their own mix of drugs (pills, meths, crack, heroin) putting them into needles (used and new) and selling them around the neighborhood and area. What was their choice of protection for their house (that had the girlfriend's name under everything possible) from anyone? Ak-47.

Is there a role for rifles- yes. I don't think anyone is against the police having rifles if needed, of body armor or robots or what not... but double stacked mags indicate a mindset that is dangerous. The number of suspects in particular innocents who die via bleeding out is also a problem. deadmen tell no tales....

You can't just expect to go against someone with an AK with pistols and shotguns and expect the a good outcome. I also talked to an officer who killed a man with his police issued AR-15 and said if it wasn't for the range of the AR, he probably wouldn't be talking to me now. The story behind that one is that the man was beating his wife to death to get officers to come and respond and was sitting on his porch with his hunting rifle waiting for the police to come to shoot at them. Suicide by Police.

so he didn't really want to kill cops, he wanted to be killed by them.....

video- bahahaha....