Submitted by: Mike Spindell, guest blogger
This blog, like many others has an internal search function that will lead you to past stories. It is located beneath the smiling countenance of our proprietor on the upper right. If you enter SWAT into search, you see that the first archive page shows 19 stories involving SWAT raids that were unnecessary and/or unwarranted. In those raids 4 people and 9 dogs were shot in error by the SWAT Team. Just a catalog of the shootings belies the terror that these raids can instill in people who are merely residing within their homes. Many of the articles detail doors suddenly smashed open, flash grenades and gas grenades tossed into the home, people thrown to the floor handcuffed and left for hours in that position, by invading SWAT teams that either had the wrong house, faulty leads and or in some cases enforcing what were clearly civil warrants. In one instance in California a SWAT raid was carried out due to the suspicion of a defaulted student loan. http://jonathanturley.org/2011/06/08/california-family-hit-with-swat-raid-ordered-by-the-department-of-education/
I believe that the rise of these SWAT teams is leading this country towards martial law and what we all commonly understand is a “police state” as repressive as any we’ve seen in the past century. We have seen constant encroachment on our citizens Constitutional protections and a continued erosion of “the Bill of Rights”. Free Speech, the right to peacefully assemble, Habeas Corpus and safety from unwarranted intrusion in our own homes, among others, have been steadily eroded under various guises, be it the drug war, or national security. In my opinion the SWAT team concept, which militarizes our police forces, is leading this nation to what I see as a state of Martial Law. Despite ones place on the currently inflamed political spectrum, this is a problem that I think concerns us all as citizens, not as partisans. I will present to you sufficient proof of my belief, the majority of which will come from what can be fairly described as a “Libertarian Think Tank” and which was founded by Charles Koch, among others. When I find myself on the same side on an issue as the Cato Institute, then I know with certainty that my fears are well grounded and unrelated to any personal partisanship of my own.
“Martial Law (definition)
The exercise of government and control by military authorities over the civilian population of a designated territory.” http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/martial+law
That partial definition above really doesn’t state the understood essence of the term “Martial Law”. The full definition would of course describe situations like a “State of National Emergency”, where the National Guard is called out to restore order. Yet, while I’m admittedly stretching the definition to fit my own conception, I don’t believe my conception is far from the mark of what’s occurring in America today.
First let me briefly summarize the history of SWAT teams in America as I see it and then I will present evidence that I believe backs up my opinion with factual argumentation. The man credited with inventing the “SWAT” concept was Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) Police Chief Darryl Gates in 1966 as a response to the riots in the Watts section of Los Angeles. Gates was a rather controversial man, who took a draconian mindset into law enforcement. His pronouncement on racial issues regarding both Black and Latinos skirted quite closely to bigotry. Then too the history of the LAPD is a rather checkered one. It was an open fact that the police in L.A. were always seen to be the “protectors” of the “White” population from first the resident Latino’s and then from the Black people who had joined the emigration to California as a land of opportunity. The LAPD actively recruited police officers from the South who were experienced in enforcing “Jim Crow” laws. Gates’ innovation was the use of military tactics and equipment in a special force that was trained by ex-Marines. Besides “riots” the LAPD SWAT team soon became deployed in the “drug wars” and in “controlling” demonstrations.
Gates’ SWAT concept slowly gained popularity through the 70’s but it was limited to units being formed in only a few Cities around the U.S.. With the election of Ronald Reagan though and his institution of the “War on Drugs”, the SWAT concept began to spread across the Nation and local Police Department began receiving massive amounts of Federal funding to organize units, to train in military tactics and to buy military equipment. The public acceptance of these units stemmed from a media all too eager to engender fear ridden news items and to show the “heroism” (and need for) these tactics on their numerous “Cop Shows”. The over sensationalized “Crack Epidemic” of the 80’s and its’ overplay in the media helped impel this new tactic. Having been directly involved in working with “Crack” and Cocaine addiction I’m not trying to lighten their terrible effects. I was on the ground, so to speak, these were issues that required mental health professionals, rather than policing. Especially because invariably those caught and arrested were users, or low level dealers. Interestingly too, “Crack” was an addiction of the lower classes and thus caught most of the attention, whereas the more expensive Cocaine was commonly used among the wealthy with few criminal consequences, other than the health issues it raised.
“The Military Cooperation with Law Enforcement Act”: Passed in 1981 it was the first “official” blending of the military and the police.
“In 1988, Congress ordered the National Guard to assist state drug enforcement efforts. Because of this order, National Guard troops today patrol for marijuana plants and assist in large-scale anti-drug operations in every state in the country.
In 1989, President Bush created a series of regional task forces within the Department of Defense, charged with facilitating cooperation between the military and domestic police forces.
In 1994, the Department of Defense issued a memorandum authorizing the transfer of equipment and technology to state and local police. The same year, Congress created a “re-utilization program” to facilitate handing military gear”
After 1994, the use of SWAT Teams for local police forces grew exponentially with the impetus coming from the infusion of massive amounts of Federal Fund and surplus military equipment. What local police chief wouldn’t want a free armored vehicle? The spread of SWAT Teams around the US has become an epidemic to the point that even relatively small town police forces (towns with 25,000 to 50,000 people) have their own SWAT teams supplied via generous Federal funding and trained by military personnel, often at specialized military training bases.
The essence of this problem as I see it is that conceptually police and the military, while both carry weaponry, have two distinctly separate functions. The Military are to be used for making war and for invading foreign countries. Historically in America we didn’t allow the military to be used on our shores. The responsibility for maintaining order within our country is given to State and Local Police forces and not to the Federal Government. That idea has in fact been chipped away for many years, for many reasons. The FBI which was supposed to investigate Federal Criminal activity has found its duties expanded, either legally by legislation, or by fiat from such figures as J. Edgar Hoover, who conveniently conflated FBI work with his own personal power interests. Since the founding of the DEA, the line between Federal and State/Local has further been blurred, as indeed the line between the DEA and the Military has also been blurred. Finally, the establishment of the Department of Homeland Security and the Patriot Act has made the separation between Federal and local law enforcement almost nil.
Traditionally in this Country Police Officers were seen as members of the community and most felt that way. Thus policing, with exceptions of course, was more about maintaining public peace rather than frightening, disabling and punishing citizens. From a military perspective though, especially in occupying other countries, the idea is that all the populace are possible enemies not to be trusted and with whom harsh treatment is needed to instill fear and submission. When you begin to train police officers in those same tactics, then the citizens they deal with suddenly become “the other” in their minds, to be harshly repressed, frightened and dominated. It is this mindset that has become all too prevalent today and it has come into being via the SWAT concept.
A second problem with the SWAT teams and with the largesse of supplying localities with military equipment, structure and training is that “cool” stuff when available will be used and “overused”. To local police officers, indeed to many ordinary people, this equipment is “cool” stuff and its’ availability makes its usage much more likely. That is how a SWAT Team can be sent to deal with a delinquent Department of Education Student Loan. The human “need” to use the “team” and the equipment leads to rationalizing its use in instances that in the past were dealt with without the need for overwhelming firepower. While any situation where police must go to a house on official business can turn deadly for the police, this is generally not true in the overwhelming majority of cases. In fact in these days where 300 million firearms are owned by our citizens, sudden massive confrontation can exacerbate violence.
Beyond the lack of Constitutionality, the unneeded expense of manpower and the plethora of tragic happenstance is the bald fact that for us average citizens these SWAT actions are terrifying and have a “chilling” effect on even our legal activities. This to me is the essence of a Police State and a close harbinger of the imposition of Martial Law upon us. The word “martial” itself means military, or warlike.
Since this is the essence of the over proliferation of SWAT teams, to me at least, it seems that what is being rapidly imposed on Americans is Martial Law. Before you decide to agree, or disagree with me I would humbly request that you don’t take my word for what it happening. Below I’ve supplied 3 sources that detail copious proof of my allegations and a thorough discussion of what is happening to America due to the SWAT team craze.
The first is from one of the most popular (definitely centrist for financial reasons) and iconic magazines in the United States Popular Mechanics. It is written by Law Professor Glenn Reynolds of Instapundit.com
“SWAT Overkill: The Danger of a Paramilitary Police Force
“In a guest editorial, law professor and instapundit.com blogger Glenn Reynolds argues that over aggressive tactics and surplus military gear have turned some police units into a dangerous menace. SOLDIERS AND POLICE are supposed to be different. Soldiers are aimed at enemies from outside the country. They are trained to kill those enemies, and their supporters. In fact, “killing people and breaking things” are their main reasons for existence.
Police look inward. They’re supposed to protect their fellow citizens from criminals, and to maintain order with a minimum of force. It’s the difference between Audie Murphy and Andy Griffith. But nowadays, police are looking, and acting, more like soldiers than cops, with bad consequences. And those who suffer the consequences are usually innocent civilians.” Read more: http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military/4203345
The second source consists of a paper written for The Cato Institute by Radley Balko, who is a well-known libertarian journalist:
“CATO Paper: Overkill: The Rise of Paramilitary Police Raids in America: (published in 2006)
Executive Summary:
Americans have long maintained that a man’s home is his castle and that he has the right to defend it from unlawful intruders. Unfortunately, that right may be disappearing. Over the last 25 years, America has seen a disturbing militarization of its civilian law enforcement, along with a dramatic and unsettling rise in the use of paramilitary police units (most commonly called Special Weapons and Tactics, or SWAT) for routine police work. The most common use of SWAT teams today is to serve narcotics warrants, usually with forced, unannounced entry into the home.
These increasingly frequent raids, 40,000 per year by one estimate, are needlessly subjecting nonviolent drug offenders, bystanders, and wrongly targeted civilians to the terror of having their homes invaded while they’re sleeping, usually by teams of heavily armed paramilitary units dressed not as police officers but as soldiers. These raids bring unnecessary violence and provocation to nonviolent drug offenders, many of whom were guilty of only misdemeanors. The raids terrorize innocents when police mistakenly target the wrong residence. And they have resulted in dozens of needless deaths and injuries, not only of drug offenders, but also of police officers, children, bystanders, and innocent suspects. This paper presents a history and overview of the issue of paramilitary drug raids, provides an extensive catalogue of abuses and mistaken raids, and offers recommendations for reform.”http://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/balko_whitepaper_2006.pdf
Included with the paper that you might profit from seeing is an interactive map of the U.S. showing the huge amount of botched SWAT teams’ raids across the country and their results. This map alone is worth looking at to get an idea of the extent of the problem, with the understanding that it was created in 2006 and so it omits the increasing SWAT usage of the last seven years. http://www.cato.org/raidmap
Finally, my evidence comes from the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) an organization I’ve supported since my teens. The ACLU to me has proved that it will fight for any civil liberties cause, without judging the politics of the people it fights for. The ACLU has just launched a nationwide program to investigate the abuses of SWAT Teams and the militarization of police enforcement in the U.S.
“American neighborhoods are increasingly being policed by cops armed with the weapons and tactics of war. Federal funding in the billions of dollars has allowed state and local police departments to gain access to weapons and tactics created for overseas combat theaters – and yet very little is known about exactly how many police departments have military weapons and training, how militarized the police have become, and how extensively federal money is incentivizing this trend.
It’s time to understand the true scope of the militarization of policing in America and the impact it is having in our neighborhoods. On March 6th, ACLU affiliates in 23 states filed over 255 public records requests with law enforcement agencies and National Guard offices to determine the extent to which federal funding and support has fueled the militarization of state and local police departments. Stay tuned as this project develops.
Consider these ten chilling stories. If the anecdotal evidence is any indication, use of military machinery such as tanks and grenades, as well as counter-terrorism tactics, encourage overly aggressive policing – too often with devastating consequences:
1. Confused after throwing a deafening and blinding “flashbang” into a home, police mistakenly shot and killed a sleeping nine-year-old.
Read more »
2. A county sheriff’s department in South Carolina has an armored personnel carrier dubbed “The Peacemaker,” which can shoot weapons that the U.S. military specifically refrains from using on people.
Read more »
3. New Hampshire police received federal funds for a counter-attack vehicle, asking “what red-blooded American cop isn’t going to be excited about getting a toy like this?”
Read more »
4. Two SWAT Teams shut down a neighborhood in Colorado for four hours to search for a man suspected of stealing a bicycle and merchandise from Wal-Mart. Read more »
5. A company in Arizona submitted a patent for shock cuffs, which can be used by cops to remotely administer a Taser-like shock to detainees.
Read more »
6. Police in North Dakota borrowed a $154 million Predator drone from Homeland Security to arrest a family who refused to return six cows that wandered onto their farm. Read more »
7. Police in Arkansas announced plans to patrol streets wearing full SWAT gear and carrying AR-15 assault rifles. Read more »
8. Drone manufacturers may offer police remote controlled drones with weapons like rubber bullets, Tasers, and tear gas. Read more »
9. An Arizona SWAT team defended shooting an Iraq War veteran 60 times during a drug raid, but had to retract its claim that the veteran shot first.
Read more »
10. The New York City Police Department disclosed that it deployed “counter-terror” measures against Occupy Movement protesters.
http://www.aclu.org/militarization
I think that these three articles and the information they supply has proven my case, with solid evidence, that our country is fast becoming a police state under martial law. Do you think I’m wrong, if so how?
Submitted by: Mike Spindell, guest blogger
Mike, excellent article. I’ve posted for a while that I don’t think we’re coming under anything, we are already there, it just depends on where in the citizenry the focus is put at any given time. Increasingly protesters are being arrested and charged under local terrorism related laws, dissent is being equated with terrorism. As well, as you mention, local police and SWAT are being used to deal with matters more appropriate to civil law remedies but hey, why send a process server to deliver a subpoena when a fully tricked out SWAT team is available?
I have thought about the changing face and soul of policing regarding the drug laws for some time- about 25 years give or take- and think about it as a hybrid of privateering and brigandage. Forfeiture laws have made it so. I went to the link of the map you posted in your article and and went to my city. The first click of my mouse returned the description I posted below.
If you haven’t already checked out the video on wealth inequality that Anon keeps linking to you should, its part of the equation and should be factored in to the thinking that the police now regard us all as the enemy. The police have always been a reflection of the attitude of the power players/structure in a city or state. Used to be minorities were the focus, keep them down and in their place with relentless harassment. It’s a wider net now which is probably why it’s a matter of more generalized concern. It’s classed based now and almost everyone is fair game.
We post on Turleyblawg that there is a two-tier justice system but there always has been multi-tier justice, what is different today is that the class structure has changed but most people are still deceiving themselves about it. The militarism of the police is the response to a new social structure wherein there are the wealthy, the 1%, and the new class of serfs which encompass about 80% of the population. SWAT rolls up heavily padded and armored, like the Lord’s own knights, to harass and pillage under color of law and the rationale du jour.
The first time I read about asset forfeiture was in the very early 80’s in Mother Jones magazine- the take away was if you were a person of color and or carrying any cash stay the hell away from Miami International Airport- the cops stop you, take the money and on occasion your jewelry/camera, and release you in time to catch your flight out albeit traveling a bit lighter. Brigandage under color of a war on drugs.
Keep in mind the military aid and intervention the war on drugs included as well as serving to spur the country to lock up and disenfranchise as many as a million people a year. the enemy became the citizenry. The war on terror is following that same pattern IMO and is a boon to the MIC and has set off a round of intervention unseen since the Vietnam era. The rights not crushed by the war on drugs have been under the war on terror. The treasure not looted and the class-based gains not lost to our ‘wars’ has been by banking fraud, trade policy (which has encouraged runaway corporations) and tax policy. The benefactors of those policies are also the benefactors of our two-tier justice system. The justice system, right down to the local level, works for them.
The point is that turning local police into a quasi-military force is not isolated from the other aspects of the changing landscape of America and it’s been at work for 30 years at least. You have to do it if the overwhelming majority of your citizens have become the enemy, or a rabble that needs a constant reminder of where the power lies to keep them in line.
Lol, too paranoid?
******
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privateer
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brigandage
******
Title: Gary Miller
Type: Raid on an innocent suspect.
State: MO
Description: In October 1986, police raid the St. Louis home of Gary Miller, based on a tip from a confidential informant. In the course of the search, a Detective Clifford of the St. Louis Police Department steps on an infant baby’s head while attempting to search the home’s ceiling for drugs. Police find no drugs or weapons, nor do they make any arrests. Police do, however, seize about $13,000 in cash from Mr. Miller. Under asset forfeiture laws, the police department gets to keep the money. Even though he is never charged with a crime, it is up to Mr. Miller to prove he didn’t get the money through drug transactions. In 1992, the U.S. Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals rules that although there is no evidence of drug use or distribution on the part of Mr. Miller, he failed to prove he earned the money legitimately. The police get to keep the money they seized in the raid. Source: U.S. v. Twelve Thousand, Three Hundred Ninety Dollars, 956 F.2d 801 (1992)
Date: Oct 10, 1986
Maybe this is another social control tactic from the Elites? Could there be an ominous movement or potential revolution about to occur and the Elites are using these tactics to prevent this revolution from transpiring? Or maybe their is a potential ‘domestic terror threat’-on a scale, that you and I couldn’t possibly imagine,-brewing or on the horizon? Why else would you tell the ‘enemy’ (or people that you are trying to control) your plan of attack if they ‘cross that line’?
Think about this: In the past 2 months, they (Elites) have told us that they can and are reading and listening to our emails, phone records, etc.; they told us the weapon that they can use (drones, and other military style weapons and tactics); and they told us that they can use it anytime that they feel like it (or when they feel a potential threat is imminent).
Something is on the horizon…………or maybe they are just trying to prevent one of us from committing another Timothy McVeigh act? Sandy Hook Incident?….Stay tuned…….
Darren,
Agree on the SWAT team standing in most departments. One department I do some work for has two former Marine snipers who work as corrections officers. When the SWAT team is called out, and that is very rare, these two men are on the team for obvious reasons. They have not yet been put into a position where they have to use skills the USMC spent a million dollars apiece training them. However, it is good to know they are ready to go in case of hostage situations or similar. The SWAT team members do regular patrol or corrections work until there is a crisis. It may seem odd, but the bomb squad has far more calls than the SWAT team. The bomb squad seems to stay busy. Quite a few of the calls are to help dispose of chemicals in meth labs, but many are for suspicious packages or actual homemade pipe bombs.
I remember the bank robber shootout. I also remember the Texas Tower shooter, Charles Whitman. He outgunned the police as well. Two officers and a civilian volunteer climbed the tower and killed Whitman in a close quarters shootout at enormous risk to themselves. I suspect either of our two former Marine snipers could have easily taken him out from a safe distance if they had proper equipment.
The major concern I have is the departments who get all this military equipment, then are all too eager to collude with rogue Federal agents against protesters and others exercising their Constitutional rights. I fear we have too many mayors, police chiefs and sheriffs who are wannabe generals, and also wish to suck up to the Feds. Not to mention exercising their favorite prejudices.
Anyone remember the Bonus Army march on Washington? Herbert Hoover was quite embarrassed by the protests literally in his front door at the White House. He called on Douglas MacArthur, who sent infantry and cavalry supported by six tanks to confront and attack the WW-I vets and their families. The Bonus Army marchers were driven out, along with their wives and children, and their shelters and belongings burned.
More recently, we have seen the attacks on OWS groups. None of the militarized officers involved have been identified,much less prosecuted, for almost killing former Marine and Iraq combat vet Scott Olsen. Olsen has a fractured skull and brain damage from being hit in the head by a tear gas grenade. When others came to his aid, a flash-bang grenade was thrown into the group trying to give first aid. Stuff like that. The officer who threw the grenades was caught on video, and was in a group of other officers, but his identity is still unknown to the general public. We have since learned that Federal agencies were involved in disrupting those protests and deliberately destroying personal belongings, including cameras and portable computers.
I have long maintained that the purpose of TSA at airports is to turn you into sheep. The war on Terror is likewise meant to make you, a citizen of this country, very fearful and thus thankful for Papa Fed to protect you from all the evil terrorists out to kill you, your wife/husband and kids. And the war on drugs is likewise meant to terrorize you.
There are some signs things are changing for the better: 2 states just approved marijuana for recreational use, many states allow medical marijuana, gay and lesbien people are more and more gaining the right to marry. So while there are signs of improvement, there are also, sadly, many signs that we are still being herded like sheep, and too many of us are thankful for that herding.
The original Posse Comitatus Act (18 U.S.C. § 1385) (PCA) was passed at the end of The Civil War.
The military website USNORTHCOM has language that on its face strongly respects PCA.
However, another military source says PCA has been emasculated and its now a toothless historical piece:
(Will The Military Become The Police – 3?). That is a quote from a Homeland Security contractor website, written by Major Craig T. Trebilcock, then removed from the site when it drew someon’s attention.
I got a copy in the Wayback Machine, showing they removed it because they wanted that reality hidden from somebody.
The have also developed a military manual that goes through the paces of detailing deployment of the military if we complain too much about economic problems:
(ibid, quoting The Phoenix Business Journal). The manuals and the equipment are in place.
All it takes to implement the reality Mike S pondered is an order from …
When Americans choose to trade temporary safety for essential liberty as Ben Franklin warned us about they may want to weigh it this way: if we have an American style “Innocent until Proven Guilty” system (which most police/FBI don’t subscribe to) then there will be some guilty people that temporarily get away – there theoretically will be more citizen-crime. But if we have a “Guilty until Proven Innocent” system (our current system) there will be more “color of law” crimes perpetrated by police officers/FBI and more innocent people falsely punished. Crimes perpetrated by some (not most) police officers also are not documented accurately so the voters never see the true police-crime statistics. Either way the American people are not any safer and didn’t reduce the crime rate with our upside down justice system. Great book is “The Rights of the People” by David K. Shipler published in 2011 where he traces the roots of the problem back several decades.
@warren
“I would take organized crime and drugs in the hands of the stupid few any day over the RICO statute, the “war” on drugs, the “no knock” warrants and the SWAT teams”
None of those things are mutually-exclusive. Kennedy worked with the mafia to try to assassinate Castro, Oliver North used the mafia to help launder money for his drug running operation. It happens.
The CIA still runs drugs, still launders money (Wachovia and HSBC are some of the more high-profile cases), and is still involved with organized crime — not just the mafia, but now Mexican drug cartels too.
The larger issue here is the planning process.
HSPD 51 came as part of a chain of planning documents, stretching back through PDD-62 and FPC-65 under Clinton, and the REX84 tests under Reagan.
Possee Comitatus is clearly undermined by Northcom, created under Bush II, which was mobilized during the BP oil spill, but is also operating in Mexico through the Merida Initiative. Obama’s domestic roles for drones are quite in line with the Bush Administration’s thinking here. Local law enforcement have been wrapped up with federal espionage through the Intelligence Fusion Centers, also under Bush II.
Of specific relevance to this blog post here is the 1122 Procurement Program.
This provides a pathway for local law enforcement to procure military grade weapons.
Like many things, one rationale lends cover for another. Just like “fighting online piracy” is a tool for “eroding online privacy,” the War on Drugs is a similar catch-all. The 1122 Program is marketed as a tool for fighting drugs, but there is scant data that’s what its actually being used for.
Consider in this connection, one noteworthy provision in the post-911 PATRIOT ACT:
http://nymag.com/news/9-11/10th-anniversary/patriot-act/
The “sneek-n-peek” provisions have been used 1,618 times for drug offenders…. but only 15 times in terror cases. This provision of the PATRIOT ACT is 100x more likely to be used in a non-terrorism related context.
I would like to also point out that there is really a disconnect between local-state police agencies and the federal government. Just because the President and Congress are whittling away certain liberties of the populace, it does not necessarily translate to what happens at state, county or city agencies. Local agencies do not report to the federal gov’t. The rules of search and seizure are often different.
Just because the federal gov’t provides money to agencies to purchase equipment it does not at all mean that the federal government is forcing a crackdown on the population in fact in many cases the opposite is true. These grants often come with conditions that certain policies and procedures be enacted that deal with professionalism or approaches to the rights of the public. One grant that I wrote and obtained had a condition that our department enact a policy of how to deal with race riots. Some had requirements that our department have a policy on informing victims of domestic violence of resources they could seek in our community. I recognize that some could argue that providing equipment to deal with drug enforcement is causing harm to the rights of the public but I think that is more about perspective than oppression.
You really have to look at each agency individually to see if it is benevolent or not. Nearly all LE agencies do not plot together to deprive the citizenry of their rights. But I will agree there is a perception of this because often there are ideas such as procedures and equipment that seem to fan out like any idea in any trade, business, or social circle and it can be interpreted as an agreement by all to do it a certain way.
I understant where you are coming from Mike, but I might suggest that this isn’t as much a wide spread problem as it might seem. There are a few realities that are present in LE that have caused the agencies to engage in tactics that resemble military roles but just because there is a parallel in tactics and equipment does not always imply that the purpose of those two entities is becoming merged.
It really is the matter of how they are used that is the question as to whether or not it is beneficial or not.
Probably in my mind the wake up call in LE came during the infamous North Hollywood shootout. This incident caught the LAPD with its pants down and they were totally outgunned by 2 heavily armed bank robbers. The LAPD was reduced to having its patrol officers borrow hunting rifles from sporting goods stores to address the threat, that is two robbers bent on destruction, armed with machine guns and threat level IV body armor.
This kind of incident can happen anywhere and I have been an advocate for being better prepared for these types of incidents. Especialy active shooters.
SWAT teams are good for these type of incidents, I agree it is really a waste of resources and too risky to deploy them needlessly. But if I was a police administrator and saw a potentially dangerous situation about to unfold I am going to do what it takes to protect my deputies and the public and if the SWAT team is indicated, then that is what I would call out.
I also have a different approach to SWAT teams that is a bit controversial and one you probably would not agree with. Unless the jurisdiction is a extremely large metro area, I would not have standing SWAT teams but I feel that regular patrol units should be equipped to handle any active shooter or hostage situation. The former being so exigent there isn’t time to call out and assemble SWAT. The training would benefit all patrol officers to go through it. Most of the gear could be carried in the patrol car. My former department had an Armoured Personnel Carrier but it iwas rarely used and more or less a military donation. But it was there for the rare event of a barricaded shooter. Other than training purposes I haven’t seen it used personally.
It is the equipment that is not the problem it is the deployment when unnecessary that is.
As I recall, Nixon initiated the “War on Drugs.” I would take organized crime and drugs in the hands of the stupid few any day over the RICO statute, the “war” on drugs, the “no knock” warrants and the SWAT teams. Some risks? Of course. It depends on what type of country you want. When FBI agents appeared at the home of the Governor of Illinois at 6 AM to arrest him as opposed to phoning him at a reasonable hour to ask him to appear in court demonstrates that the United States inches ever closer to a police state where officers of the “law” abuse their powers…not to mention WACO, Ruby Ridge and all of the instances Mike lists.
We’ve really become everything I grew up mocking the Sovets for.
Evelyn,
I doubt you get many visitors to this blog to disagree with you. Did you notice Dredd’s post above about the new CIA Director, John Brennan, being sworn in using an original copy of the Constitution…with the Bill of Rights removed? Was that an OOPS or deliberate on his part?
As the Guardian article points out, the object on which one is sworn in is not binding, but the Oath itself is, which includes upholding the Constitution. All of it.
Factoid: I have visited the home and tailor shop of President Andrew Johnson. His grave is in the smallest National Cemetery in the VA cemetery system. I have visited it in Greene County, Tennessee. Our 17th President was buried with his head resting on a copy of the Constitution. That was his last request.
It is time for a Revolution.
We need a national strike to force our govt to step down.
Our Bill of Rights is under attack. We defend it now or never
Why don’t people defend Gods law? Defending Gods law results in peace. Can you tell me what that law is?
Excellent Post Mike. I don’t think you are wrong. I think you are pretty well spot on. Americans should be afraid. Very afraid. If we don’t join together to do something about this kind of thing, it will be too late and before we know it we will wake up to find the Constitution no longer exists. It’s already been torn to shreds as it is.
Mike,
Being able to look for lost kids, or study a crime scene from the air is a useful and non-malignant tool. It is cheaper to monitor problems such as traffic patterns, forest fires, flooded areas or hazmat contaminated areas using UAVs than a helicopter costing hundreds of dollars an hour to operate. Our sheriff’s department got a small helicopter that had been retired from the Army. It was similar to the ones used in the opening scenes of the old TV series MASH. Hangar rent, maintenance, and operating costs were so high they got rid of it.
The FPV type machine shown in that video is inexpensive enough an ordinary hobbyist can afford one, and prices are coming down all the time.
My personal opinion is there are valid uses for UAVs that will keep officers safe and cost less money, but for routine “spy in the sky” use, there are all kinds of problems. The FAA is chartered with the responsibility of aviation safety; it has to enforce regulations, but the FAA is not a law enforcement agency. One of the FAA’s concerns is avoiding airspace conflicts. That is one reason radio control model airplanes are limited to 400 feet above ground level. Hitting one in flight could ruin your whole day.
Mike,
Interesting post! Those are chilling tales about the actions of some SWAT teams. It seems there are so many things that we should be concerned about:–kill lists, indefinite detention, drone strikes, prosecution of whistleblowers, the Patriot Act…
Excellent article. I am good friends with 2 Police Chiefs, both who are retiring next year so you can imagine how long they have been on their respective forces.
Both have been seriously concerned for the last few years on the direction “Federal Government Sponsored” militarization has taken within their ranks. They worry for their communities and for the individual officers and their families. Both have instituted programs to help keep their officers involved with their communities helping with charity events such as police sponsored food drives and several programs aimed at interacting with children.
When responsible members of the Police force are worried about the effects of militarization, you know the problem is real.
FWIW, sometime after this FPV video was made, one of those windmills “ate” this guy’s airplane. Why am I not surprised?
Didn’t even scratch the paint on the windmill, from the account I read.
OS,
As you’ve shown the drone discussion is a nuanced one. I think the problem is twofold. First that the “weaponized” ones could be responsible for all kinds of deadly mischief. The second though I think is even more important. As you remember in Orwell’s “1984” everyone’s home had a two way TV that could watch you and therefore control you. I don’t want to live in a society where everyone’s movements are tracked. I can understand the rationale for security cameras, but not the rationale for moving security cameras.
Mike,
I am most certainly the choir on this issue as my thoughts on militarizing the police being a bad idea aren’t exactly a secret, but well said nonetheless. Martial law by proxy or martial law by direct military intervention is still martial law.