Militarized State and Local Police
By Anthony Gregory on Apr 16, 2008 in Civil Liberties, Criminal Justice
The recent raid of the fundamentalist Mormon home in Texas illustrates the incredible degree to which even local and state police forces have become militarized. In search of a sixteen-year-old female who had reportedly been abused by her 50-year-old husband, police agencies from six counties, the Texas Rangers and the wildlife authorities appeared ready for an all-out military confrontation. “Images released Tuesday show police entering the Yearning for Zion ranch on April 3 wearing body armor and carrying automatic weapons, backed by an armored personnel carrier.” Thankfully, the Mormon family did not resist, and instead responded with non-violent prayer, for it might have descended into a violent conflagration as in Waco, where about 80 civilians, including two dozen children, died from being shot, burned and gassed in an ATF publicity stunt gone awry. The lesson seems to be that if your home is being called a “compound” under siege, the choice is resistance, which would put your kids at risk of being killed by the government—or simply surrendering, and handing over your kids to the state. Texas officials defend the action of forcibly seizing 416 kids from their mothers. What supposedly justifies this? One alleged abuse victim? What about due process for every one else?
This whole sad episode demonstrates something very disturbing about modern American life: The police, even on the state level, have been thoroughly militarized, to the point where the recently gutted Posse Comitatus Act is even more irrelevant than some of us might have suspected: What relief is it, after all, to have the military isolated from domestic policing, if the domestic police have virtually become a military force? Local and state police have become a standing army, in fact, as formidable, ubiquitous, and potentially tyrannical as the redcoats who terrorized the American colonies and motivated the American revolutionaries to denounce, in no uncertain terms, such an omnipresent force of dangerously armed and legally privileged class of armed government officers, and declare that America should never again be home to such a force. What, indeed, is the difference between the state police and the armies of history? Liberals argue the Second Amendment was never meant to protect private ownership of modern weapons. Yet I’d point out that King George’s men didn’t sport such body armor and flaunt military tanks in their execution of civilian law enforcement. If anything, the disparity in weaponry has only moved inexorably in favor of our oppressors.
Updates: It turns out that Posse Comitatus, which I wrote above was “recently gutted,” was (somewhat) restored without any fanfare and practically no media attention at the end of January. This doesn’t change the fact that the militarized police still use military tactics in domestic law enforcement, which is the point of this entry.
As for the case, the government now insists that it doesn’t need to produce the alleged teenage victim who reportedly complained—the reason that supposedly spurred the police response. She is beside the point, sort of like those weapons of mass destruction.
Your article fails to mention how many times police officers are assaulted because they aren’t properly armed and protected. How quickly you forgot mass shootings on school campuses around this country. One main reason police are militarized is to do a very difficult job. It not prepared, you claim inefficiently. If civilians are hurt, you claim excessive use of force.
Let me address the body armor issue. State laws require cops to wear it. It keeps them safe. In some areas, if you don’t wear it and are injured by a suspect. You don’t collect your disable pay.
Finally, as a retired state cop, my wife and kids would have been sicken by the notion of me not wearing as much protection as possible.
The nature of the job requires a militarized law enforcement agency. They have always been that way. They have only upgraded and received bad press from folks like you.
Our local and state cops will never become a military force. Thanks to folks like you and a little something called the constitution.
Oh! Let me turn you on to one last thing. Cops respond to calls all the time. Sometimes, they don’t locate their initial call. They find other criminal acts in progress or that had been committed. Would you prefer if they just walk away… I think not.
Larry | Apr 17, 2008 | Reply
Hey Larry, I bet you support the no-knock drug raids in which the COPS got it wrong and killed people defending their families from intruders. Instead it was the cops, with no relaying that their presence was their. Usually operating on a “tip”. Now you might want to argue that the no-knock raids keeps the coops safer. Does it really?? How much effort does it take to yell “It’s the cops” and THEN bust down the door?? Oh wait, in that brief second the “suspects” can dispose of “whatever” they have, right?? I can’t buy that.. I think not!! Cops should take precautions to protect themselves, but, Paramilitary actoins put a lot of people at risk. Whatever happened to negotiations??
J. | Apr 18, 2008 | Reply
Larry, if my press is bad press, but it also helps prevent the cops from becoming a military force, isn’t that a good thing?
Anthony Gregory | Apr 18, 2008 | Reply
Perhaps we really don’t want or need a police force! It has only been in this country for a little over 100 years–imported from England shortly after they created a police force.
The Constitution makes no mention of police force and contains no authorization for creating one at the Federal level.
In a choice between militarized police and no police, recent history demonstrates that the latter is safer.
Dennis Wilson | Apr 19, 2008 | Reply
Yes, I’d like to see some study showing the police do more good than harm, on balance. They surely do some good. But they also do a lot of harm — simply by virtue of the laws they must enforce, and the ways they must enforce them.
Anthony Gregory | Apr 19, 2008 | Reply
Waco, Ruby Ridge… the hits keep on coming!
MIKE | Apr 20, 2008 | Reply
Anthony,
I am not disputing the issue of police becoming a military force. I do take issue with you about equipping our officers to be an effective crime deterrent and strike force.
The equipment doesn’t make cops become a militarized state.
Bad cops make bad press. People like J. point out issues about the no knock rule. That law stemmed from a federal agency case, not local law enforcement.
There will always be instances of police overreaction. Let the system deal with those who abused their power.
The reason crime is so rampant in this country is because the cops are so restricted. I love this country and it’s only going to get worse because some folks don’t understand what’s required of their local law enforcement agencies.
Reference the “tip” issue. Courts are required to evaluate where the “tips” came from. Does balance of power ring a bell? I wish people would contact their local cops and ask “why did you do it that way?” Let them show you how limited cops really are. Your views are just an opinion and doesn’t necessary reflect reality or what the truth really is.
Lastly, I rather live in a country with a checks and balances. Rather than one where the army secretly removes you during the night, where you are never seen or heard from again. Hitler’s Germany, for one, comes to mind. Ever read the diary of Anne Frank?
Too bad we aren’t more concerned about and supporting the thousands of moms, dads, brothers, and sisters etc… who put that uniform on everyday to keep you safe. They have families and love ones too.
Larry
Larry | Apr 21, 2008 | Reply
Larry, police must, as a matter of job description, enforce multiple policies that make us less safe – the war on drugs and gun control, especially. Much of what police now do is enforce laws against victimless crimes. Do you think there should be even fewer safeguards against police abuse, given that so much of what they are ordered to do is wrong and counterproductive in fostering a safe, civil society?
Anthony Gregory | Apr 21, 2008 | Reply
xyhu hkgaqr dwuy puolc
air jamaicacom air jamaica route map | Jul 4, 2008 | Reply
rvhgfxe
microsoft windows msdn webcast | Jul 5, 2008 | Reply
psegm
for | Jul 6, 2008 | Reply
Good site. Thank you!
variance reduction | Oct 6, 2008 | Reply