Showing posts with label Militarized Police. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Militarized Police. Show all posts

Tuesday, May 19, 2015

Obama Administration Lowers the Boom on Military Gear for Police

Effective immediately, the White House has banned the transfer of several classes of weapons and gear to police agencies. (Photo: AP/Jeff Roberson)

Guns dot com

Following a year of high-profile riots and demonstrations, the White House on Monday moved forward with implementing a ban on transferring some weapons and military equipment to law enforcement.

The Task Force on 21st Century Policing, a now permanent separate federal inter-agency working group set up by executive order of President Barack Obama in January, has released its final report, which the president has ordered placed into effect through the Departments of Justice, Defense and Homeland Security.

Among the list of items now prohibited from being transferred either from surplus military stocks via the DOD’s 1033 Program or bought through DHS grants are tracked armored vehicles, weaponized aircraft, vessels or vehicles of any kind; firearms or ammunition of .50 caliber or higher, grenade launchers, bayonets and camouflage uniforms.

“The Working Group concluded that a prohibition on acquisition of such equipment by LEAs [law enforcement agencies] from Federal programs is appropriate because the substantial risk of misusing or overusing these items, which are seen as militaristic in nature, could significantly undermine community trust and may encourage tactics and behaviors that are inconsistent with the premise of civilian law enforcement,” reads the report. “These concerns outweigh the Federal Government’s interest in providing this equipment to address law enforcement needs (that could not otherwise be fulfilled).

”In addition to prohibiting the future transfer of the now-restricted weapons and equipment, the administration is also seeking to recover those that are already in the hands of police agencies nationwide.

Sunday, August 24, 2014

Libertarians Who Oppose a Militarized Police Should Support Gun Control—But They Don't, of Course

The New Republic

The current issue of The Economist contains a striking factoid: “Last year, in total, British police officers actually fired their weapons three times. The number of people fatally shot was zero.” By contrast, there are about 400 fatal shootings each year by local police in the United States.

When I tweeted out this stunning stat earlier this week, no shortage of people noted an obvious explanation for why British police were so much less likely to fire their guns: there were far fewer guns around them. The U.K. has some of the world’s strictest limitations on gun ownershiphandguns are all but prohibited, while shotguns and rifles require a police certificate and special justification (self-defense does not qualify.) There are an estimated 14,000 handguns in civilian hands in the U.K. (population 63 million) and slightly more than 2 million shotguns and rifles. Estimates for the number of total firearms in civilian hands in the U.S. float north of 300 million. Simply put, if the police in the U.S. seem a lot more on edge than those across the pond, they have good reason to be.

As obvious as this explanation for the militarization and trigger-happiness of U.S. police may be, it has gotten relatively little attention amid the alarming spectacle that has played out in Ferguson, Missouri following the fatal police shooting of an unarmed black 18-year-old and, more recently, the fatal shooting just a few miles away of a mentally-ill man holding a knife. That oversight  may be partly because this aspect of the debate undermines one of the most popular media narratives to emerge from Ferguson: the notion of a growing right-left coalition united against heavy-handed police tactics.

There is indeed agreement between many liberals and libertarians that the militarization of the police, especially in its dealings with racial minorities, has gone too far. But this consensus may crumble pretty quickly when it’s confronted with the obvious police counter-argument: that the authorities’ heavy firepower and armor is necessary in light of all the firepower they’re up against. At that point, many liberals will revert to arguing for sensible gun control regulations like broader background checks to keep guns out of the hands of violent felons and the mentally ill (the measure that police organizations successfully argued should be the gun control movement’s legislative priority following the Newtown, Connecticut shootings) or limits on assault weapons and oversized ammunition clips. And liberals will be reminded that the libertarians who agree with them in opposing police militarization are very much also opposed to the gun regulations that might help make the environment faced by police slightly less threatening.