One positive outcome of the race riots in Ferguson, MO, may be a fresh look at the over-militarization of law enforcement. It’s about time. Deployment of SWAT teams by local police departments has been increasing for decades, often unnecessarily and occasionally with tragic results. Heavily armed police assault squads, once reserved for major crimes and hostage situations, now are commonplace for serving warrants, making routine arrests and confronting protesters.
Unloading surplus assault rifles and mine-resistant ambush-protected (MRAP) military vehicles on local police departments has boosted militarization by combining the cops’ warrior instincts with the lure of federal freebies. (Whether the cops keep their free MRAPs once they learn what it costs to operate and maintain these 14-ton clunkers is another question.) I’ll bet the Ukrainians and Kurds can make better use of those weapons than the average county sheriff.
If the politicians are serious about demilitarizing law enforcement, they can start by disbanding some of the dozens of federal SWAT teams in agencies such as the Fish and Wildlife Service, the Consumer Product Safety Commission and the Department of Education. In recent years heavily armed federales have burst into the homes of desperadoes suspected of student loan fraud and shipping unpasteurized milk across state lines.
While domestic law enforcement has gone warrior, our armed forces are going in the other direction. U.S. soldiers in overseas conflicts are increasingly constrained by rules of engagement intended to avoid civilian casualties. Rules of war are nothing new, and a lot of progress has been made in recent generations. But some argue that recent restrictions in Afghanistan, such as declining to enter a home in which terrorists may be hiding, will put our troops in danger.
The Israelis have taken military rules of engagement to a new level of sophistication by warning residents of buildings in Gaza before firing missiles. One of the ironies of the current conflict is that Israel is accused of war crimes when Hamas’ human shields become casualties.
We further blur the lines between law enforcement and warfare when we respond to overseas terrorist acts such as the attack on the Benghazi consulate by sending in the FBI rather than a SEAL team, and by giving every enemy combatant a lawyer. Yet the rights of our own citizens are in jeopardy when few rules of engagement apply to local police and federal agencies.
Some politicians are calling for a federal “police czar” to police the police, but we already have one. The U.S. Department of Justice has launched more than a dozen civil rights investigations of local police departments. One recently took place in my home town of Albuquerque, prompted by numerous police shootings of mostly mentally ill perpetrators. Federal oversight may force some much-needed needed reforms in racial diversity and training, and may help so long as the investigations are fair and impartial. That was not the case in New Orleans, however, where a federal judge reprimanded DOJ prosecutors for abusive tactics in securing the indictment of police officers.
So far DOJ scrutiny has focused only on local police departments, and there’s no indication that federal agencies will be held to the same standard. So if the SWAT team breaking down your door is from, say, the Bureau of Land Management, all you can do is holler “hands up, don’t shoot.”
When cops are Rambo and soldiers are Barney Fife
One positive outcome of the race riots in Ferguson, MO, may be a fresh look at the over-militarization of law enforcement. It’s about time. Deployment of SWAT teams by local police departments has been increasing for decades, often unnecessarily and occasionally with tragic results. Heavily armed police assault squads, once reserved for major crimes and hostage situations, now are commonplace for serving warrants, making routine arrests and confronting protesters.
If the politicians are serious about demilitarizing law enforcement, they can start by disbanding some of the dozens of federal SWAT teams in agencies such as the Fish and Wildlife Service, the Consumer Product Safety Commission and the Department of Education. In recent years heavily armed federales have burst into the homes of desperadoes suspected of student loan fraud and shipping unpasteurized milk across state lines.
While domestic law enforcement has gone warrior, our armed forces are going in the other direction. U.S. soldiers in overseas conflicts are increasingly constrained by rules of engagement intended to avoid civilian casualties. Rules of war are nothing new, and a lot of progress has been made in recent generations. But some argue that recent restrictions in Afghanistan, such as declining to enter a home in which terrorists may be hiding, will put our troops in danger.
The Israelis have taken military rules of engagement to a new level of sophistication by warning residents of buildings in Gaza before firing missiles. One of the ironies of the current conflict is that Israel is accused of war crimes when Hamas’ human shields become casualties.
We further blur the lines between law enforcement and warfare when we respond to overseas terrorist acts such as the attack on the Benghazi consulate by sending in the FBI rather than a SEAL team, and by giving every enemy combatant a lawyer. Yet the rights of our own citizens are in jeopardy when few rules of engagement apply to local police and federal agencies.
Some politicians are calling for a federal “police czar” to police the police, but we already have one. The U.S. Department of Justice has launched more than a dozen civil rights investigations of local police departments. One recently took place in my home town of Albuquerque, prompted by numerous police shootings of mostly mentally ill perpetrators. Federal oversight may force some much-needed needed reforms in racial diversity and training, and may help so long as the investigations are fair and impartial. That was not the case in New Orleans, however, where a federal judge reprimanded DOJ prosecutors for abusive tactics in securing the indictment of police officers.
So far DOJ scrutiny has focused only on local police departments, and there’s no indication that federal agencies will be held to the same standard. So if the SWAT team breaking down your door is from, say, the Bureau of Land Management, all you can do is holler “hands up, don’t shoot.”
Share this: