It’s interesting because arguing against the “militarization of police” ultimately is saying that more power has to go to State and Federal government than local.
Its somewhat analogous to 2nd amendment issue where the anti-right-to-bear side says big brother will take care of you, so you don’t need guns.
Here it is big big brother will come in and take care of your city if there are any problems, so you don’t need equipment to deal with riots or other threats to your city.
The point is those threats are vanishingly rare in most cases, and out of all proportion to the equimpment. To justify the expense, they have to use it, so the rules of engagement get looser and looser.
I’ll take my chances with the occasional riot.
“The point is those threats are vanishingly rare in most cases, and out of all proportion to the equimpment. “
Exactly what the gun grabbers say.