Posted on 12/11/2013 12:40:46 PM PST by Kaslin
The University of the Incarnate Word is a highly-rated Catholic college in San Antonio, Texas. It is hardly a hot bed of campus violence. When senior Robert Cameron Redus was pulled-over last Friday by campus police for “erratically speeding,” it is unlikely he had any clue of how tragically the stop would end. The campus police department contends Redus, an honors student set to graduate in May, grabbed the officer’s steel baton during a struggle. Not in dispute, however, is that Redus was shot five times by the officer, at close range, leaving him dead and the University scrambling to explain why lethal force was needed to subdue a single college student.
Police-involved shootings are on the rise from New York City to Anaheim, California and crime data suggests incidents involving questionable use of police force -- once a problem primarily limited to large, inner-city areas -- are occurring with greater frequency in smaller towns across the country. For civil liberties watchdogs, this disturbing trend should come as no surprise; much like their federal counterparts, local police and prosecutors are demanding greater power to “pursue criminals,” even if such power may overstep constitutional limitation; and regardless of whether such an approach makes practical sense in low-crime communities or in many non-violent situations in which police officers are involved.
A major factor accounting for this trend is the massive infusion of federal “anti-terrorism” money being funneled from the Department of Homeland Security to local police departments. These billions are turning many neighborhood cops into paramilitary personnel -- equipped with vehicles and weapons intended for use in the world’s most violent warzones. The over- militarization of small-town America is turning Mayberry into the Middle East; with Andy Griffith monitoring a license plate camera while Don Knotts patrols the streets carrying an MP5. Officers now have military-style armored vehicles parked in their lots along side their Crown Victoria patrol cars. This has created such unusual scenarios as Ohio State University’s 40,000-pound, armored Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicle, and sophisticated license plate readers in a town of 333 people.
More than simply increasing the likelihood of abuse or disaster, such militarization tends to change the psyche of the American police officer -- the more he is equipped like a soldier, the more he begins to act like one. This, coupled with today’s crime-speak that treats all crimes as if they were acts of terrorism, puts police officers mentally on the offensive; changing their perspective from “serve and protect,” to “find and prosecute.”
Perhaps this is why earlier this year, Virginia Alcohol Control Board agents pulled their guns on a frightened, 20-year-old college student. After mistaking her purchase of bottled water for alcohol, plainclothes officers surrounded her vehicle, and one agent jumped on her hood. Understandably frightened after being ambushed in a dark parking lot, the student tried to drive away as agents drew their guns and tried breaking her windows. Fortunately, the student was not shot. She was, however, forced to spend the night in jail and charged with three felony offenses. The District Attorney decided not to prosecute the case, but stood by officers’ decision to file charges against the student.
In a country where buying a bottle of water can escalate quickly into a potential five-year prison term, the once-common refrain of “you have nothing to fear if you have nothing to hide,” has become esoteric. Reports emerge daily about new details of the Obama Administration’s domestic spying programs. Recent court documents reveal the FBI’s ability to activate computer cameras without alerting users. Government agencies at all levels share our personal data with each other -- even data illegally stolen from commercial sites.
The entire attitude of the criminal justice system is shifting towards treating all citizens -- regardless of guilt -- as suspects. There is no more burden of proof. There is no more assumption of innocence. Your only “right” is to obey; just try to board an airline with a two-inch toy gun in a child’s back pack.
The best hope we have to undoing this statutory and regulatory nightmare created in recent years is to fight back through the ballot box and in court. Fortunately, organizations from across the ideological spectrum -- from the Institute for Justice to the American Civil Liberties Union, and many others – are actively helping to protect citizens from government abuse in all its forms.
All this is not to say there are not very real and very serious threats in communities across the country. Adam Lanza reminded us of that a year ago in Newtown, CT. These threats and incidents must be dealt with using a sound combination of good policing and new technology. But militarizing police forces in communities large and small, and treating all citizens as enemies, is not reasonable, necessary or American.
“anti-terrorism” money being funneled from the Department of Homeland Security to local police departments.
shoot my dog ? They better shoot me first . No threat implied to any LEOs but I would rather not live without my dog . Send us both to heaven together , if it comes to that .
Even if it happened as the police contend its still a tragedy. By all reports this was a good kid. There’s no indication of a criminal record or criminal activity other than speeding.
yet this cop allowed it to escalate to the point he could justify lethal force. Just like those cops in New Mexico with that woman who was speeding.
Its almost as if they want to shoot someone and are just looking for an excuse.
Agree...
Thanks to the Internet, these escalating militarized and heavy handed police actions are being exposed on a daily basis..
“I’m beginning to think the idea of beating up some poor, law abiding citizen, and killing his pet dog, gives these Storm Troopers a hard on.”
I know several cops and people who used to be cops. They tell me there are quite a few who will escalate a situation because they want to shoot someone.
or b/c of asset forfeiture...
Thats where they steal your stuff on trumped up charges or no charges at all. Its the ‘in’ thing among LE and DAs who need funding and/or want to make a name for themselves.
The Founders knew that the biggest threat to freedom was government, so they brilliantly put constitutional limits on government. Our leaders seem to believe that our Constitution has passed its sell-by date.
We now have the internet to see what goes on...How many family pets have you killed during your career???
Yet, we are in the wrong -- according to you -- for noting these trends.
That’s the way of the power trippin’ authority folks. It’s always the victim’s fault they traveled through the bullet.
http://www.policemisconduct.net/
I’d like to thank all the war on drugs supporting conservatives for leading us down this path. Kudos to you all. You’re just as responsible as the liberals/progressives.
That’s it? A few stories of “alleged” misconduct? I don’t think anyone will be surprised that there has always been and always will be police ‘misconduct.’ I’ve seen plenty myself.
What does that have to do with ‘the militarization’ of the police?
And the author talks about all the equipment that the police are getting with the money pouring in from the feds. You know what I got? A pair of 10 power Bushnell binoculars and a few ammo cans.
How many family pets have I killed? What kind of a ridiculous question is that? And what does it have to do with the militarization of the police?
From one of your links
_____
UIW police officer Chris Carter pulled over Redus at 2:00 a.m. on Friday night for unknown reasons. The argument between the two quickly became heated, and Redus attacked, according to an Alamo Heights Police Department press conference. Redus successfully wrestled Carter’s police baton out of his hands, and started beating him over the head with it.
Carter reacquired the baton, and told Redus that he would open fire if the student refused to surrender. According to Police Chief Richard Pruitt, Redus charged the officer once again, forcing Carter to shoot him.
_____
Still debatable if the deadly force should have been used, but if true it is not as clear-cut as you are making it.
First you say it’s horse shit, then you talk about other cases. Don’t hand me that “just like” stuff where the situation is completely different. If the guy took the officer’s baton and beat him with it, the officer has a right to defend himself. And since it wasn’t his normal behavior, and it was a 2am, I suspect alcohol was involved.
Personally I put a lot of the blame on affirmative action. It used to be there were size requirements to be a cop. Cops were supposed to be big, tough guys who could handle people using a nightstick. Then in the 70s those requirement were deemed discriminatory against women and Asians. Now you have a lot of cops who can’t defend themselves against unarmed assailants without resorting to shooting.
The latest report I read was the audio portion of this incident is available. Trial by media already has the officer guilty. No surprise there. I will reserve my judgement until I’ve seen and heard enough to make more than a knee jerk opinion.
It also “appears” that more cops are getting shot nowadays. Seems more people are ‘cop fishing.’
I think the trend that needs to be noted is the people electing politicians that are creating the police state.
We get what we vote for.
Sorry, I blame the militarization of the police on the police.
It would be illogical and idiotic to place the blame anywhere else.
Given the number of “malfunctions” the police experience with their recording equipment, perhaps they’d be better off obtaining better quality camera and audio equipment instead of 5 ton assault vehicles, Hummers and M16s.
Finally, the fact that you consider an AR15 to be a “patrol rifle” is strong evidence that the police are being increasingly militarized.
We try, but it is starting to appear that voting is a useless exercise.
So: You guys COULD help a little, in turning back the tide.
"Just following orders" is a phrase that never works.
The officer’s own report states that he “reacquired” his baton. Once he had his baton back, why would he not use IT to subdue the suspect?
Sorry, but if the officer had all the weapons then the shooting was not justified.
It's the mindset...And the question is not too ridiculous to the person who owns the pet you guys just killed in their living room...I notice you didn't answer the question...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.