Posted on 08/16/2014 4:38:17 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
The rioting, protests and controversy continue to swirl around Ferguson this weekend, and you will no doubt be reading plenty of coverage from both sides about it. But in the background, a disturbing, larger national conversation has erupted out of the troubles in the St. Louis suburb. The hot topic everywhere seems to be a growing call to halt the so called “militarization” of the nation’s civilian police forces, highlighted by the riot suppression gear on display in Ferguson. It’s an argument coming from both sides of the ideological spectrum, too.
The IBD editorial board warns us to “beware” of this trend. John Fund, writing at National Review, worries over not just police, but a host of federal agencies being armed to the teeth. Bob Barr sounds the alarm as to how the psyche of our police must become warped when they are equipped like soldiers. Our own Noah Rothman has written thoughtfully on the subject, expressing some of his own concerns.
Frankly, I find the whole discussion to be a rather rapid rush to judgement and lacking in larger context. As far as the specific incidents in Ferguson go, we still need a lot more information before final conclusions can be drawn. The details of the initial shooting may remain in question, but what followed was well documented. Riots and looting broke out on a massive scale for such a small town, and continue this morning. The local police stood on the edge of being completely overwhelmed. And whether or not you find their level of response appropriate, this one local disturbance has turned into a national demand to defang the police. The Washington Post quickly began issuing advice on how to tame the cops. Clearly the nation’s legislators were listening, as Hank Johnson (D – Georgia) has already drafted legislation to do just that.
Am I the only one who finds this rather insulting to the nation’s first responders in general? Even if we are to assume that the Ferguson police crossed a line in breaking out their heaviest equipment in an attempt to reestablish control (which has not been conclusively proven at all, in my opinion), what of the rest of the country? As these critics frequently note, police departments in cities and towns of all sizes have been equipped with more modern, military style equipment for quite some time now and they don’t seem to be converting the rest of the nation into a series of oppressive death camps. And far too often, the cops find themselves in need of the “big guns” and body armor.
In case you think I’m coming in late to this debate, it’s not true. There was apparently a meeting held at some point in which Radley Balko was appointed as the go to guy for such discussions, but that dates back quite a ways. More than a year ago, Balko was pushing his ideas about so called “warrior cops” and at that time I penned an editorial stating that he was going too far.
Do we need “kinder and gentler” cops interacting with the community in a friendly fashion? It is certainly to the benefit of the police to be in good standing with a cooperative community and to know the people they protect and serve, but they also deserve a fighting chance when the situation suddenly turns violent and ugly. The rise of “warrior cops” may not be what everyone would hope for, but I don’t see any realistic alternatives.
While I both understand and sympathize with the reminiscing for the good old days, the times have changed. The era of the lovable flatfoot, twirling his baton and wagging a finger at the precocious kid about to steal some penny candy has passed us by. Have we collectively forgotten the riots that took place following the Rodney King verdict? How about the now infamous North Hollywood shootout? And for our friends on the Left, what about the next time somebody goes into an elementary school armed with a Bushmaster and a couple of 9mm Glocks? You don’t want us arming the teachers or having local residents open carrying to keep the school grounds safe. “Leave it to the cops,” you say. But should the cops be going into a situation like that with nothing more than a layer of cotton uniform and a revolver to protect themselves and take down the bad guys? Or should they have to wait until a SWAT unit from an “appropriately large city” shows up, with the shooter mowing down third graders in the meantime?
While the shooting of Michael Brown may provide a teachable moment in terms of police interactions with the community, the nearly immediate mayhem which followed should also serve as a timely reminder. The old assumptions of law enforcement and their unwritten compact with the citizenry relied on a society where the police – and the laws – were respected, and criminals were a minority who would be rejected by the rank and file residents. But when the majority of an entire community decides to break that compact, the formula changes. They realize that they outnumber – and frequently outgun – the cops. A slumbering, snarling beast is awakened and in short order the police can find themselves on the run. This is not a formula for freedom of speech… it’s the path to mayhem and the breakdown of civil society. Before you’re too quick to demand the “demilitarization” of the police, you might want to remember who it is that stands between the neighborhood you have now and South Central L.A circa 1992. And Ferguson has shown us that you don’t need a huge metropolitan area for it to happen.
Who are they, pray tell?
fully automatic weapons up to & including belt fed machine guns,fragmentation grenades,40mm explosive grenade launchers,recoilless rifles/ anti-tank missile launchers,mortars,flamethrower.
The duty of police is to keep the peace & arrest people who engage in what is generally referred to a criminal behavior NOT killing people & breaking their stuff on an industrial scale.
/johnny
CC
So wet noodles for "most."
Thanks.
Who's advocating for that on this thread?
Names, since you attempted to smear them by using the term "gear-queer."
You are most welcome.
This thread got me to make arrangements to go to Austin for the next session and sit in on the budget hearings. I'll be speaking with some lawmakers on this subject, and pushing hard for a budget reduction and prohibition of State or local LE taking federal military surplus.
/johnny
“the issue with “militarisation of the police” is not so much about the equipment they carry as the attitudes they display”
Yes.
A post earlier in this thread I said that was the key to this.
Those that are advocating for heavily armed police are self identifying. I certainly don't need to list names for you.
/johnny
But they don't need the equipment, either. So they shouldn't get it.
That's what I'll be advocating for at the State and local level. While pushing the fed legislators of mine to stop giving gear to locals.
/johnny
I'm willing to take any test I advocate for.
/johnny
I viscerally disagree with you but I have to go help my wife now replant a cactus.
Quite serious.
>>San Diego’s stats attest to the fact that the 60’s were a decade of rampant disorder, and it got far worse after that, peaking only in the 90’s, three decades later. Even at today’s diminished numbers vis-a-vis the 90’s, San Diego’s per capita violent crime rate is 8x what it was in 1950.<<
To do an honest comparison you’d have to find a location that has few drug users and also not in the middle of an illegal immigration alley.
Where that would be I have no idea.
All the best!
All the best to you, too.
/johnny
So nice I said it twice!
What does any of that have to do with what I posted?
Do you even comprehend what I posted?
I only want to disarm them as agents of the state.
/johnny
you have to make weak attempts to mischaracterize certain arguments to make your own pathetic points look better I guess…..
” they don’t need the equipment, either. So they shouldn’t get it.”
Who decides what equipment local police can have?
Obama? Or the citizens of their own city?
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.