Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Obama combats police militarization by limiting supply of military-style gear
The Guardian (UK) ^ | Monday 18 May 2015 07.29 EDT | http://www.theguardian.com/profile/lauren-gambino

Posted on 05/18/2015 6:29:25 AM PDT by Lazamataz

More than nine months after the paramilitary response to anti-police protests sent shockwaves around the world from the streets of Ferguson, Missouri, Barack Obama is taking matters into his own hands. The president will ban the US government from funding certain types of military-style equipment to local police departments and sharply control other weapons and gear provided to law enforcement, White House officials announced on Monday.

The announcement coincides with the release of a report from a policing taskforce assembled by Obama in response to the turmoil in Ferguson. The so-called 21st Century Policing Task Force, made up of 12 members from academia and law enforcement, was asked to propose solutions to overcome racial bias in police operations and recommend ways to improve relations between agencies and the communities they serve.

(Excerpt) Read more at theguardian.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Extended News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021 next last
Interesting.

I have mixed feelings.

I despise the militarization of local police....

....HOWEVER, I know enough about Obama to know that this is a hideously devious and conniving jaded political move, not an effort to make America a better place.

He wants Federal police, and *then*, Katie-bar-the-door. All those A-10 Warthogs will be transferred to Federal police. Artillery, Predator drones, satellite resources, M1A3 Abrams tanks, you name it.

1 posted on 05/18/2015 6:29:25 AM PDT by Lazamataz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz

Obama wants to let the thugs run wild.


2 posted on 05/18/2015 6:30:49 AM PDT by mfish13 (Elections have Consequences.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mfish13

I’m thinking along some different lines - letting the thugs run wild, but then adding another element.

Now that this equipment is already pre-positioned for use,
and then he bans LOCAL police from using it -

when he gives the “go” signal for the zombies to stream out of the cities into the suburbs and conservative areas,
FEDERAL law enforcement will have the equipment available to protect the criminals from the property owners that are defending themselves.


3 posted on 05/18/2015 6:35:05 AM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter admits whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz

Spot on with all of if Laz. Taken in context, this is an ominous move.


4 posted on 05/18/2015 6:36:00 AM PDT by RatRipper (Obama has made me the slave of sluggards.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mfish13

Obama wants the problem to use as an excuse to grow government.


5 posted on 05/18/2015 6:40:12 AM PDT by A CA Guy ( God Bless America, God Bless and keep safe our fighting men and women.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz
If you ever work with DHS you discover that their primary purpose is to distribute pork around the country. They fund tons of small grants to first responders, a fire truck here, some flashlights there, an armored assault vehicle over yonder. Having worked with small town first reponders, they often have people whose only job is to write grant petitions and they ask for all sorts of crazy stuff because "why not?". That and the civil forfeiture cash which the police get to keep have resulted in cops having lots of high end swat stuff they could never afford if the taxpayers of their tiny hamlets were paying.

Is this a good thing? Well, federal funding of unnecessary offensive capability to small town police forces seems to me to be a textbook case of waste, whatever your take on the stat of law enforcement mindset.

6 posted on 05/18/2015 6:41:33 AM PDT by pepsi_junkie (Who is John Galt?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pepsi_junkie

I actually have worked with DHS but my experience differed, perhaps because I was working in a different capacity.


7 posted on 05/18/2015 6:43:18 AM PDT by Lazamataz (America has less than a year left.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz

Good grief. The heavy steps are already done. There is no going back.


8 posted on 05/18/2015 6:43:56 AM PDT by RedHeeler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pepsi_junkie

About a year after 9-11....a small town from near where I grew up in Alabama....put in a request via their one-cop department to acquire night-vision goggles. The request never flowed via the town council or the mayor. Six months later, this package arrives and it’s a set of semi-new night-vision goggles. The cop goes out that weekend and uses them to check on back road activity. One of the city council guys comes by...asks questions....and goes ballistic over the necessity for the ‘toy’. They order the cop to put the item on the fed page to ‘sell’ (the rule is that it must go to another cop-department under the program).

Five miles away, another cop department (five cops in this one) put a request for a speed boat to use on the river next to the hydro-electric dam....to protect it from 9-11 attacks. Yeah, it’s no joke...they inserted the wording in there. Six months later....they get a $8k fishing boat, which they actively used for drunken boating and more fines on river activities. No, the town council didn’t approve this acquisition either. But in this case, because of the fines....no one said nothing and they kept the boat as part of their revenue program for the town.


9 posted on 05/18/2015 6:52:42 AM PDT by pepsionice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz
I work in a large defense company command and control and intelligence systems and we were charged with working with DHS to see if we could apply our products to any of their programs. We found that there are a few large procurements but the vast majority of their funds seems to be keeping their front line organizations going (USCG, TSA) and paying small amounts out to cities and municipalities everywhere. There were a few big DOD style acquisitions like SBInet (virtual border fence) but even those tended to fizzle out after a couple of years, never reaching the talked about contract values. Most of their acquisition money went to small business science projects and to grants. To be fair, some of the grants were fairly sizable and were for system, not just gear (cameras, port security, etc). Still localized and through grants.

Anyway that was our experience.

10 posted on 05/18/2015 6:54:58 AM PDT by pepsi_junkie (Who is John Galt?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz

He’s fearing the potential that County Sheriffs, Local Police and County Police in rural areas will get that equipment. He much prefers to equip his own “civilian defense forces as well funded and well equipped as DoD.”


11 posted on 05/18/2015 6:57:11 AM PDT by Gaffer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pepsi_junkie

I’m not at liberty to detail my experience, but that it differs, in no way denigrates or lessens your experience.

Different parts of the elephant.


12 posted on 05/18/2015 6:59:43 AM PDT by Lazamataz (America has less than a year left.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz

There are some interesting things about the details here.

For instance “no APCs” means TRACKED APCs. Like M113s. wheeled APCs like MRAPs are still ok for transfer.

M113s are pretty utilitarian, have capabilities that in many cases make them
superior to MRAPs for things like disaster areas.

I see this as just like the Assault Weapon Ban. They’re going for the “ugly” stuff that scares people. Like APCs that just happen to look like tanks. Not doing anything based on actual capabilities.


13 posted on 05/18/2015 7:08:12 AM PDT by tanknetter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tanknetter
Or, it could be -- and it's much more likely -- that we are seeing a combination of malevolence and cluelessness.

Obama wishes to federalize police. So he wishes to hurt local police. However, with utterly no military or policing experience, he doesn't know how to truly do that -- and he is much to narcissistic to listen to his people who do.

14 posted on 05/18/2015 7:11:33 AM PDT by Lazamataz (America has less than a year left.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz
Where does the constitution grant to Congress or the Executive the authority to equip local police in the first place?

If your answer is that does not grant such a power, then how in the world is ending or curtailing such action unconstitutional?

15 posted on 05/18/2015 7:25:35 AM PDT by Ken H
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz

Never ever thought I’d agree with O’Dimwit but ... excellent.

Militarizing the police is giving the enforcement arm of the government the ability to easily subdue Patriots.

I guess this one falls in the “give a monkey a typewriter” category.


16 posted on 05/18/2015 7:32:32 AM PDT by RIghtwardHo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz

A better title for this article would be “Obama combats police.”


17 posted on 05/18/2015 7:34:35 AM PDT by armydawg505
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz
...limiting supply of military-style gear

Akin to turning off the water after the dam broke...

18 posted on 05/18/2015 7:38:21 AM PDT by logi_cal869 (-cynicus-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz

Might be the first time he’s every done anything right. : )


19 posted on 05/18/2015 7:58:17 AM PDT by SaraJohnson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz

He may have been clued in that many police forces and sheriffs’ departments will be among the resistance rather than the oppressors.


20 posted on 05/18/2015 8:31:20 AM PDT by JimRed (Excise the cancer before it kills us; feed & Ifwater the Tree of Liberty! TERM LIMITS NOW & FOREVER!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson