Sure, you can logically justify it in some cases, but my point is that they were doing just fine without it. That vehicle is 5 or 6 officer salaries. Or 7 patrol cars. Whatever number of vests.
Not entirely - the once-common nickname for a police officer, “flatfoot”, suggested someone who was in law enforcement after being rejected for military service.
I thought they were called flatfoot because of all the walking the beat. Or are you joking?
I’m not joking, but I recognize that I may be incorrect.
Looking at the wiki article, those “free” MRAP vehicles would cost $50 000 in shipping and $70 000 in refitting. Since they weigh 14 tonnes, I suspect they would probably need a special garage built. They get about 5 miles to the gallon, as well.
$70,000 seems to be very inflated but I guess you could go with all the bells and whistles. It will already be demilitarized. All you really need is a new paint job. Its a mistake to say that they are all 14 tons and get 5 miles to the gallon. Some are some aren’t. The term MRAP encompassed multiple different vehicles of different sizes. But I mostly agree with you. As I stated in my first post I don’t think most of the departments who are requesting them understand fully what the maintenance costs are. But they are number crunching the cost of a new law enforcement Bearcat against the cost of a “free” MRAP. To many it seems like a good deal. In the long run I don’t think it will be.
But as to the subject at hand, I don’t see this as militarization of the police. Getting a MRAP is basically just getting a big truck. It is armored but not armed. Its not much different than getting one of these.
Un-cited and anecdotal -
Right after 9-11 and the formation of the Homeland Security Agency, there was a pile of Federal grant money available to city/county/state/etc. agencies if they could prove a possible homeland security vulnerability. My spouse was responsible for writing the grant proposal in a city government office in a small mid-western city. It seemed that everyone with a water tower or train track running through town could justify vulnerability. Bottom line - there was money to be got.
So, I’m only speculating, but it’s possible some of that money flowed into purchasing the more advanced militarized police equipment - after all, they would be buying from American military arms manufacturers - and could justify the grant proposals with “we’re fighten’ terrorists!” I don’t know if that money is still flowing, but if it is, it is probably earmarked for these types of purchases.
Loach (and others but Loach is both present in this thread and has particular knowledge),
I’ve seen quite a bit of footage and pictures of SWAT and I’ve noticed that their main weapon seems to have changed.
This is the first Google image for “swat team”:
https://www.bolo411.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/How-to-Become-a-SWAT-Team-Member.jpg
third (the second one was about a fictional work): http://www.dailyslave.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/swatteam.jpg
fifth (fourth one didn’t show weapons): http://img1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20110721155014/deadliestwarrior/images/8/80/Swat.jpg
I have gotten the impression that SWAT teams often use M16s or M4s, is that right? Now, I see why you’d want them available to you at the scene but wouldn’t SMGs or their semi-auto versions be better suited in most situations? Perhaps there’s a good reason aside from “We got 'em cheap from the military” but if so, what is it? MP5s used to be the workhorse but no more.
I am by no means an expert. We have our own ESU Team (its a part time additional duty) that I have never had a desire to be on. They have both M4 style weapons and sub-machine guns. They are qualified with both and can use either depending on the situation.
BTW the your 1st image seems to be from Indonesia. Further down there are pictures like this in which you can see teams using MP5s.
Some of the critics of militarized policing are in fact other cops – often those of earlier generations who were trained to think and act differently than many cops today do.
See the numerous comments from cops here: Former Cops Speak Out About Police Militarization | HuffPost Latest News
St. Louis police to auction vintage Thompson gun collection: St. Louis police to auction gangland-era Tommy guns to buy new sidearms
Thanks to the sky-high price of pre-1986 full-auto firearms, selling these venerable but obsolete guns will allow St. Louis to upgrade it’s officers’ service weapons.
Traffic stops are dangerous too, cops can get shot in those. There really isn’t much a police officer can do that can’t be labeled dangerous on some level. It is a question of how far do you want to take it, there are risks to that kind of behavior. The police could treat every speeding ticket like a felony warrant and pull their guns just to keep themselves safe, but they do not. If the police send in a SWAT team for a drug crime they run the risk of causing PTSD among the people living there (most of whom are living the house are innocent, I believe something like 1/3 of SWAT raids occur when children are present). Where do you draw the line, is (after 100 SWAT raids) 50 people with PTSD and a healthy fear of cops worth 1 cop not being physically attacked? Plus heavily armed people barging in could cause people to fire who normally wouldn’t. I have read several cases of this where people are caught off guard and fired at the people kicking their door down with machine guns. So again, has it been studied to determine the negative effects of all these SWAT raids (PTSD among the people living in the households, fear of the police, people reacting violently who wouldn’t otherwise)?
When the police are given military hardware they say ‘better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it’. But if SWAT teams are any bellwether, the police are going to find ways to use all that military hardware and it isn’t going to be for what it was originally intended to be used for. Again, SWAT teams are only used for what they were designed for (hostage situations, active shooters, etc) 7% of the time. The other 93% of the time is for less serious issues.
What I’m saying is police spend a good amount of time dealing with people that society as a whole has very little respect for and does not value much, or who may be disturbed or in crisis. A good number of police, if anything, have less respect for the socially marginalized than the average person.