They are not masks. They are balaclavas. For the most part they are only worn by SWAT/ESU types. Unless it’s cold out. Then a nice balaclava is very useful.
There are several reasons. Generally they are made out of Nomex so they are flame retardant. That is can be very useful for ESU types that deploy things like flashbangs.
Also on many departments those that might be involved in raids or other activities that involved SWAT/ESU are the same officers that are used as undercover officers.
But mostly it’s because it is part of their PPE (Personal Protective Equipment). That changes from department to department. Some require uniformity. Some allow leeway and personal purchases within units. That’s why you will find plenty of pictures of SWAT members with balaclavas standing next ones that aren’t. Some units will require it because it is part of the uniform.
Militarized? I’ve been in the Army for 27 years. I was issued a green Nomex balaclava as a tank crewman. It was not to be worn outside of the tank. We do not generally wear them otherwise. No other “mask” was issued. It is police equipment not military equipment.
I think their utility is touted as an excuse to wear them. Some guys saw pictures of actual SF dudes in Afghanistan wearing face covering or with their faces blurred out in pictures, and thought “Damn, I wanna be cool too.”
Same thing with patrol officers wearing BDUs as the default work uniform. “Well, we might be faced with a tactical situation at any time!” No, you probably won’t. You want to play army. Now go put on a nice civilian uniform.
I meant their equipment and tactics by militarized. I understand its needed in situations like they are dealing with in Sydney right now. Anything that helps get the hostages out safely.
Isn’t that the point though? The tactical gear cops are generally the ones they call when a serious application of legal force is required, and some degree of intimidation is usually a good thing to have while doing their thing, like say if those Australian guys storm that coffee shop. I’m sure it’s part of the uniform.
The bigger question is, why are those guys being deployed for relatively run-of-the-mill stuff like that business in Ferguson, etc… In my mind, that kind of thing would be met by clearly uniformed cops, not terrifying faceless commandos. (even though the vast majority of those guys couldn’t hack real commando training)
Yeah, I think the obvious answer is that police wear balaclavas to protect their face from things like broken glass, fire and debris when breaching a location. Or when it’s really cold out.
Large scale civil disturbances are typically met by armies of police in riot gear, which may include balaclavas, face shields, and gas masks which all end up obscuring the face and make the police look like a phalanx of modern-day Spartans (which is actually not by accident).
They strike me as a variation on Dale Gribble mirrored sunglasses. The aviator style was first developed by RayBan in 1936, they have become steadily more popular since General Douglas McArthur wore them in his famous photo-ops when landing in the Philippines in WWII.
In modern tactical use, any face covering could have the dual purpose of being protective as well as concealing the face. The later could be for several reasons, including masking the identity of the wearer to impede later war-crimes or police brutality identification, or to prevent an adversary from being able to read your intentions in your facial gestures. A variation on the one-way glass of the interrogation room.
15 years ago one could not do an image search of someone, now, you can and for free. Throw in all the other demographic information that can be gleaned from public records, email addresses, personal websites, etc. And you can get those last few crazies who might have been demotivated by this extra leg work ready to go.
If the police were wearing the baclava’s for routine traffic stops, I’d say that’s an issue. But, for a major civil disturbance like a riot and burning buildings, you simply have more pressing issues to deal with. There is also the liability factor presented to the department for each officer, if some injury does happen to an officer in the line of duty then the department really has to compensate. Decades of union pressure has made running a police department very expensive and quite cost prohibitive. So, if that mask and goggles protects them from spit, vomit, glass shards from thrown bottles, etc. Then there is some fiscal sense as well to them wearing them.
“That business in Ferguson” was handled byclearly uniformed cops. In fact, the governor has been widely criticized for not deploying the National Guard in massive force.
All my life I have been on the police or LEO’s side. Lawyers, not so much. But now with so many video’s of police kicking handcuffed people, using their batons after the fact and not even being in the take down group, but just walking up and getting some licks in and they are not prosecuted much less fired and the good cops cover for them, well, now I wonder how much can I trust any group of police if they will not stop these thugs …
On a one on one basis I know many LEO’s that I would trust in most any situation but if the one who is a bully happens to be with them, then I know that no matter what the bad cop does the guy I know will not even try to protect me.
Why would I say this? I have never seen an LEO pull off another that is so obviously out of control. I have never had an LEO say that they would in anyway protect the perp no matter age, sex, etc. from a fellow officer.
I have asked many who I consider good guys and acquaintances or friends and the best response I ever get is a refusal to answer.
As more & more situations occur that if people knew that the cop living next door was the one who used the baton on the little girls head for no reason are beginning to realize that people will not let that go anymore.
Of course there might be no LEO’s like I have described and those things never happen. It is the age of photo manipulation now.
