If this is true, this is good news.
The Department of Defense is ordering police forces across the nation to give up the sophisticated weaponry that police forces have acquired.
It is a good thing, because those kinds of weapons were designed for war, and the unmistakable impression left when police are seen with such weapons, coupled with the increased volume of videos where clear cut cases of police brutality can be witnessed, have given the impression to a growing number of American citizens that the police resemble more of an occupying force than an element of local government explicitly designed to serve and protect local communities.
I believe that I have mentioned this somewhere here before, but my reaction was pure shock when I drove by a local automotive shop some years back and found armored trucks with the logo for Wayne Township, which is basically a typically suburban town with residential homes (some elaborate and fairly expensive) and malls. Strip malls, as well as bigger shopping malls, both in town and along the stretch of highways that traverse through the town. There are no really tough neighborhoods there that I am aware of, and certainly no reason or justification for the local police force to use such heavy weaponry.
What for? Who are you fighting against?
For that matter, how would a local resident feel when arrested and placed in such a vehicle?
Yet, this is hardly an isolated example. In fact, we as a nation saw such use of sophisticated weaponry in places like Ferguson last year, and it makes you wonder if the local citizens there, who were complaining of systematically brutal and excessive tactics employed against them by the local police force, have some legitimacy to their claims.
This nation is not a war zone. At least not yet, certainly. It seems dubious for anyone to think that local police departments would actually need these weapons of warfare, even in the most dangerous, crime-ridden cities. Why would we need armored trucks, tanks, or grenade launchers in Detroit or Camden? Does that not seem a little excessive?
It sure feels that way to me. It also feels like the police become less available, less accessible, to the average citizen, when the police have all of this gear and militarized equipment to use against the citizens. Also, and this one should be quite obvious, it would further empower the delusional sense of exception and immunity from truly having to face up to one's overstepping of limits or outright committing wrongs by those members of police forces who seem to go into policing for the wrong reasons - and let us not fool ourselves into thinking that there are just a handful of bad apples who match this description.
So, personally, I think this is a positive, and that police forces really should not have such weapons, because they are not fighting a war against an enemy. They are here to serve and protect, not occupy and wage war.
What do you think?
The Department of Defense is ordering police forces across the nation to give up the sophisticated weaponry that police forces have acquired.
It is a good thing, because those kinds of weapons were designed for war, and the unmistakable impression left when police are seen with such weapons, coupled with the increased volume of videos where clear cut cases of police brutality can be witnessed, have given the impression to a growing number of American citizens that the police resemble more of an occupying force than an element of local government explicitly designed to serve and protect local communities.
I believe that I have mentioned this somewhere here before, but my reaction was pure shock when I drove by a local automotive shop some years back and found armored trucks with the logo for Wayne Township, which is basically a typically suburban town with residential homes (some elaborate and fairly expensive) and malls. Strip malls, as well as bigger shopping malls, both in town and along the stretch of highways that traverse through the town. There are no really tough neighborhoods there that I am aware of, and certainly no reason or justification for the local police force to use such heavy weaponry.
What for? Who are you fighting against?
For that matter, how would a local resident feel when arrested and placed in such a vehicle?
Yet, this is hardly an isolated example. In fact, we as a nation saw such use of sophisticated weaponry in places like Ferguson last year, and it makes you wonder if the local citizens there, who were complaining of systematically brutal and excessive tactics employed against them by the local police force, have some legitimacy to their claims.
This nation is not a war zone. At least not yet, certainly. It seems dubious for anyone to think that local police departments would actually need these weapons of warfare, even in the most dangerous, crime-ridden cities. Why would we need armored trucks, tanks, or grenade launchers in Detroit or Camden? Does that not seem a little excessive?
It sure feels that way to me. It also feels like the police become less available, less accessible, to the average citizen, when the police have all of this gear and militarized equipment to use against the citizens. Also, and this one should be quite obvious, it would further empower the delusional sense of exception and immunity from truly having to face up to one's overstepping of limits or outright committing wrongs by those members of police forces who seem to go into policing for the wrong reasons - and let us not fool ourselves into thinking that there are just a handful of bad apples who match this description.
So, personally, I think this is a positive, and that police forces really should not have such weapons, because they are not fighting a war against an enemy. They are here to serve and protect, not occupy and wage war.
What do you think?
DoD Orders Police Nationwide to Give Back Grenade Launchers, Bayonets, and Tanks By Matt Agorist on October 5, 2015
No comments:
Post a Comment