I can't say I'm exactly surprised. If you ran a police department, you're not about to turn down a free tank -- I mean, how cool is that, toys for the boys?!?!
What's bothersome is that a police department is allowed to do this. That DoD rules don't prohibit selling/giving military equipment to police departments. That state legislatures don't prohibit it. A police department, like any organization, is always going to amass all the power/capability it can. Where are the people who are supposed to be limiting and regulating it?
When I read something like this, I always think back to when I would see some tinfoil-hat type ranting on Usenet 20 years ago about the growing surveillance/police state in America. It was generally eye-rolling or unintentionally hilarious stuff.
What's depressing is that it's starting to look like they were right.
If every police station in the country is equipped with military-grade weapons and vehicles, what happens in the event of despotic leadership?
Suppose someone rises to power with little regard for legislative oversight and activates the sleeping military at home. It might start with a real (or faked) terror event coordinated across several major cities. It wouldn't take much at all, 5-10 cities, and suddenly: 1. Internet & cell communications are shut down 2. a national state of emergency is declared 3. A curfew is issued 4. Dissidents are squashed via a military police force with little recourse themselves. 5. Everyone is required to have location-aware implants "for safety."
With a little fear, a government could take full, permanent control of their citizens via aggressive laws and more aggressive enforcers. Would it even take two weeks?
WOW! The most shocking linked article is the kids who got arrested for waiting for the bus. They were excepted to plea bargain. That's right, the charges weren't dropped!!!!!!
edit the DA dismissed the charges but the police chief thinks the arrest was justified.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/12/04/charges...
Interview with the coach (he seems like a really nice guy):
http://www.infowars.com/kids-arrested-waiting-for-school-bus...
This is a common way that a totalitarian state can be implemented on top of an apparent democratic republic: pass so many laws (and contradictory / complex laws) that anyone can be found guilty of something, then enforce the law selectively.
>“in an era of terrorist attacks on U.S. soil and mass killings in schools, police agencies need to be ready for whatever comes their way..."
There has always been terrorism in the United States. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_the_United_States
As well as mass shootings. http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/12/mass-shootings-m...
This current "era" isn't defined by the number or scale of these tragedies but by institutions' and the public's reaction to them. If we want to protect the lives and welfare of the average U.S. citizen our money and efforts would be better spent tackling some of the less newsworthy health issues.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_preventable_causes_of_d...
Also the time frame of the Sandy Hook Shooting was extremely brief. The shooter was believed to enter the school around 9:30 the first 911 call was made at 9:35 and the last shot heard was at 9:40 and the police enter at 9:44. The MRAP and other military artillery obviously wouldn't have made a difference due to time frame of the tragedy.
The fact that this is being instigated by the federal government makes me suspect that this is deliberate planning for the long-term consequences of american societal breakdown, for when the war on drugs isn't enough to control the ever-growing underclass anymore.
Does this kind of thinking still place me firmly with the tinfoil contingent?
This article is not about police tanks. (Even though it's horrifying that if the tanks were about to roll into America's equivalent of Tianeman Square, our American Tank Man would just be tasered, at best.)
This article is about the prison/police system becoming the fundamental axis of civil society. Schools are run like prisons, and increasingly with police presence. Minority groups are, as always, increasingly targeted for harassment and neutralization. If you get on the radar of the police state, you and your family will be hounded forever. If you are imprisoned, it's more likely than not that you'll be held in solitary confinement.
The article doesn't seem to answer the question I wish I knew the answer to -- how did we get here? What happened that made the United States this way? Was it always like this, behind the curtains, just a nest of HUAACs and J Edgar Hoovers?
Well, now the J Edgar Hoover of 2013 knows everything about everyone, he can arrest anyone for any reason at any time, and he can't be opposed by any means I'm aware of. That iconic picture of a hippy putting a flower in the barrel of a riot cop's gun could never happen today -- as soon as the hippy reached for the gun I'm sure his head would be blown off.
Used to be military surplus stores would acquire military surplus and sell them to an amused and subsequently harmless citizenry. All that old equipment has to go somewhere; now such civilian possession is prohibited (even used Humvees (basically just off-road cars) cannot, by law, be sold to the public), it ends up routed to the only group legally allowed to have it and wants it: police. In the meantime, stores that sold military surplus have adapted by selling military-like knockoff gear, and would-be buyers are pumping money into the fast-growing "tactical gear" market.
Fact is, if all this military equipment were sold on open market, no harm would come of it. Used to be available and wasn't a problem then, and the rather large paramilitary equipment market isn't a problem now. Question is: why is the government so afraid of its own citizens possessing such gear?
What a depressing article(s). Our reality is only going to get worse since there is little we can (or have the will to) do. At least in the Ukraine people are really contemplating change. Here we watch our football and our shows and fawn over celebrities and nothing changes.
This is a continuation of the military industrial complex. There aren't enough wars, but companies that supply the military still need to make money. So they make so much equipment that the DoD needs to give their completely usable equipment away for free.
This page should make any U.S. taxpayer sick and any non-U.S. citizen worried:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_e...
I have felt we have too many laws and over zealous cops for some time now. I guess I'm old--I was born in 1972, but I can assure you; things were not like it has been in the last twenty years. I started noticing a change in the late 80's and it's(a over regulated society, cops who abuse the system) just gotten worse. If Jesus Christ reappeared he would most likely be arrested for indecency. Ticketed for fishing without license. Arrested for loitering. Arrested for holding an event without a permit. Ticketed for sleeping in someone manger, without written consent. It's really not funny when you get an expensive ticket for no reason. I have thought about this and a solution; tie all fines to income, and require all Cruisers to be wired with 24/7 cams. This is a good website, but I sometimes wonder if I just blowing smoke, and racking up clicks for a already Rich Dude? Some of these topics are so important they deserve their own webpage?
"If you didn't do anything wrong, you have nothing to fear (at least from the cops)" is looking stupider every day.
I just find it so incredible that a hospital can bill you for a rectal cavity search ordered by police/judge. Honestly I think my mind is experiencing some sort of race condition as I try to pick a word that accurately describes my incredulity about this. Ughhhhhh
Surprised this didn't get any comments. It's a good reason to leave (or not move to) the US, or increasingly, the UK.
Appropriate, seeing as how Kent State is in Ohio, too. Clearly, they learned their lessons in Ohio: shoot students first, ask questions later.
What's striking is the correlation between excessive police tactics and enforcement of victimless crimes.
From a right libertarian point of view, it is the government's responsibility to protect your rights, not to protect you.
From a left libertarian point of view, it is the government's responsibility to demonstrate that the good of enforcing a law outweighs the loss of individual freedom and other harm of enforcing it.
Drugs, immigration, fail those tests. Many sex crimes fail those tests. Seatbelt laws probably fail.
The police have to be so aggressive about these things because they never lent themselves to enforcement in the first place.
One of the underpinnings of the U.S. Constitution is the Bill Of Rights, one of which states "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
People go bouncing off the wall around this issue as if it were one having solely to do with owning guns, but the real purpose is arranging the real power in the government. The people reserve and are ultimately responsible for the use of lethal force in the United States. They can delegate that power to the government for certain things, like a defense department or law enforcement, but at the end of the day, it's everybody carrying guns that are responsible for social order. At least that's the way it was set up.
As we've drifted away from that principle, by assigning more and more powers to the defense department and police agencies, (gun control is part of this but not the only part), those folks have quite naturally started viewing themselves as the privileged few to hold the power to make things go boom. Then we got rid of the volunteer military, further separating the mass of the population from the things carrying lethal force.
So nowadays, if you want to become a specialist in the application of power tools to destroy people and things, you pick one of a few different career paths and become one of the chosen few. This is a VERY recent development. Not 50 years ago it was commonplace to know people who could operate machine guns, explosives, and drive tanks around. To those folks, cops were just another working Joe like them except they wore a badge. On the other side, cops viewed the population as a trained asset to have and use in time of crisis. It was not unusual to consider gathering up as many armed men as necessary from an area to conduct police operations.
But the professionals got involved, and having that kind of power was viewed as a terribly complicated responsibility that the average guy couldn't handle. This created a wall in society. On both sides now, it's us against them. We need MRAPS because, hell, anything can happen, and there's just a few of us cops in this county. We are no longer all in it together. It's not like if AQ comes knocking we can knock on doors and ask for help.
This is a self-fulfilling feedback loop: as the police arm themselves more and more with special gear, the average person really can't operate it. So even more specialized training is required. Same goes for military gear, where this divide originated.
I would suggest that what we need is some sort of ready reserve system where everybody is trained at reaching 18 on how to safely use most all common forms of police and military gear. I'd further suggest that local police departments be required to have a certain percentage of their patrols as civilian ride-alongs.
There are a lot of things that can be done here, and we don't have to argue gun control to make progress. But I think we do need an understanding of how we got here in the first place. This is a trend that has been a long time coming. The War On Terror just exacerbated it.
Americans really should learn more about the Soviet KGB and its predecessor, the NKVD, and how they ran a campaign of terror against citizens who did little more than have a different opinion of how the country should be run. Because now that America no longer compares itself to the Soviet Union, this is the kind of police state that is being constructed in the USA.
Meanwhile, in Russia, the place where the Soviet system used to be, they have moved in the opposite direction and dismantled most of the police state. In Russia people have more personal freedoms with respect to the state than they do in the USA. Of course one unfortunate side effect of so much freedom is that there was a great increase in corruption and the growth of the oligarchs after the fall of the Soviet Union. But Russia is dealing with this step by step, reducing corruption and reigning in the oligarchs. Their ideal seems to be the USA of the 1960s or 70s, but not the USA of today.
Here's what I don't understand: what is the ultimate goal of this newfound desire to police everything? The obvious answer is control over people en mass, but say that happens...then what?
Articles like this (which I'm glad are being written) point out the flaws and injustice in the system, but don't discuss the presumed results "those in control" are looking to achieve by manipulating it.
From what I understand, the desired result is to minimize the autonomy of the general public and funnel the bulk of money, control, and power into the hands of a national elite. What happens next (an honest question, as I have some semi-paranoid theories but am curious to hear from someone who is a bit more educated on the topic)?
This is AMAZING! We're getting closer and closer to a cyberpunk society (unfortunately, authoritarianism is necessary, but not sufficient for this). Soon it'll be like Escape From L.A. or Snow Crash or Neuromancer!
I can't wait to stroll down the streets of Chiba like Case.
I can't wait to hack around in the Metaverse like Hiro.
I can't wait to explore the underbelly of prison-islands like Snake.
We just need a bit more authoritarianism, some advanced cybernetic implants, and just enough unrest for a Modern Wild West to be born.
Does anyone else plan on coming along for the ride?
HACK THE GIBSON! HACK THE PLANET!
I generally agree with the article, but I object to this section:
"And the mood is spreading. Take the asset bubble collapse of 2008 and the rising cries of progressives for the criminal prosecution of Wall Street perpetrators, as if a fundamentally sound financial system had been abused by a small number of criminals who were running free after the debacle. Instead of pushing a debate about how to restructure our predatory financial system, liberals in their focus on individual prosecution are aping the punitive zeal of the authoritarians. A few high-profile prosecutions for insider trading (which had nothing to do with the last crash) have, of course, not changed Wall Street one bit."
I think that the self-serving, damaging actions of those with a lot of power that affected the entire world's economy is worth looking into at least some prosecution, it's hardly in the same league as what happened to three innocent teenagers waiting for a bus. And if insider trading isn't related to the last crash, then of course prosecuting it isn't going to change anything.
Please see historical and global context related to 'police-state' and despotism in order to understand the significance of these issues. You will need to set aside your American exceptionalism.
I do have an issue with the article though. My middle school did have quite a few young criminals in it, and a zero-tolerance policy would have been beneficial for everyone. Instead, quite a lot of physical violence and theft was dismissed as 'bullying' which resulted in escalation. I know for a fact that many of the students who misbehaved in less extreme criminal ways (and were allowed to get away with it) did enter into a life of crime before they were halfway through high school.
So there is a difference between militarization and despotic control and disciplining students enough to prevent them from becoming criminals.
I think that rather than worrying about harsh penalties for vandalism etc., take issue with the propaganda being fed to students and the lack of focus on problem solving outside of narrow domains.
The largest problem that I see with the militarization of the local police is that they will increasingly start to view themselves as soldiers. (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_prison_experiment)
At least the 113th congress didn't create many new laws. No SOPA, PIPA, or COICA yet either.
The post-911 federal gov has been directing resources towards building a domestic counter-insurgency apparatus and promoting a culture in law enforcement conducive to their inclusion in it. You don't spend over a decade building something without a reason. So what's the reason? Needless to say, if the founding fathers were around today they'd be pondering a strategy to resist it.
The usual internet twaddle. How many commenters on this thread have bothered to look up incidents of this nature in their districts, neighbourhoods or whatever, and called their councilman or congressman?
I guarantee none. Spend less time online and more complaining to your representatives. You will achieve a lot more in turning things around, ie if you really want to, cowards.
To me, as an English person looking at America through the prism of the news, and articles such as this, it looks more and more like the American state is a rogue element beset by paranoia, increasingly lacking trust not only in the world at large, but also in its own citizens.
Do any of you American citizens out there have the same opinion of your government?
We are living in an extreme, high tech, highly theatrical version of The Wire; one in which you can't trust your government, the law, the police and you can guarantee they are watching you.
Turns out that any laws that have loop holes will be abused and everyone is guilty. This is the definition of tyranny.
I would say this is a symptom that could be explained by Turchin's structural-demographic theory -- that is, increasing competition for resources (including political power) produces measures that even in earlier, more violent periods might have been considered too drastic.
I'd love to study how long it takes the tanks to fall into disuse, to the point of being inoperable, simply because police departments will lose interest in them, neglect maintenance, forget where all of the pieces are, fail to find suppliers for spares, etc.
My small town is gearing up as well ...
http://waterford.patch.com/groups/police-and-fire/p/waterfor...
My family came on boat number 2 after the Mayflower. For the first time in my life, it may be time to checkout of the USA for awhile. Maybe it is time? Can always visit, but maybe this is it. This is just insane at this point.
This can only stop when the epithet "Weak on Crime" no longer has power in politics.
The re-criminalization of everyday life—“privacy may be an anomaly”.
l9.
> Sheriff Bud York suggested, according to the Post-Star, the local newspaper, that “in an era of terrorist attacks on U.S. soil and mass killings in schools, police agencies need to be ready for whatever comes their way...
And in reality, they're just preparing for social unrest that seem more likely by the day.
This story reminded me of the Boston bombing and it's "lockdown" (read martial law). Didn't Boston have one of these APCs roaming the streets during its martial law. In that case it's really a show of force against the "civilian" population than to catch terrorists.
Why the hell does Ohio State need an MRAP. Are they going to actually tell us that the terrorists might roll in with tanks or APCs. Or maybe the terrorists will be running around with APCs in full combat? No.
Geez, is anybody even questioning these clowns about these acquisitions.
This is probably more of "If we scare people by throwing around the terrorist word then we get to spend money, have cool new toys, and look badass".
It's pathetic, but it seems to work.
The 'good old days' had drug dealers and violence, don't kid yourself. It got covered up and ignored.
What is a police dept to do, when the crimes are escalating? Its simple to chide Warren County (or whoever); but who are you to say the next bombing or public rage will not occur there? The others were in similar places; no place is safe.
I wish people would move beyond 1984 and quote more Foucault's Discipline & Punishment [1]. There is a much deeper-rooted problem in society than mass surveillance or militarization of police. It's the question of why we all let this happen without any resistance. We accept and welcome our controllers. Foucault wrote about the effects of prisoner mindset in society in the 1960-70s. Our subjugation and tolerance to authoritarianism is very widespread and not limited to just police.
We're not just afraid to be anti-authoritative, we're institutionalized since our birth in schools and the concept of control is in embedded in every aspect of life (such as in language found in politics, school work, or newspapers).
Mass-surveillance is just a more direct implementation of "panopticon" [2] applied to everyday life, existing at all times. Having committed a crime is no longer the requirement to be imprisoned, whether physically or mentally.
http://www.amazon.com/Discipline-Punish-Birth-Prison-Vintage...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panopticon