Former Seattle Police Chief Norm Stamper, Yes Magazine - As Radley Balko points out in his superb book, Rise of the Warrior Cop: The Militarization of America’s Police Forces, SWAT incidents ... are proliferating at a frightening pace. In the ’70s, the nation’s roughly 18,000 municipal, county, and state police forces conducted a few hundred such operations a year. By the ’80s the number had grown to approximately 3,000. And in 2005, the last year of collected data, there were more than 50,000 SWAT operations. Today’s count is surely much higher....
How is it that so many of today’s police officers have come to resemble—in appearance, weaponry, and tactics—infantrymen in the U.S. military? A retired army combat sergeant, recently returned from Afghanistan, was interviewed on CNN during the protests in Ferguson, Missouri. He was shown footage of a St. Louis County police officer sitting high atop an MRAP (mine-resistant, ambush-protected vehicle) and pointing a sniper rifle at the crowd. The soldier was astonished and appalled. “This shouldn’t be happening in America,” he said...
There is a time and place for military-style tactics, carried out by police officers who do, in fact, look more like soldiers than cops. Think active shooter situations, or armed and dangerous suspects who’ve taken hostages and barricaded themselves. Think service of warrants accompanied by a reasonable suspicion that the suspects are armed and poised to do violence. Think terrorists.
But it is the routinization of police militarism that ought to concern us all. America’s police departments—aided and abetted by the federal government’s “1033” program, which allocates to local law enforcement military surplus, including armored vehicles, weapons, even aircraft—have gradually morphed from images of “Officer Friendly,” neighborhood-oriented cops to those of war zone occupiers...
But how to reverse the militarization trend? As Seattle’s police chief during the World Trade Organization’s 1999 “Battle in Seattle,” and acutely aware of my own unwise reliance on militarized tactics, I realize just how difficult the task will be. But that should not stop us. Here are five steps that can help us turn things around.
1. Residents of cities across the country must rise up and reclaim their police departments.
The police in America belong to the people, not the other way around. An organized, mobilized citizenry is essential to the kind of structural and cultural reforms necessary for reasoned, responsible, and responsive policing.
2. Sustained social and political pressure for demilitarization is essential.
Mayors, city council members, sheriffs, and police chiefs should be elected or selected, in significant measure, on the basis of their dedication to authentic “community policing.” At the heart of community policing is a demonstrable commitment to a problem-solving partnership between the police department and the people it serves. Citizen-police partners must work together to identify, analyze, and solve crime, traffic, and other neighborhood problems—including the nature and quality of the relationship itself. Indeed, police officers and their “civilian” partners must act in unified fashion on agency policies and procedures, program development, and crisis management. No more unilateral decisions about what’s “best for the community.”
3. Local political jurisdictions must implement independent citizen oversight of police practices.
Currently, no single model works flawlessly, and many flounder. But successful approaches in the future will incorporate investigative authority, including subpoena powers, for oversight bodies. Professionalism, competence, and cooperation between police management and labor are essential. It won’t happen by Tuesday of next week. But the hard, thorny work must begin, urgently.
4. It is vital that all law enforcement agencies, in conjunction with their communities, set and enforce rigorous standards for the selection, training, and systematic retraining of SWAT officers and their leaders.
Also crucial: a similarly demanding definition of what justifies a SWAT mission. Emphatically not part of that definition is the use of chemical agents on nonviolent, nonthreatening protesters or the conspicuous presence of military weaponry (including sniper rifles, as seen in Ferguson) at political protests.
It is the people of America...who can bring an end to those horrifying pre-dawn raids and to the specter of a military-like occupation
5. End the drug war.
Eighty percent of all SWAT raids are in service of search or arrest warrants, the vast majority of them aimed at low-level, nonviolent drug offenders. Indeed, it was in the early prosecution of the drug war that we sowed the seeds of police militarization. Certainly, in the aftermath of 9/11 we witnessed a dramatic expansion of police militarization (as well as a deeply troubling attack on our civil liberties). But it has been the “War on Drugs,” with its reliance on the thoroughly bankrupt policy of prohibition, that has done such terrible damage to individuals, families, and neighborhoods, and to the community-police relationship. Ending the drug war, replacing prohibition with a regulatory model, will do much to demilitarize our local PDs.
3 comments:
Yes, But No Dept: Radley Balko, as outed by S.H.A.M.E. project: http://shameproject.com/report/radley-balko-anatomy-stand-ground-shill-2/
The wikipedia entry for Shutzstaffel describes the basic culture pattern. The elite forces are ideologically pure, loyal and committed to controlling subhumans.
don't really give a shit what radley balko's politics are, which is ESSENTIALLY ALL the poster's linked article bitches about: he ain't PC /libtard enough for the previous writer to 'admire'...
moron, you HAVE TO agree 100% with EVERYONE's take on EVERYTHING before they are given any validity in ANY subject ?? ? grow the fuck up, baby citizen...
YOU are the problem, not him...
not sure what the twitterati made of his tweets about zimmerman not being 'stand your ground' case, but i don't disagree with his assessment...
(not to mention, don't give a shit what obsessive twittering twits post *THIS* nano-second... no, *now*... no, um, *now*... don't you twits have jobs ? ? ?)
in the context, i don't think it was NOT that zimmerman's defense attorneys would not USE that defense; BUT that it had NO VALIDITY in the context of stalking and assaulting an INNOCENT pedestrian zimmerman conjured up as a monster in his own mind...
WHEN YOU ASSAULT SOMEONE AND THEY DEFEND THEMSELVES, *THE ASSAULTEE* IS THE ONE 'STANDING THEIR GROUND', you waste of protoplasm...
zimmerman was/is a puffed-up, self-important, RACIST vigilante murderer, that simple...
all the rest is rationalization bullshit by racists and authoritarian fucktards who would slit their own throats if Big Daddy told them to...
Post a Comment