Set aside for a second what caused the St. Louis riots this week. Also set aside the fact that there is no connection between anger directed at social injustice and looting a shoe store.
The Atlantic ran a story today with a picture of three officers dressed in fatigues, military style rifles raised at a small young man with arms up. One can understand the weapons, at least in a riot situation. Police should be able to protect themselves in dangerous situations.
But what about the combat fatigues?
The militarization of American police continues unabated. Reports of small town and even campus police obtaining armored personnel carriers strike most people as absurd. SWAT style raids have hit farms who sell raw milk to willing customers as well.
Add to this the outpouring of stories where police needlessly shoot dogs. In Mason County, police shot a dog on its owner's property where no crime had taken place.
The Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 expressly forbids the US military from acting in a law enforcement capacity within the country. It passed before the rise of city and state police departments, as well as much of the federal law enforcement apparatus. Police departments need equipment and weapons in case they must confront the most dangerous elements.
They, however, should not be outfitted in military style apparel unless a specific situation calls for it.
And we cannot allow police departments to grow into alternative military units. The US Army in 1898 had about 28,000 officers and men. The New York City Police Department now has around 40,000 officers.
Traditionally, city police wear blue uniforms. Some say that this goes back to the London Metropolitan Police Department who supposedly chose the color to distinguish police from the army. State Police, however, wear uniforms similar to those worn by the US Army during the First World War. Many states formed their police after the war and used surplus uniforms. As military uniforms quickly evolved, most state police kept the old style.
Beyond the uniforms, the tactics and equipment of the police have grown to more and more resemble the military. Rarely, this may be necessary, but not for routine use.
Appearances matter, though. Police in fatigues inspire more fear and less confidence in those they are sworn to protect.
American police cannot go around like Sheriff Andy Taylor with a broad smile and no gun. But likewise, they cannot approach every situation like Samuel L. Jackson in SWAT. Police safety must be upheld, but the public is losing confidence in police to do their jobs with discipline and restraint.
Showing posts with label SWAT. Show all posts
Showing posts with label SWAT. Show all posts
Tuesday, August 12, 2014
Tuesday, June 24, 2014
Time to Reign In SWAT Teams, Restore Spirit of Posse Comitatus Act
In George Washington's Farewell Address at the close of his presidency, he warned Americans to stay vigilant. Allowing a large military to grow unchecked would undermine liberties and infringe upon rights.
Washington's fears came from the dual role of the military. It defended the nation, but also could be used to police it. These lines grew blurred enough during Reconstruction and the Old West that Congress passed the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878. This act prevented regular military forces from being used for internal policing. State militia, later National Guard, are exempt as are the Coast Guard. As weapons and tactics of warfare grew more powerful and violent, Congress deemed that they had no place in policing a free society.
In the last century, criminal gangs grew more sophisticated and better armed. They once hid in the recesses of cities and dominated the traditional vice trade. After World War II, gangs expanded the drug trade. More money led to more competition and more violence. Police and citizens got caught in the crossfire. For this, and many other reasons, SWAT, Special Weapons and Tactics units, were created.
Elite police units and advanced equipment costs money, but situations calling for their use is limited. Despite media interest in the most dramatic scenarios, there just are not that many hostage situations, active shooters, or super dangerous gangs and terrorists lying around. Violent crime in the United States has also dropped considerably since the 1990s. So what can a SWAT team do?
According to an exhaustive ACLU study they do routine police work, but with deadly consequences. Only seven percent of SWAT actions responded to hostage or shooter situations. 80 percent of raids were for simple search warrants. Two thirds of actions were performed as part of a drug search, but anywhere from one third to two thirds of those searches turned up nothing.
Most searches, again around two thirds, involve forced entry. Officers use a battering ram to burst through a door with minimal warning, often deploy flash grenades, and rely on shock and awe tactics to stun their targets. Often, possible presence of a weapon is cited as justification but most of the time, none are found.
Police bursting into a home with automatic weapons drawn and almost no warning relies on psychological trauma to immobilize the people inside. It can also have deadly results. In a recent case, a flash grenade mistakenly dropped into a baby crib nearly killed the 19 month old inside.
SWAT teams also make mistakes all too often. Going to the wrong house and using such tactics can get officers and residents shot, or both. In one instance, a 92 year old Georgia woman was killed in a hail of gunfire after shooting at police bursting into her home.
Problems also come with the militarization of police equipment. Surplus armored personnel carriers have been granted to police forces across the country, even as National Guard units have lost their own.
No one has explained why Ohio State University's campus police need one. According to the ACLU, they are almost exclusively used on drug raids.
The ACLU also said that the possible presence of a weapon is no justification to use SWAT. "Given that almost half of American households have guns," they noted, "use of a SWAT team could almost always be justified if this was a sole factor."
The problems with SWAT are profound because use of the teams have gotten out of control. Local police need latitude to make decisions and respond effectively. Then again, clearly local authorities in many areas have abused the privilege of having and using such units.
State legislatures across the country need to step in and create guidelines for the use of SWAT teams, then ensure in some way that these actions get reviewed for efficiency, effectiveness, and how well they protect or failed to protect the public. Our system was never meant to allow routine policing with military equipment or methods. Time to reign it in a little.
Update: Salon article about a flash grenade blowing a hole in a young child's chest. There is right and left agreement that this needs to be curbed. Time to do it.
Washington's fears came from the dual role of the military. It defended the nation, but also could be used to police it. These lines grew blurred enough during Reconstruction and the Old West that Congress passed the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878. This act prevented regular military forces from being used for internal policing. State militia, later National Guard, are exempt as are the Coast Guard. As weapons and tactics of warfare grew more powerful and violent, Congress deemed that they had no place in policing a free society.
In the last century, criminal gangs grew more sophisticated and better armed. They once hid in the recesses of cities and dominated the traditional vice trade. After World War II, gangs expanded the drug trade. More money led to more competition and more violence. Police and citizens got caught in the crossfire. For this, and many other reasons, SWAT, Special Weapons and Tactics units, were created.
Elite police units and advanced equipment costs money, but situations calling for their use is limited. Despite media interest in the most dramatic scenarios, there just are not that many hostage situations, active shooters, or super dangerous gangs and terrorists lying around. Violent crime in the United States has also dropped considerably since the 1990s. So what can a SWAT team do?
According to an exhaustive ACLU study they do routine police work, but with deadly consequences. Only seven percent of SWAT actions responded to hostage or shooter situations. 80 percent of raids were for simple search warrants. Two thirds of actions were performed as part of a drug search, but anywhere from one third to two thirds of those searches turned up nothing.
Most searches, again around two thirds, involve forced entry. Officers use a battering ram to burst through a door with minimal warning, often deploy flash grenades, and rely on shock and awe tactics to stun their targets. Often, possible presence of a weapon is cited as justification but most of the time, none are found.
Police bursting into a home with automatic weapons drawn and almost no warning relies on psychological trauma to immobilize the people inside. It can also have deadly results. In a recent case, a flash grenade mistakenly dropped into a baby crib nearly killed the 19 month old inside.
SWAT teams also make mistakes all too often. Going to the wrong house and using such tactics can get officers and residents shot, or both. In one instance, a 92 year old Georgia woman was killed in a hail of gunfire after shooting at police bursting into her home.
Problems also come with the militarization of police equipment. Surplus armored personnel carriers have been granted to police forces across the country, even as National Guard units have lost their own.
No one has explained why Ohio State University's campus police need one. According to the ACLU, they are almost exclusively used on drug raids.
The ACLU also said that the possible presence of a weapon is no justification to use SWAT. "Given that almost half of American households have guns," they noted, "use of a SWAT team could almost always be justified if this was a sole factor."
The problems with SWAT are profound because use of the teams have gotten out of control. Local police need latitude to make decisions and respond effectively. Then again, clearly local authorities in many areas have abused the privilege of having and using such units.
State legislatures across the country need to step in and create guidelines for the use of SWAT teams, then ensure in some way that these actions get reviewed for efficiency, effectiveness, and how well they protect or failed to protect the public. Our system was never meant to allow routine policing with military equipment or methods. Time to reign it in a little.
Update: Salon article about a flash grenade blowing a hole in a young child's chest. There is right and left agreement that this needs to be curbed. Time to do it.
Thursday, September 12, 2013
EPA SWAT Style Raid on Mines Raises Questions About Militarization of Police
Federal agents wearing menacing black uniforms, body armor and carrying automatic weapons went into action recently. Using commando style tactics, they forced their way onto private property to detain individuals and locate evidence of wrongdoing.
Did agents break up a clique of terrorists? Did they find the hideout of a dangerous gang?
No. They were enforcing the Clean Water Act on an Alaska gold mine. And now United States Senators are demanding answers.
A Daily Caller investigation shows that the EPA did more than simply over equip its agents on a routine investigation. It also lied when asked why it adopted such extreme measures.
The EPA claimed that it told Alaska State Police that the targets were involved with drugs and human trafficking (mind you, in Chicken, Alaska.) State Police spokesmen strongly dispute the EPA claims.
John Stossel in Reason points out that SWAT raids have increased from 300 per year to over a hundred per day. He describes how SWAT teams even descended upon organic farms to end the dire social threat of unpasteurized milk.
Politicians accepted the idea that the war on drugs might mean reduced private property rights. It ended up in every police department wanting military style equipment. This resulted in police "terrorizing innocent people, raiding the wrong house and causing violence."
The vast majority of SWAT raids descend upon people suspected of drug possession or trafficking, even if the individual has no history of violence. Other agencies fear the threat from . . . libertarians. Concord, New Hampshire police justified the purchase of an armored vehicle to stave off "daily challenges" posed by libertarians.
In 1878, Congress passed the Posse Comitatus Act. After the Civil War, the Army had been called upon in certain situations to act as law enforcement. Lawmakers recognized that the mission of the Army, to seek out and destroy foreign enemies, did not make it a viable police force. Congress forbade the military forces of the United States from doing routine law enforcement.
As a result, police forces emerged in most state and local jurisdictions by the end of World War I. Sheriff's departments dated back to medieval England, but most states did not create their own police forces until around a century ago. Cities had done so earlier, around the end of the 19th century. Interestingly, the colors of police uniforms reflect when they were created. As the US military went from dark blue to khaki in the 1890s, city police used surplus uniforms. State trooper dress still resembles that of World War I era soldiers.
They, however, retained the distinction between police technique and military tactics.
In the past generation, police have increasingly adopted military style weapons and tactics. In selected situations, this is reasonable. Violent street gangs' illicit acquisition of automatic weapons meant that police have to keep up to keep from being outgunned. Fair enough.
But police forces need stricter guidelines to govern when they may go into full commando mode. Raiding a lair of the dangerous MS-13 gang, yes. Raiding an organic farm selling raw milk (and perhaps a little weed), no.
The Department of Education even has a SWAT team to attack those accused of ducking student loans!
Police serve and protect. The military defends the nation and destroys its enemies. All too often in recent years, law enforcement at all levels has chosen to terrify the public rather than to serve it. Not every situation can be handled in the Sheriff Andy Taylor manner, without use of weapons and trusting in the goodness of the public, but a boundaries must be drawn.
And federal agencies without law enforcement missions must be stripped of enforcement agents.
The spirit of the Posse Comitatus Act relies on the idea of separation between the military and law enforcement. Police should not be routinely equipped and trained as if they patrol the streets of an Afghan village. Current practice does not violate the letter of this important act, but it certainly contradicts the spirit.
The militarization of police at all levels is one of the most serious threats to liberty.
Did agents break up a clique of terrorists? Did they find the hideout of a dangerous gang?
No. They were enforcing the Clean Water Act on an Alaska gold mine. And now United States Senators are demanding answers.
A Daily Caller investigation shows that the EPA did more than simply over equip its agents on a routine investigation. It also lied when asked why it adopted such extreme measures.
The EPA claimed that it told Alaska State Police that the targets were involved with drugs and human trafficking (mind you, in Chicken, Alaska.) State Police spokesmen strongly dispute the EPA claims.
John Stossel in Reason points out that SWAT raids have increased from 300 per year to over a hundred per day. He describes how SWAT teams even descended upon organic farms to end the dire social threat of unpasteurized milk.
Politicians accepted the idea that the war on drugs might mean reduced private property rights. It ended up in every police department wanting military style equipment. This resulted in police "terrorizing innocent people, raiding the wrong house and causing violence."
The vast majority of SWAT raids descend upon people suspected of drug possession or trafficking, even if the individual has no history of violence. Other agencies fear the threat from . . . libertarians. Concord, New Hampshire police justified the purchase of an armored vehicle to stave off "daily challenges" posed by libertarians.
In 1878, Congress passed the Posse Comitatus Act. After the Civil War, the Army had been called upon in certain situations to act as law enforcement. Lawmakers recognized that the mission of the Army, to seek out and destroy foreign enemies, did not make it a viable police force. Congress forbade the military forces of the United States from doing routine law enforcement.
As a result, police forces emerged in most state and local jurisdictions by the end of World War I. Sheriff's departments dated back to medieval England, but most states did not create their own police forces until around a century ago. Cities had done so earlier, around the end of the 19th century. Interestingly, the colors of police uniforms reflect when they were created. As the US military went from dark blue to khaki in the 1890s, city police used surplus uniforms. State trooper dress still resembles that of World War I era soldiers.
They, however, retained the distinction between police technique and military tactics.
In the past generation, police have increasingly adopted military style weapons and tactics. In selected situations, this is reasonable. Violent street gangs' illicit acquisition of automatic weapons meant that police have to keep up to keep from being outgunned. Fair enough.
But police forces need stricter guidelines to govern when they may go into full commando mode. Raiding a lair of the dangerous MS-13 gang, yes. Raiding an organic farm selling raw milk (and perhaps a little weed), no.
The Department of Education even has a SWAT team to attack those accused of ducking student loans!
Police serve and protect. The military defends the nation and destroys its enemies. All too often in recent years, law enforcement at all levels has chosen to terrify the public rather than to serve it. Not every situation can be handled in the Sheriff Andy Taylor manner, without use of weapons and trusting in the goodness of the public, but a boundaries must be drawn.
And federal agencies without law enforcement missions must be stripped of enforcement agents.
The spirit of the Posse Comitatus Act relies on the idea of separation between the military and law enforcement. Police should not be routinely equipped and trained as if they patrol the streets of an Afghan village. Current practice does not violate the letter of this important act, but it certainly contradicts the spirit.
The militarization of police at all levels is one of the most serious threats to liberty.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)