Trump Rolls Back Ban On Transfer Of Military Equipment To Law Enforcement Agencies
from the police-statesmanship dept
As part of his ongoing effort to reverse everything President Obama ever did, President Trump will be rolling back the previous administration’s 1033 program ban. The program allowed local law enforcement agencies to help themselves to Defense Department equipment — often paid for with federal grants — as long as they said the magic words (terrorism/drugs) on the application.
Attorney General Jeff Sessions, who led the campaign for the program’s reinstatement, outlined the President Trump’s new executive order Monday in an address at the annual meeting of the Fraternal Order of Police, the nation’s largest police union.
The administration’s action, first disclosed by USA TODAY, would restore “the full scope of a longstanding program for recycling surplus, lifesaving gear from the Department of Defense, along with restoring the full scope of grants used to purchase this type of equipment from other sources,” according to a administration summary of the new program recently circulated to some law enforcement groups.
“Assets that would otherwise be scrapped can be re-purposed to help state, local and tribal law enforcement better protect public safety and reduce crime.”
Attorney General Sessions loves rolling things back. This will give police departments access to mine-resistant vehicles, grenade launchers, and firearms, which should “assist” them in fighting the Drug War 1980s-style and/or pitching in with ICE’s efforts to pitch migrants back over the wall Trump can’t seem to get built.
This is prime law-and-order stuff. Trump has made it clear law enforcement is on the right side of history. Everyone who doubts or criticizes cops is simply wrong. A ban put in place as a reaction to militarized police responses is being reversed because no one up top cares how police are perceived. AG Sessions has already killed off federal civil rights investigations of local law enforcement agencies. Now, police will find it easier than ever to dude up as war-fighters, rather than easily-identifiable public servants.
As Radley Balko pointed out on Twitter, Obama’s rollback didn’t put a huge dent in military gear acquisitions. But it did attempt to head off further development of law enforcement’s “us vs. them” mentality by making it a bit more difficult to look and act like an occupying force, rather than law enforcement agencies. Balko notes plenty of gear can still be obtained from other sources, like the DHS, state agencies, and donations. But the ultimate point of the ban was to reduce the gap between public servants and the people they serve — something explicitly noted by Obama’s law enforcement guidance task force.
The Task Force on 21st Century Policing, chaired by former Philadelphia Police Commissioner Charles Ramsey and Laurie Robinson, a former assistant attorney general, called on law enforcement officials to “minimize the appearance of a military operation” when policing mass demonstrations.
“Avoid using provocative tactics and equipment that undermine civilian trust,” the task force urged.
The previously-banned equipment also included tracked armored vehicles, bayonets and grenade launchers.
Trump’s ban reversal sends the opposite message. Combined with his public statements, proclamations, and executive orders, the future of policing will make cities and towns feel like occupied territory and turn citizens into civilians.
Filed Under: 1033, doj, donald trump, jeff sessions, militarized police, military surplus, police
Comments on “Trump Rolls Back Ban On Transfer Of Military Equipment To Law Enforcement Agencies”
Out of sight out of mind
Politicians care more about how things look than about what is happening. It was bad in the days when people got bent out of shape when it was made clear that the thin veneer of the happy life in your town was nothing more than a charade. Now in the days of the Internet, trying to keep up appearances is not just silly but also dangerous.
Re: Out of sight out of mind
Ack… sorry this was put in the wrong thread, and I am not sure how to delete a post.
Re: Re: Out of sight out of mind
You can’t delete posts. You can’t edit them either.
Does that man expect civil war, or does he hope to provoke one?
Re: Re:
C’mon. Be optimistic.
Sure, during the campaign, Trump repeatedly urged the roughing up of protesters. You know, back when he was still expected to “act more presidential” once the primaries were over.
And sure, a month ago he encouraged police to rough up suspects and not worry about injuring them. And followed it up by declaring that Nazis are “just a side.” And now he’s sending more military equipment to the police.
That may seem bad, but I for one take the optimistic view: The President of the United States is a stupid, childish nutjob whose insecurity won’t let him allow anything Obama did to stand. This is about rolling back another of Obama’s executive orders.
Re: Re: Re:
Your optimistic view is not warranted since Trump does not act alone. He is surrounded by sycophants who embrace their opportunity of enacting evil through him.
Stupidity may not be evil itself, but it enables it while putting up a scapegoat as well. This is G.W.B. on steroids.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
I stand corrected.
I also have a recommendation for Trump’s final words as President:
"The Aristocrats!"
Re: Re: Re:2 Re:
At least he would kill that “joke” once and for all.
Re: Re: Re:2 Re:
I’m still hoping for “Unpresidented.”
It’s part of his Schutzstaffel campaign.
Re: Re:
It’s part of his bigotry. He’s probably frustrated he couldn’t attend Charlottesville. And having a black president enacting stuff is a no-no, we must erase it from existence.
The day he was elected was a sad day.
It seems to me that people have forgotten the difference between Nationalism and Patriotism. Patriotism is supporting what a country (supposedly) stands for, whereas Nationalism is supporting what a country actually does, whether that is in agreement with its ideals or not.
i.e. "Dissent is patriotic" vs "Support the President no matter what."
"Law and Order" is at a similar crossroads right now. The Order part can be easy, but you have to erode the foundations of the Law to do it that way. The harder, long-term way to support Order (peace and stability) is to increase respect for the Law. The President is taking shortcuts here, at the expense of the citizenry.
If one wanted to actually restore Law and Order (in a literal sense) they must first restore Order to the Law.
Re: Re:
My country, right or wrong—if right, to be kept right; if wrong, to be set right.
Re: Re:
And the Nationalist will tell you that Nationalism is patriotic 🙂
It’s a lot more accurate to say that Sessions is doing this, and I wish your headline reflected that.
I will never understand those who fear Democrats abusing state power but cheer on this authoritarianism.
Re: Re:
It kind of funny how the stereotype of the left is one of absolute trust in government, but also more distrustful of the very representatives of that power, while the right is more distrustful of government, unless they are carrying a gun (police and military).
Re: That goes both ways.
Part of the restrictions put in place by Obama included a ban on camoflauge and the requirement that police paint vehicles with a non-military color. These restrictions existed, in part, so police officers could change their mindset from “soldiers in a war zone” to something far less militaristic.
Trump reversed these restrictions because Obama put them in place, that much I know. What worries me: He might have done it for a far more sinister reason—even if he believes turning police departments into paramilitary groups is what the United States “needs” to preserve “law and order”.
Re: Re:
Of course he did it for a more sinister purpose. Trump is merely a manifestation of a decades-long social trend; the rich are declaring war against the poor.
The Middle-class will either join them or get kicked down in the dirt with the plebs.
Re: Re: Re:
The rich can only get richer by making those below them poorer, or by making some of the rich poorer. Which option do you think the rich will choose?
If Antifa with their Marxist wishes grows, maybe it is what the US needs to preserve “law and order”.
Re: Re:
lol
Re: Re:
Step away from James Woods’s pipe.
Re: Re: Re:
That’s a funny way to spell Donald Trump’s retweets.
https://twitter.com/DineshDSouza/status/902144656015671297
Re: Re:
Last time I checked, anti-fascist groups have not adopted vehicular homicide as part of their tactics.
Who killed Heather Heyer, again?
Re: Re: Re:
I will wait for the courts to decide that prejudiced one.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Of course. Video is only conclusive when it exonerates police, or convicts blacks. When it comes to good old white rednecks, it’s always inconclusive.
Amirite?
Lemme guess…poor snowflake was a-scared?
Re: Re: Re:
Read the article in the Vox titled The case against antifa.
Their tactics will bring about things they are against. Have fun with that.
Re: Re: No. You don't get to punch Nazis.
No they just advocate political violence.
Forget about Nazis. Political violence is the thing that everyone should be denouncing rather than embracing.
Re: Re: Re: No. You don't get to punch Nazis.
This. No one has a lock on morality if they behave immorally themselves, and violence is immoral.
Antifa wouldn’t exist if Nazis didn’t exist, but they’re not as organised as Nazis. The problem, then, isn’t $group, it’s the underlying ideologies. Sort that out.
Re: Re:
Do you come here, just to have people who are both smarter and better looking than yourself, give you sick burns? Or is it just a bonus?
so uhh… what is the spirit of the Posse Comitatus Act vs giving Milspec equipment to law enforcement? I mean, could it be reasonably construed as to enlisting law enforcement as Military in order to enforce domestic policy?
Re: Mispec? That's funny.
The funny thing is that most stuff that’s been depicted in pictures decrying this policy are stuff that you could buy yourself from US Cav or your local gun show.
You’re probably better off with the equipment that is NOT milspec. Most of the civilian stuff is better. Even actual soldiers and marines buy the better civilian stuff when necessary (and possible).
Even Cher was getting in on this act at one point.
It’s not just “bad optics”. It’s unnecessary.
Posse Comitatus Act
The National Defense Reauthorization Act of 2012 did away with the Posse Comitatus Act allowing the use of the military against us for terrorism reasons.
What was banned?
.50 cal. weapons. The police were not getting machine guns, but .50 caliber anti-sniper rifles. Sniper scopes (which make shooting more accurate, we want less accurate shooting? Bayonets, which the military doesn’t use anymore. Grenade launchers, which police use to shoot tear gas/smoke. Camouflage utilities, which I guess look much worse than black uniforms.
I guess the optics look bad, but the issue is not what cops carry but what they do with them. Then again, politicians always look to do things that look good but don’t really do anything.
Banning military equipment won’t make anything better if cops still have the mindset that they can do anything they want and the use of overwhelming force is the 1st thing they think of.
Re: Re:
According to coverage I heard on the radio today (NPR), of the various things banned from sale to police forces under the now-rescinded order, there were only three which any police force had ever purchased under that program:
* Tracked vehicles – i.e., tanks and tank-style armored personnel carriers, et cetera.
* Grenade launchers.
* Bayonets.
The other things which were banned by the order reportedly included things like armed aircraft, but also reportedly no police force in America had ever obtained such a thing through the 1033 program. Other things – such as camouflage gear – reportedly were not covered by the prohibition.
If that’s not the case, I’d be interested to see citations, if only so that I can be sure I understand the facts accurately.
The law is for thee
The way Trump’s tough on crime policy works. Laws that he doesn’t approve of won’t be enforced or punished. Everyone else will be punished to the full extent of the law for any transgression and then some. It’s been that way for decades with minor ebbs and flows along the way.
Re: The law is for thee
And Obama’s crime policy was the exact same thing. The things he didn’t want enforced didn’t get enforced. Same with Bush, same with Clinton.
That is the problem with allowing presidents to do this, yeah, it is great when your guy or gal is in the White House, but when the elections turn, you get something you really don’t like.
Too bad, the law of the land should be the law of the land. If you don’t like the law, work to change it, ignoring it doesn’t work.
Contractor police
How long until we have Blackwater types fulfilling local policing roles with full-on military equipment and no accountability? (Putting aside all manner of comments about current police accountability).
Re: Contractor police
…Within my lifetime (I’m 29).
Don’t complain, this is the future you chose.
Re: Re: Contractor police
Indeed. This is what the Great God Market will provide. Haven’t you heard? Private enterprise is more efficient. If government ruins everything it touches, why put it in charge of protecting property and enforcing the law?
Combat Patrol in Podunk USA
Trump’s ban reversal sends the opposite message. Combined with his public statements, proclamations, and executive orders, the future of policing will make cities and towns feel like occupied territory and turn citizens into civilians.
How does the US governments 1033 program (ie military gear for local police) benefit the average citizen?
What need is there for local police departments to be issued military weapons, military comm-gear (eg Stingray/DRT box) and armored personal carriers?
If the local police would like to play army they can enlist in the military.
Police officers should reflect the community they patrol and thus be attired appropriately as professional law enforcement officers not geared up as soldiers on combat patrol militarily occupying a foreign nation in constant fear for their lives with itchy trigger-fingers.
When you dress like a police officer you act like a police officer.
When you dress like a soldier on combat patrol you act like a soldier on combat patrol.
Re: Combat Patrol in Podunk USA
Just ask the British Army and ex-Royal Ulster Constabulary how much fun it wasn’t to have the two mixed together in Northern Ireland.
At least some military trucks can handle 4' deep water in Houston
Love those high intake & exhaust ports!
Fhew!
I was worried for a while that OCP wouldn’t be able to give us Robocop…
The problem is not the equipment. It is how the local organizations use it. If it is used for rescue, think Houston TX, then it is good. If it is used to create a military police army, then it is bad. We the people need to visit our city council meetings and ask questions.
Wonder how long before Trump declares Martial Law. Many of his steps are just what I would do if I were trying to become dictator, however foundering the attempt.
You guys are hilarious. Seriously.
Re: Re:
Yes. The tinfoil hat brigade is out in force today.
” the future of policing will make cities and towns feel like occupied territory and turn citizens into civilians.”
Would you like to know more?
Re: Where have you been?
You say that like the black man didn’t feel that way long before the Obama administration. The new “optics” only make it more obvious to those who are outsiders to the situation.
I would imagine there are residents in certain parts of Chicago wouldn’t mind having more of a police presence, a heavily armed presence.
You can stay in your gated community with your private police and feel safe, but there are places that really depend on the police, not that you keyboard justice warriors would know about.
Re: Oh really?
Are you kidding? The places that need more police in Chicago probably despise the police and view them as a foreign occupying army.
Re: Re: Oh really?
Hahaha, another liberal from his gated community.
The problem isn’t military equipment in the hands of police, it is the improper use of the military equipment.
Just follow the fucking Constitution. I am conservative, but if the Constitution is followed, everything works.
That means cops have to stop fucking up with minorities. That means the NSA/FBI/LEO’s have to stop their illegal surveillance.
That means that antifa is prosecuted for their actions (although if you start following the Constitution I think they start to go away.
That means that bigots stop illegal activities.
We have a document that is sort of old, but if followed, stops a lot of problems. Why don’t we try that?
Re: Re:
That means cops have to stop fucking up with minorities. That means the NSA/FBI/LEO’s have to stop their illegal surveillance.
And what happens when the above doesn’t happen? Are the "liberals", the "gated", the "keyboard warriors" still to blame as you are doing so?
Re: Re:
_That means that antifa is prosecuted for their actions (although if you start following the Constitution I think they start to go away._
Ah, you get it. Good.
RE: gated communities, few of us can afford to live in those. The truth is, we fear those LEOs who abuse the power we’ve given them to protect and to serve us.
Right to Keep and Bear Arms
Always hilarious to hear liberals whining about police having guns too.
I wait patiently for liberals to discover the Feds abuse their guns as well.
This is why we ALL need the right to keep and bear all weapons. Of course our police have the right. They are closer to the people than the Feds after all.
Re: Right to Keep and Bear Arms
Always hilarious to hear liberals whining about police having guns too.
Always hilarious to see conservatives not understanding that their little pop guns won’t be worth a shit when facing a police force armed with military-grade weapons.
Then again, you are the party of the uneducated.