Trump Reverses Obama Policy on Military Gear for Police
WASHINGTON — Reversing an Obama-era policy, President Donald Trump Monday removed restrictions on the kinds of surplus military gear the Defense Department can turn over to local police departments.
The issue has been a sensitive one since the Justice Department concluded that tactics used by police during 2014's violent street protest in Ferguson, Missouri inflamed tensions and created fear among demonstrators.
Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced the change, first reported by USA Today , in a speech to the Fraternal Order of Police in Nashville on Monday.
The executive order "will ensure that you can get the lifesaving gear that you need to do your job and send a strong message that we will not allow criminal activity, violence, and lawlessness to become the new normal," he said.
The Obama limitations hurt law enforcement, Sessions added.
"One sheriff told me earlier this year about how, due to the prior administration's restrictions, the federal government made his department return an armored vehicle that can change the dynamics of an active shooter situation," he said.
Jim Pasco, the police organization's executive director, said the change "is President Trump making good on a campaign promise." Pasco said he and other police officials discussed the issue with the president and attorney general two times during meetings at the White House.
Tags
Who is online
162 visitors
He's just giving our Law Enforcement what the rest of the worlds Law Enforcement has. Water Cannons, Armored cars, Military weapons, etc.... He is giving exactly what the Liberal types want. Everyone in this world is the same ! The World order is coming to a neighborhood near you.
One must be careful what they wish for huh ?
Choose your wishes carefully. :-D
One should also be careful of getting hysterical. The police armed and behaving like the military is not any people you imagine to be liberals want.
The police armed and behaving like the military
And what would make them do that ?
We've all seen the news around the world. There seems to be a theme in order to bring out the big guns....wouldn't you say atheist ?
And what would make them do that ?
Orders from above.
And if "above" happens to be a fascist like Joe Arpaio, ready and willing to use force against people just because he doesn't like their looks... ugly results will become even uglier with military weaponry...
If a municipality feels a need for military-style police... there's surely something very wrong, and the solution is not force.
I fail to see how Trump doing this is a bad thing.
I fail to see how Trump doing this is a bad thing.
Then I guess you don't think militarizing the civilian police forces is not a bad thing. I happen to think it is.
Then I guess you don't think militarizing the civilian police forces is not a bad thing. I happen to think it is.
Define "militarizing" civilian police forces. I often hear that term and no one seems to be able to define it. The fact is that there is military equipment and technology that has immediate and positive use in modern policing.
Define "militarizing" civilian police forces.
First let's establish a parameter:
The Posse Comitatus Act is a United States federal law (18 U.S.C. § 1385, original at 20 Stat. 152) signed on June 18, 1878 by President Rutherford B. Hayes. The purpose of the act – in concert with the Insurrection Act of 1807 – is to limit the powers of the federal government in using federal military personnel to enforce domestic policies within the United States. It was passed as an amendment to an army appropriation bill following the end of Reconstruction, and was subsequently updated in 1956 and 1981.
Now, if the Federal Government is able to equip police forces with the same equipment as is used by the Military (in effect: militarization of the police force) then that will essentially render The Posse Comitatus Act moot, as if will have the effect of creating a Domestic Army to put down any Freedom of Speech activity The Federal Government (The President) so orders.
Essentially, militarization of the U.S. Police could create the modern day American equivalent of the Pre-World War II German Orpo, Kripo, Sipo and Gestapo.
But that doesn't worry you, right?
That's not really true, Squirrel. Equipment doesn't equate to a command structure that answers to the military.
Equipment doesn't equate to a command structure that answers to the military.
You don't really think police departments are salivating over getting these freebie "toys" just so they can play with them in a parking lot, do you?
They want them to protect officers from an increase in political violence. After the leftist gunned down five cops and another shoots up congressmen more burn and loot their own community cops need the protection
MAGA!!!
ausmth,
Don't be silly.
Having APCs would have changed nothing in either of the tragedies you cite.
The tension that exists between many Black communities and their police will not be resolved by APCs.
KCPD was glad they had one when a barricaded white supremacist started shooting at fire fighters and cops.
Why do you want cops to be vulnerable?
So if the cases you cited were irrelevant, you'll just keep on citing others until you get lucky? Waco, maybe?
Yes, there will be a situation, once in a blue moon, when an APC would be useful. I'm pretty sure something could be worked out with the National Guard for those very rare circumstances.
What's the problem Bob? Are you afraid the APC would be used against the terrorist groups you like?
You said:
That's not really true, Squirrel. Equipment doesn't equate to a command structure that answers to the military.
Sorry but it is YOU who are wrong. I did not say the police force would "report" to a military authority. I said the police would evolve into a military-like organization. Militarization of the police.
In The Army we called is the TOE, which stands for TABLE of ORGANIZATION and EQUIPMENT. It is part of the SOP - Standard Operating Procedure. They are inexorably linked.
The Army calls it the TOE/SOP, whereas the civilian police refer to it as something like "organizational structure,material resources, manpower". They are the same. If the police force has Tanks, it will have procedures as to how to effectively use them. I guarantee it.
Still stretching for anything. The two are still not the same no matter how many times you put it in bold type.
MAGA!!!
Impasse
Wow! What a stretch!
You cite something that has absolutely no relevance to the issue.
I draw the line at tanks. No local cop needs an Abrams tank. Armored vehicles to move officers into the streets full of antifa, anarchists, neo nazis and armed protesters are needed.
Obama was concerned with optics and Trump is concerned with protecting the lives of cops.
Making America Great Again by countering Obama's mistakes
MAHA*
* Make America Hate Again
Someone is going to say something stupid like "I draw the line at tanks..." or some such nonsense.
Nobody gives a good goddamn what anyone here says, ar where a line is drawn by anyone on this site. That would truly be a stupid ass comment!
Obama already drew THE LINE at tanks and other such hardware.
Trump ERASED THAT LINE because Trump is a fool and an idiot!
Get it?
Nobody gives a good goddamn what anyone here says, ar where a line is drawn by anyone on this site. That would truly be a stupid ass comment!
Nice attempt to skirt the CoC!
MAGA!!!!
Impasse
Yes, allowing police gear for their safety and protection some consider militarization. It's not. It's keeping officers alive while doing their job. It's allowing them equipment to complete there job keeping citizens safe.
They are not a military force nor are they commanded by the military structure. No matter how hysterical some people get.
It's keeping officers alive while doing their job.
Seriously?
When was the last time municipal police needed tanks? Or even just army-style hemlets and battle armor?
The reason for such equipment is intimidation. Think about that. The police "needs" to massively intimidate the population it is supposed to be protecting.
That kinda sorta sounds like a very sick society.
When was the last time municipal police needed tanks? Or even just army-style hemlets and battle armor?
Can you list a city with a tank?
The military uses kevlar bullet proof helmets. Why don't you want the police protected with bullet proof equipment?
Can you list a city with a tank?
The military uses kevlar bullet proof helmets. Why don't you want the police protected?
Tanks was a bit of an exaggeration but your statement is absurdly dismissive:
Armored personnel carriers are designed for military assaults. We know what you're talking about: this is fine with you as long as it's confined to the inner cities but I can't wait for your reaction when they're used for the next rightwing occupation à la Malheur.
That is not a tank!
You don't even stop to read the comment, do you. No wonder you people are always so confused and operate out of a "low-information" position.
You don't even stop to read the comment, do you.
And you missed the context
MAGA!!!
NO it is not a "Tank"
It is an Mwrap, urban assault vehicle. They had thousands of them in Iraq cause they were much more efficient at controlling the populace than "Tanks".
Over a thousand of them were shipped back to the US with the pull out and rather than store them, they offered them to the civilian police forces around the country.
Seattle police has three of them
Tacoma police has one.
What the fuck does the Tacoma Police need with an RPG proof vehicle?
None of them need it...the real question is why do they WANT it?
What the fuck does the Tacoma Police need with an RPG proof vehicle?
They are also bullet proof. That is why they need them.
They are also bullet proof. That is why they need them.
When was the last time the Tacoma police neede an APC?
The last time they were shot at!
ausmth,
The only way that your Comment makes sense is that you mean all cops should be in APCs all the time.
Is that what you meant?
Or did you just toss out a smart-ass Comment in a transparent attempt to disguise the fact that your previous Comments led necessarily to "all cops in APCs all the time"... which is obviously a very stupid thing...
Or did you just toss out a smart-ass Comment in a transparent attempt to disguise the fact that your previous Comments led necessarily to "all cops in APCs all the time"... which is obviously a very stupid thing...
Trying for a slap fight? Not taking the bait on your personal attack
MAGA!
You're disowning your lead-in to "all cops in APCs all the time" idea?
Very wise decision...
Those were your words.
Define "militarizing" civilian police forces.
Do you not even bother to read the OC?
I fail to see how Trump doing this is a bad thing.
Fail is exactly the right word: "For there is none so blind as he who will not see."
Nice skirting!
MAGA!!!!!
I see everyone forgets what the people in Boston went through after the marathon bombing.
The armored vehicles rolling enmasse down the streets, people being rousted from their homes at gunpoint
Complete military lock down......
I remember the absolute condemnation of such all over this board.
I"m surprised that my libertarian friends see this as a good thing....
I see everyone forgets what the people in Boston went through after the marathon bombing.
Not 'everyone'. (Though some of us remember it differently. It almost seems as if your description is that of the May Day Parade in Red Square.) Be that as it may.
It does seem as if those who support Trum's rollback of the Obama restrictions on militarizing the police have forgotten what one of our FOUNDING FATHERS warned:
Benjamin Franklin once said:
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
I was saying the exact same thing to many of my brethren on the board back when it was actually happening.
Seems we have one point in agreement.....
Seems we have one point in agreement.....
Well, that's a start.
It does seem as if those who support Trum's rollback of the Obama restrictions on militarizing the police have forgotten what one of our FOUNDING FATHERS warned:
Oh, that's not all they forget. Every time a nest of violent rightwingers are routed out (e.g., Ruby Ridge, Malheur) they screech at the "jackbooted" police tactics. But if black guy throws a punch at a cop, summary execution is just fine with them.
Yes, there does seem to be a definite DOUBLE-STANDARD. I agree!
Did you know the term "jackbooted thug" was first used by a dem congressman to describe BATFE tactics? John Dingell 1981.
MAGA!
Gosh.
That's so... ... irrelevant!
Wow!
Impasse
I remember the absolute condemnation of such all over this board.
You mean like Trump "remembered" seeing thousands of Muslims in NJ celebrating the 9/11 attack? Yeah, we know about the "memories" that you lot have. Those memories were planted in your minds from the constant exposure to the alt-lying-right and they're permantly embedded now. They even come with a command to ignore every bit of actual proof that they're lies.
As compared to the Alt-fucking leftist goons that run around committing violent acts against anyone they wish?
You know, those wacko radicals you support... and their marxist agenda....
As compared to the Alt-fucking leftist goons that run around committing violent acts against anyone they wish?
One hundred sixty-eight people died, and hundreds more were injured in America's worst domestic terrorist attack, in Oklahoma City, 22 years ago. That was perpetrated by right-wing nutzoids.
Since then, there have many other terrorist murders by right-wing / White-suprmacist nutzoids. Dylan Roof comes to mind.
The total murdered by "Alt-fucking leftist goons" is zero.
Your double-standard is disgusting.
Your double-standard is disgusting.
What about yours Bob? You are all in favor of free speech but defend antifa and others who's goal is to end speech they don't like.
MAGA
If antifa starts murdering random innocent targets, I will condemn them just as harshly as your fascist White-supremacist friends who already do so.
But you won't condemn their violent action to suppress free speech? Violence as a political tool is terrorism. Anyone who uses violence for a political purpose should be charged with terrorism and jailed for a long time.
Antifa is not supressing free speech. Antifa is opposing fascists
Fascists are evil. Opposing fascists is good.
We sent a bunch of GIs to Europe and to the Pacific to fight fascists in WWII. Or as you might say, "to suppress those fascists' free speech".
Fascists are evil. Opposing fascists is good.
So you do support violence if it agrees with your political purpose. If that is an acceptable way of looking at violence then it must be ok for someone who agrees with those you oppose to use violence.
Don't you see the slippery slope you create when you don't oppose all political violence?
So you do support violence if it agrees with your political purpose.
Oh, like when the right salutes every gunning down of a black man by a cop?
Oh, like when the right salutes every gunning down of a black man by a cop?
EVERY ?
Care to link that ASSumption ?
I don't support political violence. Do you?
So you do support violence if it agrees with your political purpose.
That's the wrong question.
The right question is "Why are you defending fascists?"
The right question is "Why are you defending fascists?"
I am not. I am calling for prison terms for any who use violence as a political tool. You are the one defending violence as a political tool.
You are equating two groups. One occasionally commits terrorist murder. The other, less frequently commits assault. By treating the two equally, you are favorizing the terrorist murderers.
Why are you defending fascists?
You are defending violence as a political tool as long as you agree with those doing the violence.
I condemn any political violence. Why won't you?
AGAG*
*All Garbage Always Garbage
What garbage?
MAGA!
Complete military lock down......
Actually... no.
I happened to be in Watertown that day, a few hundred yards from the gunbattle there. I drove through the intersection just an hour earlier, and there was no sign of anything. We learned what had happened just minutes after it went down... because TV teams were very quick; we learned about it all through them.
We flew out of Logan a few hours later... on time.
Try these Bob....
Watertown, At gunpoint search...
The were going house to house.
And the militarization of the Boston police...
Just because you didn't see it doesn't mean it didn't happen.
You said "lock-down".
Didn't happen.
Period.
Look at the first image in the second video, the lockdown order was even posted on the highway info signs....
"a Shelter in Place order"? don't leave your location ending all citizen movement.
What is that but a lockdown?
Do you believe NPR? (National Public Radio broadcaster)
Boston Lockdown 'Extraordinary' But Prudent, Experts Say
How about the NY Times? (print)
Thoughts on the Boston Lockdown
How about Politico? (internet)
Boston lockdown: The new normal?
How about international? (Daily Mail UK)
Boston is on LOCKDOWN as the ENTIRE CITY told to stay indoors during manhunt for the second bombing suspect
Seems like the typical main liberal media knew what it was...
They posted about it EVERYWHERE
I guess you weren't paying attention, PERIOD!
I was THERE. A couple hundred yards from the intersection where most of the gunfire was exchanged. We did not see a single cop. THERE WAS NO LOCK DOWN.
Cops did a house to house search for the one who was eventually found in a boat, and recommended that people stay home until the guy was found... but THERE WAS NO LOCK DOWN.
Jeez! I was fuçking there!
Jeez! I was fuçking there!
Oh, but THAT doesn't count. The only thing that counts to that guy is what he thought he read or heard or was just made up by the rightwing echochamber.
Fuck your rightwing echo chamber.
All you want is a left wing one....
Which you just may well get....
Well then what you saw doesn't fit the the vivid video posted and bounced all over the world.
Like I said, just becsaue you didn't see it doesn't mean it didn't happen.
Or in the alternative is those vids taken from behind the window with the cops not knowing are frauds showing cops with automatic weapons rousting people out of their homes. the lockdown orders all over the freeways, the armored cars rolling down the streets..
You calling the left wing media that reported and showed this all over the world liars?
The Boston Lock down didn't happen cause BOB WAS THERE! (despite miles and miles of video that show it in real time)
Nowhere Man,
One last effort:
You said among other things, "military lock-down". I quoted only those three words from your post.
That did not happen.
The gunfight in Watertown occurred when the fleeing brothers thought a local cop was studying them. They opened fire. The cops - ordinary beat cops in their everyday uniforms, one of whom said in an interview that he had never before fired a gun except at a firing range - took cover behind their cruiser and returned fire.
After a while, the gunfire died down. When the SWAT team arrived, they checked the brothers' car. (The beat cops were told to just keep their heads down.) One dead in the car, the other missing.
The SWAT guys started going house-to-house. That's what cops do when hunting a fugitive murderer. That's your photo. I don't know who the guys hanging onto the truck are - maybe the SWAT arriving on scene.
The cops recommended that people stay inside. Duh! There was a fugitive terrorist murderer somewhere out there. But no order was given.
My point is that there was nothing "military" about what went down in Watertown. It was straightforward police operations, and very well done by guys who had never imagined being in such a situation.
... and that's my last post on this topic.
It would be interesting to see our alt-right friends observe an event in person, and then get a radically different repprt from. Fox News. I really don't know which they would believe.
So we can watch your alt left friends beat reporters?
Why won't you condemn all political violence?
Team A has committed thousands of terrorist murders. Murders of law-abiding folks who displeased the murderers.
Team B has never killed anyone. They conduct protests against murderous Team A, which sometimes get rough but which have never been fatal to anyone.
You are spending a great deal of time and effort condemning... Team B.
You are spending a great deal of time and effort trying to equate Team B (killed no one) with Team A (killed thousands).
Why are you defending fascists?
I condemn both A and B. Why can't you?
B is protesting against terrorists and murderers... and you condemn them equally with the terrorists and murderers.
Cool.
You have clearly identified youself.
I condemn terrorism to fight terrorism.
You justify it as long as it suits your political purpose.
You just spoke volumes!
"The issue has been a sensitive one since the Justice Department concluded that tactics used by police during 2014's violent street protest in Ferguson, Missouri inflamed tensions and created fear among demonstrators."
2014 was halfway through Obama's 2nd term. That means for most of Obama's tenure as President the police were allowed to have such protective gear as bullet proof vests & armored cars etc. The thing that changed it was when Obama's justice department under the radical Eric Holder started investigating Ferguson & the Michael Brown shooting. The investigation which was forced -with glaring evidence - to conclude that officer Darren Wilson probably acted in self defense. ( a grand jury also refused to indict him based on the evidence.) A bitter pill for Holder, who then was left with only a report that the Ferguson police seemed to disproportionately give more traffic tickets to minorities! (a sort of payback or maybe justification for Holders preconceived beliefs). None of which made much difference to the violent angry protesters, who were so violent it even required the National Guard being called up.
Fortunately the radicals are out of the White House and we can return to measures that will protect police officers and our citizens from the violence of the mob.
Wow, you are trying for a complete rewrite of history Comment removed for skirting the CoC. jwc2blue
trumps for the second amendment but just in case there is an uprising it appears he wants to arm the police as a second military force.. IF we ever do have a second civil war here in America, it will surely be a bloody one.
A second military force? That he can't command? That's just stupid.
" That he can't command? "
Who says ?
Ever hear of Martial law ? I'll bet that would give the president the authority.
In the United States, martial law has been instituted on the national level only once, during the Civil War, and on a regional level only once, during world war ii. Otherwise, it has been limited to the states. Uprisings, political protests, labor strikes, and riots have, at various times, caused several state governors to declare some measure of martial law.
Martial law on the national level may be declared by Congress or the president.
....................................................
A very bloody civil war ?
So you're pulling for the nazis, then.
That is not the status quo. Antifa has used 1 incident involving Nazis as a precedent for their shutting down any and all protests they disagree with. Antifa calls anyone with a different view a Nazi. In effect antifa is against free speech and freedom of thought. They are the ones using violence and the mainstream media have been noticeably silent & biased- that is what is going to make all this turn out badly
Generally speaking, the police ARE outgunned by the people they are supposed to be defending us against. It's also worth noting that police live in our neighborhoods, their children go to the same schools, they attend the same churches, shop at the same stores and so on. So before just going off the rails about how there could be possible martial law and so on with a better armed police force,, it's a solid reminder that the police are generally just like you and I, and are part of our communities as well. Although there are certainly no lack for tragic events surrounding the police, in the scheme of things, that represents a minute percentage of law enforcement agents, and non law enforcement with similar armaments represent a much greater threat to you and I.
Plus, National Guard gets called in for martial law, and there is no guarantee of such a personal connection with them as with the police. So you know....if you're gonna be stressed over that remote possibility, which will only come about because of extreme civil disorder or natural disaster, then maybe direct your fears in the appropriate direction instead.
APC, Humvees, and MRAPs are designed to keep the occupants safe no matter what the mission is, not just assaults.
My son rode in all 3, outside the wire many times in Afghan, he was never involved in an assault.
Ive seen them used in a variety of ways by law enforcement. Our last blizzard, the police used ours to take seniors to Dr appointments, pick up groceries and prescriptions. San Bernadino police used one to breach the building wall to evacuate occupants during the mass shooting there. Police in Texas have been using them for rescues all last week.
Many communities have a need for durable, high-clearance, all wheel drive vehicles when things go bad. Why not use something we taxpayers have already paid for?
"Ant ifa members are the violent advocates of a murderous ideology
That is why the FBI & DHS are calling antifa a terrorist organization:
"Previously unreported documents disclose that by April 2016 , authorities believed that “anarchist extremists” were the primary instigators of violence at public rallies against a range of targets . They were blamed by authorities for attacks on the police, government and political institutions, along with symbols of “the capitalist system,” racism, social injustice and fascism, according to a confidential 2016 joint intelligence assessment by DHS and the FBI."
Trump Reverses Obama Policy On Military Gear For Police
That doesn’t surprise me, when 2/3 tds of the public really doesn’t want you in power its best to make sure the parts who do are well armed.