The death of Michael Brown in Ferguson, MO is not a national issue. The news media wants it to be but it isn't. It is a local issue, albeit one that may be generalizable across most of the country.
The issue at hand for us, as Oklahomans (just read on and substitute with your neck of the woods if applicable) is an increasingly militarized police presence. Communities all over the country, like Ferguson, are looking more occupied than protected.
For those of you that believe that we are overreacting and that police need military grade vehicles and weapons to patrol the streets, I would say two things. First, travel to various countries and look at the policing style of those countries. Would you rather live in a place that the police force looks more like France or Afghanistan? Second, when police act like the military, they do so to promote fear, not protection. Police in camouflage is intimidating to almost anyone. What happened to protect and serve?
I would also like to say that the criticism is not just coming from pinko-commie-leftists like myself. Here I've linked to an editorial of a former marine explaining some of the real problems of an increased presence of weapons of war in the hands of Americas peacekeepers.
AP Photo/Jeff Roberson
The police in Ferguson in camo, holding assault rifles (see last post, even I admit that there are more powerful weaponry out there, the only reason to use this style is intimidation), riding the streets of America in the same vehicle we use in Afghanistan to search for IEVs. They are using tear gas grenades, stun grenades, pepper bullets, rubber bullets, bean bag munitions from shotguns, propelled baton munitions (basically blocks of wood shot from a grenade launcher), noise pollution, etc to attack (yes, I believe I chose this word correctly) mostly unarmed civilians. Rubin makes a great point in his editorial: no one should point a gun at someone that they don't intend to shoot.
Police use something called a "Use-of-force-continuum." It basically outlines what force to use based on the force of the suspect. From what I understand, police use the adequate force necessary and no more (I believe it is often force of suspect +1). I asked a peace officer in my office to comment briefly but he did not want to even off record due to this being published. Listed here is an example of continuum of force. I don't see point assault rifles at unarmed men because they are jaywalking on there. Maybe I missed it.
This is a great (and hilarious) commentary on the absurdity of this situation. "If they want to blend in with their surroundings, they should be dressed as a dollar store."
As I said, the above is a rant against a policy that terrifies me and one that is only tangentially related to the OKGoobernation. Or is it?
Mary Fallin and Jim Inhofe recently released a press statement (on August 14,2014) praising the return of Department of Defense 1033 program grants for former military vehicles on our streets. The press release touts the benefits for wildfire relief and fire departments across the state. Maybe we should take this at face value and believe that these vehicles are only going to be used for fire departments but I have personally seen some of these SWAT command centers on the streets in Tulsa and have no wool over my eyes. These vehicles will be used to militarize our police if the governor gets her way.
I was unable to find any information on Dorman's stance, so I cannot comment for him on how he feels about this subject. I have reached out to both camps and if they release a statement to me, I will update the blog with it.
-----
This is my letter to Fallin's office:
I am a Democrat, however, I am currently undecided on who I am going to vote for. As a school project, I am running a blog on the issues that Oklahomans are facing and how they should vote.
At this time, I am covering the increasingly militarized police force in Oklahoma. I have read a press release release issued from your office on August 14th, 2014 praising the reinstatement of grants to receive military equipment in Oklahoma "for firefighters." Will this equipment be used to militarize our State's police force? Do you believe that there is a problem with militarizing police forces? What will you do in regards to this issue if you are elected governor for another term?
Thanks for your time.
Michael Livingston
-----
And to Dorman:
Hello, my name is Michael Livingston. I am a graduate student at OU in the Public Administration Program (political science). I am also a State employee.
I am a Democrat, however, I am currently undecided on who I am going to vote for.
As a school project, I am running a blog on the issues that Oklahomans are facing and how they should vote. At this time, I am covering the increasingly militarized police force in Oklahoma. I have read a press release release issued from Governor Fallin's on August 14th, 2014 praising the reinstatement of grants to receive military equipment in Oklahoma "for firefighters." Do you believe this equipment will be used to militarize our State's police force? Do you believe that there is a problem with militarizing police forces? What will you do in regards to this issue if you are elected governor?
Thanks for your time.
Michael Livingston
-----
Thanks for reading folks. As usual, please comment below if you'd like and take the conversation to the Facebook group to chat with more Okies about this and other issues.
I was definitely thinking about this episode of John Oliver as I read this post so I was really happy to see that you included it. To me, the "use-of-force-continuum" just sounds like "use your own discretion and we'll take your word for it because we don't actually know what use-of-force-continuum means," which would be fine (or not) if the police didn't have armored trucks and tear gas grenades.
ReplyDeleteReading Michael Livingston’s article “Michael Brown’s death, thought tragic, is not the national lesson we need to learn from Ferguson, MO” and watching the video “Last Week Tonight with John Oliver: Ferguson, MO and Police Militarization (HBO)”, somewhat embarrassed me, and honestly rather enraged me, because I am in the U.S. Army. The big picture here is that an unarmed African American teen posing no threat was shot and killed by police for an unknown reason. Many people are upset by the incident, and the media is trying to make it a national issue. The almost all white police force of Ferguson, MO has had a lot of racial tension lately with its 66%+ African American population, and this is seen as the big deal. However, racial tension isn’t the real problem. The real problem is the police force, the people who are to serve and protect people in the community, the ones who are supposed to make citizens feel safe when they sleep at night, when they go out to eat, and when they go to the park with their families, but instead they turned themselves into their own enemies. As John Oliver states in one of his other videos titled Civil Forfeiture “Public trust in the police is one of the most vital elements in a civilized society.”
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, you’re not soldiers, so quit pretending. John Oliver says “Dress for the job you have, not the job you want”, and I couldn’t agree more. You don’t need to walk around your town in “full battle rattle”. You don’t need to walk around town playing dress up thinking you’re cool and better then everyone else, “look at me I’m in full camo, a gas mask, ACH (Advanced Combat Helmet), IOTV (Improved Outer Tactical Vest), a giant armored vehicle, and waving my assault rifle in your face, I’m such a bad ass”. No that’s what soldiers wear when they go into combat, when everything around them wants them dead, so when the bomb that looks like a piece of trash on the ground explodes in their face their families don’t get a knock on their door.
It seems like Ferguson police are treating the citizens of Ferguson like trash to begin with, then walking around the streets with a big weapon in their faces when they’ve done nothing wrong makes them scared. That isn’t even something you do in the military. In the military, you’re trained not to use escalation of force, and you only point your weapon at somebody if your intentions are to pull the trigger. You aren’t serving and protecting at this point, you’re being a dick and trying to assert authority that you don’t have, and you’re only escalating the problem, making people not like you, yet you’re still confused why the citizens are upset...? Really?
There are certain ways situations should be handled, and I don’t see how any of what Ferguson police have done has helped in any way. You can try to blame the chaos on racial tensions, but the problem is more than that. Police are supposed to be out friend not our enemy, so acting as a threat isn’t the way to go if you want to solve any problems.