If the police within the US is expected to resort to the use of these arms and equipment, doesn't it say something troublesome about the relationship between laypeople and the authorities? It appears that the lack of trust and the imbalance of power would be increased. Besides I find the large amount of missing weapons due to the program a real problem (it was documented that some officer sold his weapons on ebay, and some police departments auctioned off the military weapons)
Conspiracy theories aside, the bigger problem is that this moves away entirely from the real function of our police forces: to protect local populations from criminals and enforce laws.
If they would return to their stated function, they wouldn't have any need for these paramilitary armaments.
"Taxpayer money should not have to support the costs of maintaining the weapons of war that local police forces have acquired. Citizens deserve to know that their congressional leaders and law enforcement officers are working together to protect them — not recklessly engaging in a gluttonous arms race or irresponsibly losing dangerous weapons."
I agree. It's really disturbing how America is becoming such a police state.
I don't believe giving these paramilitary weapons to the police is the best option, but I do believe something has to be done with these weapons. Even if there is a large cost associated with maintaining these weapons, it may prove useful to have some sort of maintenance program.
I agree with Rasheed. Police forces are not suppose to function like soldiers in the war; there is a clear distinction between them. Giving arms to police forces doesn't fit with the purpose of the police forces. Police are suppose to make people safe. Giving arms in such a way will only create fear in general public not just for criminals.
I agree with Utsav. It makes the role of the police questionable and blurs the line between what makes a police officer and a soldier. If such a change is expected, I think that the roles of both should be redefined.
It is true that the militarization of police forces can lead to political concerns and abuse of power. The militarization of police forces have allowed countries ruled by authoritarian regimes to suppress public protests.
On the other hand, giving superior firepower to police forces can create a greater deterrence to criminals and protect the lives' of the officers and civilians. There are countless cases of the police being involved in shootouts with criminals that had superior firepower.
I believe militarization of the police is reasonable. There just needs to be proper training and effective regulations to limit the use of excessive violence and abuse of power.
This makes me feel uncomfortable that police are getting more deadly and powerful weapons. However, so are street gangs so I can see how police gaining access to these weapons might be actually for the greater good.
If the police within the US is expected to resort to the use of these arms and equipment, doesn't it say something troublesome about the relationship between laypeople and the authorities? It appears that the lack of trust and the imbalance of power would be increased. Besides I find the large amount of missing weapons due to the program a real problem (it was documented that some officer sold his weapons on ebay, and some police departments auctioned off the military weapons)
ReplyDeleteConspiracy theories aside, the bigger problem is that this moves away entirely from the real function of our police forces: to protect local populations from criminals and enforce laws.
ReplyDeleteIf they would return to their stated function, they wouldn't have any need for these paramilitary armaments.
"Taxpayer money should not have to support the costs of maintaining the weapons of war that local police forces have acquired. Citizens deserve to know that their congressional leaders and law enforcement officers are working together to protect them — not recklessly engaging in a gluttonous arms race or irresponsibly losing dangerous weapons."
ReplyDeleteI agree. It's really disturbing how America is becoming such a police state.
I don't believe giving these paramilitary weapons to the police is the best option, but I do believe something has to be done with these weapons. Even if there is a large cost associated with maintaining these weapons, it may prove useful to have some sort of maintenance program.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Rasheed. Police forces are not suppose to function like soldiers in the war; there is a clear distinction between them. Giving arms to police forces doesn't fit with the purpose of the police forces. Police are suppose to make people safe. Giving arms in such a way will only create fear in general public not just for criminals.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Utsav. It makes the role of the police questionable and blurs the line between what makes a police officer and a soldier. If such a change is expected, I think that the roles of both should be redefined.
ReplyDeleteIt is true that the militarization of police forces can lead to political concerns and abuse of power. The militarization of police forces have allowed countries ruled by authoritarian regimes to suppress public protests.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, giving superior firepower to police forces can create a greater deterrence to criminals and protect the lives' of the officers and civilians. There are countless cases of the police being involved in shootouts with criminals that had superior firepower.
I believe militarization of the police is reasonable. There just needs to be proper training and effective regulations to limit the use of excessive violence and abuse of power.
This makes me feel uncomfortable that police are getting more deadly and powerful weapons. However, so are street gangs so I can see how police gaining access to these weapons might be actually for the greater good.
ReplyDelete