Log in

View Full Version : (USA) Police Union Responds to Obama's Planned Restrictions to Military Equipment



Sewer Socialist
18th May 2015, 19:26
Police union accuses White House of politicizing cop safety

Obama administration has announced plan to restrict police forces’ access to military gear.


By Sarah Wheaton (http://www.politico.com/reporters/SarahWheaton.html) and Ben Schreckinger (http://www.politico.com/reporters/BenSchreckinger.html)
5/18/15 6:00 AM EDT
Updated 5/18/15 1:46 PM EDT



The nation’s largest police union is fighting back against a White House plan to restrict local police forces’ ability to acquire military-style gear, accusing President Barack Obama’s task force of politicizing officers’ safety.


The White House on Monday announced that bayonets, weaponized vehicles and grenade launchers will no longer be available to local police and that other equipment such as riot gear and other types of armored vehicles would be subject to a more onerous approval process.




The move came alongside the release of broader recommendations (http://www.cops.usdoj.gov/pdf/taskforce/TaskForce_FinalReport.pdf) for “21st-Century Policing” and is part of the Obama administration’s response to a series of deaths of unarmed black men at the hands of police that has provoked a national debate about the relationship between police forces and the communities they serve.

James Pasco, executive director of the Fraternal Order of Police, told POLITICO on Monday that he hopes to have a White House meeting as soon as Tuesday to discuss his concerns about how the plans could put cops at risk.


“The FOP is the most aggressive law enforcement advocacy group in Washington, and we will be at our most aggressive in asserting the need for officer safety and officer rights in any police changes that are to be effected,” Pasco said.


He said in particular he objects to a measure that would require police departments to get permission from city governments to acquire certain equipment, including riot batons, helmets and shields, through federal programs.

“We need to only look back to Baltimore to see what happens when officers are sent out ill-equipped in a disturbance situation,” he said. “Because you don’t like the optics, you can’t send police officers out to be hurt or killed.”
The sharp response from the FOP illustrates the challenging balance Obama must strike in reforming law enforcement forces across the nation.


In recent days, Obama and his attorney general, Loretta Lynch, have taken care to honor fallen officers, while also being responsive to communities still simmering over a series of incidents of police brutality, including in Baltimore last month when 25-year-old Freddie Gray died after suffering severe injuries while in police custody.


Obama’s allies on Monday rallied around the administration’s reform plan.

Missouri Sen. Claire McCaskill called the effort “a step in the right direction,” touting the similarities between the White House’s plan and the Democrat’s own Protecting Communities and Police Act.


“The White House working group recognized what we did — that this federal equipment and funding saves lives, but that these programs are in need of reform,” the former prosecutor said in a statement. “This is another step in the direction of needed change to better protect both police officers, and the communities those officers serve.”


But Obama himself has acknowledged the limitations of his reach in reforming local police forces.


“The challenge for us as the federal government is, is that we don’t run these police forces,” Obama said last month at a Rose Garden news conference. “I can’t federalize every police force in the country and force them to retrain. But what I can do is to start working with them collaboratively so that they can begin this process of change themselves.”

The militarization of police has been seen as one area where the federal government could have some say.


The images of police in armored vehicles and camouflage uniforms confronting protesters in Ferguson, Missouri, last summer brought new scrutiny to federal programs that transfer military gear to local law enforcement officials. The outcry came not only from the traditional civil rights movement, but also Republicans like Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and Rep. Raúl Labrador (R-Idaho). Now, the Obama administration is making that camo off-limits for urban departments, and local cops will have to make the case that they really need those armored vehicles going forward.


The White House is also gearing up to temper the scenes of chaos in Ferguson and Baltimore with its plan for more dialogue and data. Obama on Monday is visiting the county police headquarters in Camden, New Jersey, — a role model of improved relations. His Cabinet will then fan out across the country during the next few weeks to highlight other success stories, and Lynch will start her own Community Policing tour in Cincinnati.
http://images.politico.com/global/2015/05/09/150507_jim_pasco_web2_1160_msm.jpg
James Pasco, the executive director of the Fraternal Order of Police, said he hopes to have a White House meeting as soon as Tuesday to discuss his concerns about how the plans could put cops at risk. | M. Scott Mahaskey


A variety of federal programs had offered local police ways to get surplus military equipment or use federal funds to buy their own. The events in Ferguson, which had been a simmering concern for civil rights advocates, helped bring the issue into the mainstream, and Obama asked the departments of Justice, Defense and Homeland Security to reexamine the programs.


What they found were “no consistent standards” for local police who wanted this equipment, said Domestic Policy Council Director Cecilia Muñoz in a call with reporters Sunday. She added, “There wasn’t a single federal strategy.”


The ban on certain items — including tracked armored vehicles and firearms higher than .50 caliber — goes into effect immediately.

But local agencies can still acquire a list of “controlled items” — things like drones, Humvees and stun grenades known as “flash bangs” — if they meet an extensive set of new rules. Those will be phased in more gradually to let small departments catch up, Muñoz said.
Under the new standards, local police departments have to get sign-off from a civilian governing body, like a city council, and provide a “clear and persuasive explanation” for why the controlled equipment is necessary.


They also have to commit to training officers on community and constitutional policing approaches, as well as collect data on when the equipment is used for a “significant incident.”
Data collection is a major element of broader administration recommendations on 21st-century policing, also released Monday.

A dozen cities have agreed to share data with academic-data scientists to help develop a sort of early warning system that would “[home] in on problems before they manifest themselves in the community,” Muñoz said. During his visit on Monday, Obama plans to visit Camden’s Real-Time Tactical Operational Intelligence Center and greet a group of volunteer tech experts who’ll spend a few days helping Camden shore up its internal data system.


The administration is also planning “hackathons” and other efforts to help agencies make the data accessible to their communities through visualizations and mappings.


The task force’s report centers on six broad areas—or “pillars”—for improvement: building trust and legitimacy, policy and oversight, technology and social media, community policing and crime reduction, training and education, and officer wellness and safety.
The report’s many recommendations include encouraging agencies to maintain transparency with regard to policies on use of force, as well as encouraging independent and external reviews of cases where police force results in death.


It also recommended that law enforcement agencies should promote safety and wellness at every level, as well as recommending the Justice Department encourage and help local police implement “scientifically supported shift lengths.”


The police slayings of an unarmed teenager in Ferguson and a fleeing man in North Charleston, South Carolina, have sparked calls for another sort of police equipment: body cameras. Obama’s task force has been reluctant (http://www.politico.com/story/2015/03/policing-task-force-calls-for-de-escalation-training-115658.html) to take a firm stand on them, noting potential privacy issues. But the Justice Department took a step toward fostering broader adoption Monday with a new online clearinghouse (https://www.bja.gov/bwc/) of information on the latest policies and research geared toward local agencies.


DOJ also announced $163 million in grants available to help local police departments implement the community policing recommendations, to be awarded in the fall.


Nick Gass contributed to this report.

Sewer Socialist
18th May 2015, 19:33
The referenced report is available at: http://www.cops.usdoj.gov/pdf/taskforce/TaskForce_FinalReport.pdf

Anyway, in light of all the recent deaths at the hands of the police, and all the civil unrest IN DIRECT RESPONSE TO THE POLICE'S LETHALITY, they insist their primary concern is for "officer safety", and insist on their need for, and their right to, armored troop carriers, grenade launchers, bayonets, etc?

...Whoops, sorry, didn't notice that I forgot to include a link to the original: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/05/white-house-limiting-military-equipment-for-police-118041.html

Armchair Partisan
19th May 2015, 10:28
I agree tbh, we should let the policemen use grenade launchers and tanks for the sake of officers' safety. In turn, we should also let the protesters use grenade launchers and tanks for the sake of protesters' safety. It's only fair, after all, they're all humans, aren't they?


“The challenge for us as the federal government is, is that we don’t run these police forces,” Obama said last month at a Rose Garden news conference. “I can’t federalize every police force in the country and force them to retrain. But what I can do is to start working with them collaboratively so that they can begin this process of change themselves.”

Once again, Obama is the great pacifier who is ever so compassionate to the plight of the working class while not actually doing anything in the end. The police won't disarm themselves out of the kindness of their hearts, and anything that isn't a direct federal-level prohibition is just a PR move.

toothpick
19th May 2015, 12:56
There is a video on youtube where Rand Paul is questioning the bayonets. Very entertaining :laugh:

Ele'ill
19th May 2015, 14:47
how will denying the police military equipment stop people from being beaten to death, shot with their handguns, etc..

Sewer Socialist
19th May 2015, 15:45
It won't. But hearing the FOP's response is disgusting. To me, anyway.

A Revolutionary Tool
19th May 2015, 18:56
The worst part of this story is when they're talking about using Camden's new technology to police communities. It's just cameras on every corner with some people watching you at the station and where they can monitor you. Pretty scary stuff they can do with modern technology.

John Nada
20th May 2015, 04:04
The pig "union" is probably more pissed about the report's essentially recommending Fordism to manage the police. It's still got that COIN shit, but with modern business management added. Those body-cams are part of this effort to observe their behavior and modify it accordingly, just like those cameras you might see at work(they're not just to catch you stealing or smoking weed). Hell, those six pillars seem to be based on the six forces model (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six_forces_model).

Bala Perdida
20th May 2015, 07:26
I sense a police strike approaching. If it doesn't work for them, I'm sure it'll work for someone.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ewk_GSYP13g

MarcusJuniusBrutus
20th May 2015, 08:59
If the FOP had its way, there would be CCTV cameras in every home and a drug test for everyone every day. These people are basically school yard bullies and control freaks who want new toys to play with. And usually when there is a "riot" it was caused by the cops attacking protesters.

mushroompizza
23rd May 2015, 15:05
Fucking hate the police, not cops though.
Its like how I hate dictatorship but not dictators. The institution is stupid but some people in power are nice (exp: Gorbachev is now just a sweet old guy living in Russia)

Bala Perdida
23rd May 2015, 15:14
Fucking hate the police, not cops though.
Its like how I hate dictatorship but not dictators. The institution is stupid but some people in power are nice (exp: Gorbachev is now just a sweet old guy living in Russia)There are so many things wrong with what you just said.

What the hell is the logic behind hating an institution, but not holding the ones who perpetuate it responsible?

mushroompizza
23rd May 2015, 15:29
Ok I see what you are saying. Its like schools, I dont like how they are run but there are some genuinely nice teachers even though they work for a terrible system.

Bala Perdida
23rd May 2015, 19:50
Ok I see what you are saying. Its like schools, I dont like how they are run but there are some genuinely nice teachers even though they work for a terrible system.There is a big difference between being paid to bore students to death, and being paid to beat people to death. The schooling system effectively breeds apathy and disinterest, and the police breeds brutality and bigotry. Even if they are 'nice people' they should be opposed because of their direct participation to aid the state. I've never been able to develop a good relationship with teachers, because they treated my friends like trash. I've never liked cops because they've treated me like trash. Even if they 'don't like the rules, just enforce them' they are still responsible for perpetuating the problem. The conditions are bad because the law is enforced, not because it's written down. I got more, but I gotta leave.

Q
23rd May 2015, 21:24
To some who merely see the police as "workers in uniform": This is what that results into, dear comrades.

Fire
26th May 2015, 10:42
It was my understanding that the restrictions were extremely narrow and excluded almost everything people were complaining about like those stupid useless MRAPs.

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/may/22/obama-ban-police-military-gear-falls-short

Obama ban on police military gear falls short as critics say it's a 'publicity stunt'
Six of the seven items on ‘prohibited list’ have not been distributed to law enforcement for years and skeptics question whether rules will be enforced

It has become an emblematic image of police militarization: a half-dozen heavily outfitted officers, assault rifles drawn, advancing on an African American man in a T-shirt with his hands way up.

The police – photographed in Ferguson, Missouri, last summer – are wearing helmets and goggles and knee pads and gas masks. The man is wearing a cap from Cabela’s, the outdoors store.

The picture would seem to epitomize the kind of “wrong message” Barack Obama denounced this week in unveiling new rules to ban “equipment made for the battlefield” from the arsenals of local police forces.

“We’ve seen how militarized gear can sometimes give people a feeling like there’s an occupying force,” the president said. “So we’re going to prohibit some equipment made for the battlefield that is not appropriate for local police departments.”

Yet none of the equipment in the picture, apart from the camouflage uniforms, is mentioned in the new prohibitions. And interviews with government officials and experts suggest the new White House guidelines could fall miserably short of preventing scenes of police outfitted in military gear facing off with unarmed protesters in places like Ferguson, Baltimore, New York and beyond.

Professor Peter Kraska of the Eastern Kentucky University school of justice studies called the White House rollout of its new rules on Monday a “publicity stunt”.

“Basically we had a big announcement that there would be restrictions,” Kraska told the Guardian. “It talked about armored personnel carriers. Lots of the media reported it, verbatim of course, the talking points.

“But all you had to do was barely scratch under the surface – and it’s nothing more than symbolic politics.”

Critics of the new White House guidelines say that the list of prohibited gear is far too brief, and question whether the federal bureaucracy will be up to enforcing rules requiring local agencies to complete training and demonstrate compliance before they are permitted federal dollars to buy certain gear.

The list of prohibited equipment includes seven items: tracked armored vehicles; weaponized aircraft, vessels, and vehicles of any kind; firearms of .50‐caliber or higher; ammunition of .50‐caliber or higher; grenade launchers; bayonets; and camouflage uniforms.

Not on the list are some of the most intimidating items in police arsenals: modified M-16 assault rifles, Humvees, helicopters, night-vision goggles, mine-resistant ambush-protected vehicles (MRAPs), BearCat vehicles, military-style helmets, shin guards, shields – and on.

Of the seven items on the “prohibited equipment list”, six have not been distributed to local law enforcement agencies by the Pentagon for years, according to defense department spokesman Mark Wright.

“The only one that we were still issuing at this time were the bayonets,” said Wright, noting that the blades were not typically used as bayonets attached to rifles, that he knew of, but as “big, sturdy knives”.

“So that’s the immediate effect of the program.”

Invader Zim
26th May 2015, 11:02
To some who merely see the police as "workers in uniform": This is what that results into, dear comrades.

Is there something missing, like a picture?