ANALYSIS/OPINION:
President Donald Trump has announced that police may indeed scarf up surplus military equipment for local community law enforcement uses — a reversal of restrictions put in place by Barack Obama back in 2015.
This isn’t, as the saying goes, necessarily cause for cheer.
As much as America ought to be rejoicing at the pro-police atmosphere ushered in by Trump — a stark contrast to the very anti-police tone struck by the previous administration — the fact is: Unfettered access of U.S. military gear by military cops carries several “what ifs.”
Here’s one.
What if police, outfitted with military style gear, abuse their positions and power?
Another: What if police, dressed for military battle and ready to hit the streets to fight drug crime, forget the difference between the UCMJ — the Uniform Code of Military Justice — and the U.S. Constitution? The two are not interchangeable; the first guides military justice and doesn’t necessarily include all the individual rights spelled in the Constitution.
What if police, the protectors of the civilian world, begin to dress and act more like standing military forces than community servants of the people?
Police, of course, say these are nonsensical arguments because officer safety is of paramount importance. They say their number one goal is for each and every on-duty officer to return home, safely and soundly, to families and loved ones each shift change.
Well, that’s a worthy goal, and one, truly, all law and order types want achieved. But more to truth, the number one goal of police is to protect the innocent citizens of the communities they patrol — not save themselves.
In fact, that’s what police pledge when they sign the dotted line, so to speak — to serve and protect the civilians, not serve and protect themselves. Again, that’s not to say police don’t deserve the best in terms of shielding themselves from harm while performing their duties.
But it is to say that, truthfully speaking, their volunteered service requires they put others first. It’s part of the job. Those who don’t accept that and act accordingly aren’t properly performing their duties.
And here’s the thing: Acknowledging that truth shifts the discussion of military equipment slightly so that the top priority isn’t one of protecting police, but rather one of protecting police in a manner that doesn’t cause harm to the civilians the cops are sworn to protect at all costs.
That goes for constitutional harm, not just physical.
But police also argue that today’s modern officer needs equipment that can fend off and fight today’s modern criminal.
It’s the line of thought that says you can’t bring a cupcake to a gun fight. You can’t expect plastic shields to simply ricochet away the Molotov cocktails and AR-15 bullets of today’s gang members. For that, mine-resistance ambush protected vehicles, MRAPs, are needed.
Well, that’s common sense.
But here’s what’s not: Do police really need to ride the MRAPs for each and every drug warrant they seek to serve? Do they need to send in the armored vehicles for each and every protest gathering they are tasked to attend?
Do they even need, say, grenade launchers — or worse, tools of the military sniper trade, like silencers?
Riot response is one thing. Violent protests in the streets is another.
But the problem with transferring military gear to police is that it won’t just sit idly in a closet or shop, waiting for riot times. Police will have to train on it — use it, become accustomed to it, comfortable with it. And soon enough, these types of equipment will become just tools of the regular policing trade.
Let’s remember: Police are not soldiers. They are not shoot-to-kill warriors; they are not shoot-first-ask-questions-later fighting forces. They are servants of the people, protectors of the civilians, upholders of law and order and constitutional rights. And while blue live do indeed matter — very much so — the question has to be asked: Do they matter more than everything? Local governments with authority over local police departments need to consider the rules of engagement for cops to use this 1033 gear. And if their local policies don’t already specify, these government entities to should make clear police aren’t to play with the equipment — they’re only to pull it out for limited training and special terror-tied or crime-fighting occasions. In other words: Let’s keep the MRAPs under community wraps, except in the most dangerous and dire of times.
• Cheryl Chumley is author of “Police State USA: How Orwell’s Nightmare Is Becoming Our Reality,” and has written extensively on the rise of government encroachments in the name of safety and security.
