Trump Rolls Back Ban On Transfer Of Military Equipment To Law Enforcement Agencies
from the police-statesmanship dept
As part of his ongoing effort to reverse everything President Obama ever did, President Trump will be rolling back the previous administration's 1033 program ban. The program allowed local law enforcement agencies to help themselves to Defense Department equipment -- often paid for with federal grants -- as long as they said the magic words (terrorism/drugs) on the application.
Attorney General Jeff Sessions, who led the campaign for the program's reinstatement, outlined the President Trump's new executive order Monday in an address at the annual meeting of the Fraternal Order of Police, the nation's largest police union.
The administration's action, first disclosed by USA TODAY, would restore "the full scope of a longstanding program for recycling surplus, lifesaving gear from the Department of Defense, along with restoring the full scope of grants used to purchase this type of equipment from other sources,'' according to a administration summary of the new program recently circulated to some law enforcement groups.
"Assets that would otherwise be scrapped can be re-purposed to help state, local and tribal law enforcement better protect public safety and reduce crime."
Attorney General Sessions loves rolling things back. This will give police departments access to mine-resistant vehicles, grenade launchers, and firearms, which should "assist" them in fighting the Drug War 1980s-style and/or pitching in with ICE's efforts to pitch migrants back over the wall Trump can't seem to get built.
This is prime law-and-order stuff. Trump has made it clear law enforcement is on the right side of history. Everyone who doubts or criticizes cops is simply wrong. A ban put in place as a reaction to militarized police responses is being reversed because no one up top cares how police are perceived. AG Sessions has already killed off federal civil rights investigations of local law enforcement agencies. Now, police will find it easier than ever to dude up as war-fighters, rather than easily-identifiable public servants.
As Radley Balko pointed out on Twitter, Obama's rollback didn't put a huge dent in military gear acquisitions. But it did attempt to head off further development of law enforcement's "us vs. them" mentality by making it a bit more difficult to look and act like an occupying force, rather than law enforcement agencies. Balko notes plenty of gear can still be obtained from other sources, like the DHS, state agencies, and donations. But the ultimate point of the ban was to reduce the gap between public servants and the people they serve -- something explicitly noted by Obama's law enforcement guidance task force.
The Task Force on 21st Century Policing, chaired by former Philadelphia Police Commissioner Charles Ramsey and Laurie Robinson, a former assistant attorney general, called on law enforcement officials to "minimize the appearance of a military operation'' when policing mass demonstrations.
"Avoid using provocative tactics and equipment that undermine civilian trust," the task force urged.
The previously-banned equipment also included tracked armored vehicles, bayonets and grenade launchers.
Trump's ban reversal sends the opposite message. Combined with his public statements, proclamations, and executive orders, the future of policing will make cities and towns feel like occupied territory and turn citizens into civilians.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: 1033, doj, donald trump, jeff sessions, militarized police, military surplus, police
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Out of sight out of mind
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Out of sight out of mind
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Out of sight out of mind
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Sure, during the campaign, Trump repeatedly urged the roughing up of protesters. You know, back when he was still expected to "act more presidential" once the primaries were over.
And sure, a month ago he encouraged police to rough up suspects and not worry about injuring them. And followed it up by declaring that Nazis are "just a side." And now he's sending more military equipment to the police.
That may seem bad, but I for one take the optimistic view: The President of the United States is a stupid, childish nutjob whose insecurity won't let him allow anything Obama did to stand. This is about rolling back another of Obama's executive orders.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Stupidity may not be evil itself, but it enables it while putting up a scapegoat as well. This is G.W.B. on steroids.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
I stand corrected.
I also have a recommendation for Trump's final words as President:
"The Aristocrats!"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
At least he would kill that “joke” once and for all.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The day he was elected was a sad day.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It seems to me that people have forgotten the difference between Nationalism and Patriotism. Patriotism is supporting what a country (supposedly) stands for, whereas Nationalism is supporting what a country actually does, whether that is in agreement with its ideals or not.
i.e. "Dissent is patriotic" vs "Support the President no matter what."
"Law and Order" is at a similar crossroads right now. The Order part can be easy, but you have to erode the foundations of the Law to do it that way. The harder, long-term way to support Order (peace and stability) is to increase respect for the Law. The President is taking shortcuts here, at the expense of the citizenry.
If one wanted to actually restore Law and Order (in a literal sense) they must first restore Order to the Law.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
My country, right or wrong—if right, to be kept right; if wrong, to be set right.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
That goes both ways.
s/Democrats/Republicans/g
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Part of the restrictions put in place by Obama included a ban on camoflauge and the requirement that police paint vehicles with a non-military color. These restrictions existed, in part, so police officers could change their mindset from “soldiers in a war zone” to something far less militaristic.
Trump reversed these restrictions because Obama put them in place, that much I know. What worries me: He might have done it for a far more sinister reason—even if he believes turning police departments into paramilitary groups is what the United States “needs” to preserve “law and order”.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The Middle-class will either join them or get kicked down in the dirt with the plebs.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
https://twitter.com/DineshDSouza/status/902144656015671297
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Last time I checked, anti-fascist groups have not adopted vehicular homicide as part of their tactics.
Who killed Heather Heyer, again?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Amirite?
Lemme guess...poor snowflake was a-scared?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Their tactics will bring about things they are against. Have fun with that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No. You don't get to punch Nazis.
Forget about Nazis. Political violence is the thing that everyone should be denouncing rather than embracing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: No. You don't get to punch Nazis.
Antifa wouldn't exist if Nazis didn't exist, but they're not as organised as Nazis. The problem, then, isn't $group, it's the underlying ideologies. Sort that out.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mispec? That's funny.
You're probably better off with the equipment that is NOT milspec. Most of the civilian stuff is better. Even actual soldiers and marines buy the better civilian stuff when necessary (and possible).
Even Cher was getting in on this act at one point.
It's not just "bad optics". It's unnecessary.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Posse Comitatus Act
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
.50 cal. weapons. The police were not getting machine guns, but .50 caliber anti-sniper rifles. Sniper scopes (which make shooting more accurate, we want less accurate shooting? Bayonets, which the military doesn't use anymore. Grenade launchers, which police use to shoot tear gas/smoke. Camouflage utilities, which I guess look much worse than black uniforms.
I guess the optics look bad, but the issue is not what cops carry but what they do with them. Then again, politicians always look to do things that look good but don't really do anything.
Banning military equipment won't make anything better if cops still have the mindset that they can do anything they want and the use of overwhelming force is the 1st thing they think of.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
* Tracked vehicles - i.e., tanks and tank-style armored personnel carriers, et cetera.
* Grenade launchers.
* Bayonets.
The other things which were banned by the order reportedly included things like armed aircraft, but also reportedly no police force in America had ever obtained such a thing through the 1033 program. Other things - such as camouflage gear - reportedly were not covered by the prohibition.
If that's not the case, I'd be interested to see citations, if only so that I can be sure I understand the facts accurately.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The law is for thee
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The law is for thee
That is the problem with allowing presidents to do this, yeah, it is great when your guy or gal is in the White House, but when the elections turn, you get something you really don't like.
Too bad, the law of the land should be the law of the land. If you don't like the law, work to change it, ignoring it doesn't work.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Contractor police
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Contractor police
Don't complain, this is the future you chose.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Contractor police
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Combat Patrol in Podunk USA
Trump's ban reversal sends the opposite message. Combined with his public statements, proclamations, and executive orders, the future of policing will make cities and towns feel like occupied territory and turn citizens into civilians.
How does the US governments 1033 program (ie military gear for local police) benefit the average citizen?
What need is there for local police departments to be issued military weapons, military comm-gear (eg Stingray/DRT box) and armored personal carriers?
If the local police would like to play army they can enlist in the military.
Police officers should reflect the community they patrol and thus be attired appropriately as professional law enforcement officers not geared up as soldiers on combat patrol militarily occupying a foreign nation in constant fear for their lives with itchy trigger-fingers.
When you dress like a police officer you act like a police officer.
When you dress like a soldier on combat patrol you act like a soldier on combat patrol.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Combat Patrol in Podunk USA
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
At least some military trucks can handle 4' deep water in Houston
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Fhew!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Would you like to know more?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Where have you been?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
You can stay in your gated community with your private police and feel safe, but there are places that really depend on the police, not that you keyboard justice warriors would know about.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Oh really?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Oh really?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Just follow the fucking Constitution. I am conservative, but if the Constitution is followed, everything works.
That means cops have to stop fucking up with minorities. That means the NSA/FBI/LEO's have to stop their illegal surveillance.
That means that antifa is prosecuted for their actions (although if you start following the Constitution I think they start to go away.
That means that bigots stop illegal activities.
We have a document that is sort of old, but if followed, stops a lot of problems. Why don't we try that?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
That means cops have to stop fucking up with minorities. That means the NSA/FBI/LEO's have to stop their illegal surveillance.
And what happens when the above doesn't happen? Are the "liberals", the "gated", the "keyboard warriors" still to blame as you are doing so?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Ah, you get it. Good.
RE: gated communities, few of us can afford to live in those. The truth is, we fear those LEOs who abuse the power we've given them to protect and to serve us.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Right to Keep and Bear Arms
I wait patiently for liberals to discover the Feds abuse their guns as well.
This is why we ALL need the right to keep and bear all weapons. Of course our police have the right. They are closer to the people than the Feds after all.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Right to Keep and Bear Arms
Always hilarious to hear liberals whining about police having guns too.
Always hilarious to see conservatives not understanding that their little pop guns won't be worth a shit when facing a police force armed with military-grade weapons.
Then again, you are the party of the uneducated.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]