Lawmakers begin bipartisan push to cut off police access to military-style gear • Hacker News Board

Re: Lawmakers begin bipartisan push to cut off police access to military-style gear

#41

Post by jeffbee » Tue, Jun 02, 2020, 5:30 PM UTC

Shivetya wrote: post #28

The equipment issue isn't going to solve anything, this is just lip service to the real problem. Police Unions have effectively created a system by which officers are nearly immune from prosecution and even if successfully prosecuted their record cannot travel with them in many cases. Now one fix that removing some of the equipment will do will reduce the amount of psychological impact it has on those wielding it, as…

Changing the inventory will reduce the appeal of police work for psycho assholes who fantasize about shooting protesters. Special weapons and vehicles should be reserved for centralized, specialized police forces who are called out when needed, if ever. Most cops should be issued a radio and a bicycle, so you attract people who want to look like [1] instead of [2].

1: https://files.kstatecollegian.com/2014/08/08.27.14.BikeCop.G...

2: https://d2eehagpk5cl65.cloudfront.net/img/c1200x675-w1200-q8...

Re: Lawmakers begin bipartisan push to cut off police access to military-style gear

#42

Post by luckylion » Tue, Jun 02, 2020, 5:31 PM UTC

rconti wrote: post #14

A common response to the idea of "police reform" is that it will make it harder/more expensive/etc to hire police, which we all agree we need. As an armchair economist who believes that everything DOES happen at the margins, we can't completely ignore this, so I'm at least somewhat sympathetic to the argument. But what really kills the argument is looking at how our medical professionals have stepped up and responded…

I'm pretty sure that the medical professionals will not be happy if you made this the new normal, so I'm not sure it's wise to bring this out as an argument for "so it should be okay for the police to do this normally".

Also, fewer surgeons and nurses get shot on the job, I assume.

Re: Lawmakers begin bipartisan push to cut off police access to military-style gear

#43

Post by AWildC182 » Tue, Jun 02, 2020, 5:31 PM UTC

RangerScience wrote: post #16

rconti wrote: post #14

A common response to the idea of "police reform" is that it will make it harder/more expensive/etc to hire police, which we all agree we need. As an armchair economist who believes that everything DOES happen at the margins, we can't completely ignore this, so I'm at least somewhat sympathetic to the argument. But what really kills the argument is looking at how our medical professionals have stepped up and responded…

Changing the police narrative to one of serving, regardless of adversity (see doctors and USPS) from one of "getting to play with violent toys"...

It's interesting trolling that side of the youtube algorithm. It's abundantly clear that we've shifted from cops just being a mix of individuals who want to help and a substantial number of not-so-ex-high-school-bullies to full on military LARPers.

The DHS funding being pumped into the forces have resulted in police being better battle-equipped than the average country's military and this has become a recruiting tool. Don't want to sign many years of your life away and probably get shipped out to a -stan where you have to deal with constant misery just to live out a military fantasy? Just go to a police academy for a couple months and you can cosplay all you want while with all the same toys in a "target rich environment".

The end result is we've created a recruiting pull that only finds the worst possible people for the job. It would be like HR only hiring people for a software company who picked computer science entirely because they heard it was high paying but somehow far far deadlier.

Re: Lawmakers begin bipartisan push to cut off police access to military-style gear

#44

Post by codezero » Tue, Jun 02, 2020, 5:32 PM UTC

jmastrangelo wrote: post #5

Focusing on the gear seems like a cheap and easy solution compared to fixing training and accountability, the actual root of the issue.

I completely agree, though I assume it's because the federal government only pulls federal levers without new legislation. I bet they have more federal programs for military gear redistribution than they do to subsidize training.

Re: Lawmakers begin bipartisan push to cut off police access to military-style gear

#45

Post by core-questions » Tue, Jun 02, 2020, 5:33 PM UTC

throwaway0a5e wrote: post #30

core-questions wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should taxpayers who fund the police have to artificially pay more markup, making someone else rich, just so the police have less equipment?

Why should the police get a discount? They should have to buy their MRAPs through the auction systems the same way that someone running a logging company has to buy surplus LMTVs. I'm sympathetic to the cause of saving money but if the military won't auction something to a random US citizen I don't see why they should be auctioning that thing to a random US civilian police force. They can sell that stuff to other nat…

> I'm sympathetic to the cause of saving money but if the military won't auction something to a random US citizen I don't see why they should be auctioning that thing to a random US civilian police force.

I don't see why it's not clear there's a difference here, in terms of community interest, but whatever

> A civilian police force should have no special rights above any other civilian entity.

What a weird way of looking at the world. I've genuinely never heard this take. Police have power over you, if you break the law; that's the point, no?

Re: Lawmakers begin bipartisan push to cut off police access to military-style gear

#46

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Jun 02, 2020, 5:33 PM UTC

[deleted]

Re: Lawmakers begin bipartisan push to cut off police access to military-style gear

#47

Post by matwood » Tue, Jun 02, 2020, 5:35 PM UTC

catalogia wrote: post #17

ksdale wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is spot on, and not just because of creating the impression to people looking at police. I also think that if police see their tools as the tools of a soldier, they are more likely to act like soldiers. I don't remember who said it, in relation to sports - "Look good, feel good, play good." I think how you look can absolutely affect how you behave.

I think we should also make it legal for police departments to discriminate against combat veterans when hiring, and encourage them to do so. Perhaps as a token of fairness, this could be paired with a separate initiative to provide other sort of jobs to combat veterans. People trained by the military to police occupied communities should not be allowed to act as civilian police in peacetime conditions.

I would love to see some statistics before discriminating against veterans. My intuition says combat vets would make better police officers because they would likely be better trained, and are used to dealing with high pressure, dangerous situations.

The military's RoE are also very strict with severe consequences for violating. Contrary to what some think, soldiers are not running around shooting every person they see.

Re: Lawmakers begin bipartisan push to cut off police access to military-style gear

#48

Post by jkaptur » Tue, Jun 02, 2020, 5:36 PM UTC

luckylion wrote: post #42

rconti wrote: post #14

A common response to the idea of "police reform" is that it will make it harder/more expensive/etc to hire police, which we all agree we need. As an armchair economist who believes that everything DOES happen at the margins, we can't completely ignore this, so I'm at least somewhat sympathetic to the argument. But what really kills the argument is looking at how our medical professionals have stepped up and responded…

I'm pretty sure that the medical professionals will not be happy if you made this the new normal, so I'm not sure it's wise to bring this out as an argument for "so it should be okay for the police to do this normally". Also, fewer surgeons and nurses get shot on the job, I assume.

You may want to check that assumption (particularly if you expand to violence in general).

Re: Lawmakers begin bipartisan push to cut off police access to military-style gear

#49

Post by remarkEon » Tue, Jun 02, 2020, 5:37 PM UTC

paloaltokid wrote: post #25

twblalock wrote: post #21

Police were able to brutalize protesters in the 1960s with much simpler equipment than they have today. The equipment is not the problem.

All the more reason to not give the police even more powerful tools with which to brutalize people. If the equipment is not the problem, take it away. That's one less thing to worry about.

This isn't true. Modern tools are significantly less lethal, and give police more options on the spectrum of escalation before having to draw their service pistol. This is why protests were much more deadly in the 1970s.

Re: Lawmakers begin bipartisan push to cut off police access to military-style gear

#50

Post by jeffbee » Tue, Jun 02, 2020, 5:40 PM UTC

core-questions wrote: post #45

throwaway0a5e wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should the police get a discount? They should have to buy their MRAPs through the auction systems the same way that someone running a logging company has to buy surplus LMTVs. I'm sympathetic to the cause of saving money but if the military won't auction something to a random US citizen I don't see why they should be auctioning that thing to a random US civilian police force. They can sell that stuff to other nat…

> I'm sympathetic to the cause of saving money but if the military won't auction something to a random US citizen I don't see why they should be auctioning that thing to a random US civilian police force. I don't see why it's not clear there's a difference here, in terms of community interest, but whatever > A civilian police force should have no special rights above any other civilian entity. What a weird way of loo…

Police power is not intrinsic. It is granted by the people through their elected government. In my state, every local authority has the power to designate entities to exercise their various powers. By tradition these are police or sheriff departments but there's nothing preventing the local government from vesting police powers in the 4-H club or Wal-mart.