Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 339 posts

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

#111

Post by selimthegrim »

inerte wrote: post #26
dashundchen wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, maybe there is limited use in some of this equipment. But my small city police department recently got a grant for 450 high powered assault rifles and armored vests, on top of the hundreds they already had. There are only 700 officers including things like traffic enforcement. Of course the police union lobbied for more. They have armored trucks and undercover vehicles. They have mobile towers to survey. They h…

I live close to a small town in the Bay Area, called Los Gatos. Quaint, expensive, beautiful place. It was Big Truck Day at the library and a lot of government employees were showing their vehicles. Fire trucks, trash compactors, a huge bulldozer, and there was a police car and a handful of officers around. A little girl came and pointed at a rifle and asked the officer, “what is this for?” He said, “to protect mysel…

The (presumably white) little girl probably needs someone to explain to that the police have a duty to the public to protect order, not any given individual

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

#112

Post by JumpCrisscross »

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…

> equipment issue isn't going to solve anything

This sounds like perfect being the enemy of the good.

Militarising police lets them to project force like, well, militaries. It attracts people who want to play with military toys without military training.

Removing military equipment doesn't solve the problem. But it makes it less deadly. And it removes one, among many, incentives for bad behavior.

> civilian oversight boards that are veto proof against the police they monitor

Simplier: let them initiate investigations, and give them the funding required to do so.

> holding elected and appointed officials of the localities, city, county, or state, accountable for the harm caused by their police forces

This is lip service. They're already elected. They continue to be re-elected. Police violence is, in large part, a majoritarian failure.

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

#113

Post by mulmen »

mberning wrote: post #38

I would like them to provide and require body cams for all officers at the federal level and require all deaths and injuries occurring in police custody to be reviewed by the FBI/justice dept.

Police body cams have significant privacy challenges. There are no easy answers there.

Consolidation of power to the federal level is a very blunt tool. Our nation is not built on such centralization of power. In fact the foundation is the opposite.

Yes, deaths and injuries should be reviewed but this should happen at as local a level as possible.

There’s need for reform but more federal power is not the solution.

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

#114

Post by jeffbee »

nds43242 wrote: post #99
jeffbee wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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/2014/08/08.27.1…

How do you engender an idea of a UK/Canada-type cop in a country where there are more guns than people? I assume cops here are trained to see all citizens as armed threats, which systematically produces cops who are always on edge and ready to kill. The whole thing feels like a deeper problem than just training cops to be nicer.

The incident that has sparked the current stretch of American decline involved police using force other than firearms against an unarmed man. It's clear that sending police to respond with violence to an incidence of passing counterfeit currency was perhaps not the appropriate response. Violence in American society has various structural root causes. It's not as simple as saying there are a lot of guns. Inequality, lack of opportunity, poor education, bleak built environment, and of course racism and the echoes of slavery are all aspects of the problem. Police violence can't solve any of them.

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

#115

Post by some_random »

vsareto wrote: post #82
jeffbee wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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/2014/08/08.27.1…

If you show up for riot duty wearing [1], you're likely to walk away with injuries. If this goes through, make sure to track police injuries during riots if you want to be forthcoming. Violent protesters and instigators will throw things no matter whether you're in [1] or [2]. Bike squads on regular duty almost always look like [1] anyway. [2] might be a SWAT picture.

Oh no, what a tragedy. Perhaps [1] will be less willing to use violence if they know that they may be hurt as well.

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

#116

Post by pow_pp_-1_v »

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…

Wouldn't it be better to pay police/firefighters/teachers more? If it means a little bit more in taxes for getting well trained (in dealing with the public), empathetic police officers, I am all for it.

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

#117

Post by vsareto »

some_random wrote: post #115
vsareto wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you show up for riot duty wearing [1], you're likely to walk away with injuries. If this goes through, make sure to track police injuries during riots if you want to be forthcoming. Violent protesters and instigators will throw things no matter whether you're in [1] or [2]. Bike squads on regular duty almost always look like [1] anyway. [2] might be a SWAT picture.

Oh no, what a tragedy. Perhaps [1] will be less willing to use violence if they know that they may be hurt as well.

You'll get things thrown at you regardless of your intent or response. The anonymous violent protestors among the crowd don't likely know the cops personally, they're just there to inflict damage when they decide to throw something. You can choose to wear appropriate gear for what you're doing and prevent some damage, or eat a glass bottle to the face, arms, or legs (cops can do bike patrol AND riot control and use different gear -- there's no change in gear issuance needed). Wearing bike squad gear to a riot won't stop those assholes from doing harm. They might even prioritize you for a chance to see blood.

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

#118

Post by qball »

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…

>What a weird way of looking at the world. I've genuinely never heard this take.

That's interesting, and betrays the fact that modern policing has somewhat drifted away from its historic tradition. (https://www.techuk.org/insights/opinions/item/15744-behind-p...)

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

#119

Post by [deleted] »

vsareto wrote: post #82
jeffbee wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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/2014/08/08.27.1…

If you show up for riot duty wearing [1], you're likely to walk away with injuries. If this goes through, make sure to track police injuries during riots if you want to be forthcoming. Violent protesters and instigators will throw things no matter whether you're in [1] or [2]. Bike squads on regular duty almost always look like [1] anyway. [2] might be a SWAT picture.

[deleted]

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

#120

Post by colllectorof »

eloff wrote: post #70
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…

Yes, you're right that this won't achieve real change. I truly like the idea of civilian oversight boards. However, I think any meaningful change or even competent governance is of the table in the US until something is done about the broken and polarized two party system. Right now the two factions are about evenly matched and can hardly agree on anything. Until that changes the US will continue to have their most u…

Multiple choice voting. (I.e. you give 1 point to all candidates you like, the ones with most amount of points wins. Very simple to understand system with no spoiler effect.) It will fix the issue within one set of elections and I don't even think it would require any changes to the constitution.
Post reply on HN