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

Police killings more likely in agencies that get military gear, data shows

ajc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 336 posts

Re: Police killings more likely in agencies that get military gear, data shows

#201

Post by phobosanomaly »

bigbubba wrote: post #189
dcolkitt wrote: post #144

I think one possible reform is that SWAT teams should belong to a separate department than the regular police. If the situation gets out of hand, then the police can call in the SWAT. But we shouldn't be expect regular beat cops and detectives to be the people kicking down doors with bullet proof vests. The two jobs require very different skillsets and temperaments. Unfortunately because of the long-running wars in t…

> I'd definitely a trust a SWAT department filled with ex-special forces more than I'd trust a small-town cop LARPing in military gear. I know soldier worship is the national religion or something, but I think that's something you should reconsider: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30281075/ More research needs to be done, but there is evidence that police officers with military backgrounds are more likely to be invol…

tl;dr: 10-years of data were pulled from Dallas PD.

"Records were abstracted for 516 officers. In the adjusted models, veteran LEOs who were not deployed were significantly more likely to be involved in a shooting than non-veteran officers. Veterans with a deployment history were 2.9 times more likely to be in a shooting than non-veteran officers."

Interesting food for thought. I've heard many arguments about ex-military folks training in rules of engagement making them less-likely to use a weapon in a frivolous scenario. But, maybe that's not borne out by the data.

Or there's a selection-bias thing. Either way, good point.

I think what the parent was getting at though, was that this would silo the guys with all the guns and stuff in a way that they're used only in more carefully-considered situations as opposed to giving every yahoo on the force an MRAP, a tactical vest full of 123123 mags for their AR-15, and a fuzzy mandate to enforce the 'thin blue line.'

You both make really, excellent points, honestly.

Re: Police killings more likely in agencies that get military gear, data shows

#202

Post by tomschlick »

justinclift wrote: post #195
tomschlick wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Regardless, there is no need, ever, for police to have the automatic weapons, APCs, and "non-lethal" weapons they are buying from the military. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Hollywood_shootout is the catalyst for all of this. Police were heavily outgunned. The FBI would take hours to get there as FBI tactical teams are not in most cities and are not on call like normal SWAT teams are. APCs are purely defensiv…

> APCs are purely defensive. Many APC's seem to have significantly powerful weaponry, compared to civilian/infantry weapons anyway: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armoured_personnel_carrier In Western nations, APCs are frequently armed with the .50 calibre M2 Browning machine gun, 7.62mm FN MAG, or 40mm Mk 19 grenade launcher. In former Eastern bloc nations, the KPV, PKT and NSV machine guns are common options.

You're looking at actual APCs. OP was saying APC but police actually get the MRAP varients similar to the Lenco Bearcats that they buy. Those have no offensive weapons. Its just armor and bullet resistant glass on a heavy truck frame. Thats it.

Re: Police killings more likely in agencies that get military gear, data shows

#203

Post by SpicyLemonZest »

99_00 wrote: post #120

Every modern police department all over the world has assualt rifles, carbines, military sights, sniper rifle a, scopes, and armored vehicles.

Modern law enforcement universally has access to those things. But in most countries (and many areas of the US) they're limited to specific, organizationally disjoint departments which are specifically trained to use such force. That's different than what's happening here.

Re: Police killings more likely in agencies that get military gear, data shows

#204

Post by jjk166 »

iguy wrote: post #183
jjk166 wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Again though, selling the old equipment as surplus or just scrapping it achieves the same goal but also brings in some money.

Sure, but maybe this has better PR than scrapping stuff. Or having it show up in Isis videos. Mostly I don't think it's clear that "subsidize domestic police forces" need be the main goal.

The simplest explanation that adequately explains the observation tends to be correct. There's really no need for any conspiracy here, support for "law and order" has been a winning political strategy for decades. Meanwhile, getting the department of defense to increase the number of MRAPs they order by a fraction of a percent seems like it could be achieved in other, easier ways. It's good to be skeptical, but at some point you need evidence.

Re: Police killings more likely in agencies that get military gear, data shows

#205

Post by leetcrew »

throwaway0a5e wrote: post #191
leetcrew wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

is there a better way of describing the group of countries where it is unlikely to encounter criminals with lmgs mounted to pickup trucks?

"first and second world" does a pretty good job covering it since there's plenty of nations that are formerly in the USSR's sphere of influence that aren't exactly rich but don't have to worry about cartel type violence. Pretty much nobody likes to think that way though because the majority of the time "developed nations" are brought up it's in the context of how the US should be more like western Europe and it's usu…

"first and second world" describes more or less the same set of countries (perhaps modulo some eastern european countries like you said), but doesn't it have most of the same baggage as "developed nations"? as I understand it, the problem with "developed nations" is that it raises the question "developed compared to what?". in other words, it implicitly sets the west as the standard against which "developed" is measured. doesn't first/second/third world center the western perspective in pretty much the same way?

Re: Police killings more likely in agencies that get military gear, data shows

#206

Post by [deleted] »

bigbubba wrote: post #198
ceejayoz wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There are many worse scenarios than that. Then why aren't they the "here's why we need an APC" argument? Or are they largely theoretical?

I think most are a third option; not theoretical, but neither occurring in America. Consider something like the 2008 Mumbai attacks in which 10 men with rifles and explosives terrorized an entire city causing hundreds of casualties. Is there any particular reason to think such a thing couldn't happen in America, where rifles and explosives aren't hard to get? Against that sort of threat, I think the police having a f…

[deleted]

Re: Police killings more likely in agencies that get military gear, data shows

#207

Post by 8note »

malandrew wrote: post #143
seretogis wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Risky areas" sounds like a dog whistle to me, much like "bad neighborhood"... When you think of these "risky areas", what do the people within them look like? Do they deserve to have militarized police literally rolling armored tank-like vehicles through their neighborhood, and what sort of impact do you think that has on them?

If you're using the term dog whistle to describe something, you're the dog in that situation. That accusation is just a submarine form of kafkatrap.

People can also hear dog whistles through technology. You don't have to be a dog to hear it, just get a microphone and a Fourier transform.

Similarly, people can figure out how to spot dog whistles without being a dog.

Re: Police killings more likely in agencies that get military gear, data shows

#208

Post by SN76477 »

Communitivity wrote: post #34

We should be careful to draw a causal relationship here. It might not be that getting the military equipment causes police to be more aggressive and therefore have more killings. It might instead be that the more aggressive police departments are the ones that more seek to purchase military equipment, and the more aggressive police are the ones with more killings. I tend to think that's the case. Regardless, there is…

When you train warriors, they start looking for a war.

We need to change the mindset that police are fighting everyday. They should be community servants that aid in settling disputes.

Re: Police killings more likely in agencies that get military gear, data shows

#209

Post by nitrogen »

bigbubba wrote: post #198
ceejayoz wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There are many worse scenarios than that. Then why aren't they the "here's why we need an APC" argument? Or are they largely theoretical?

I think most are a third option; not theoretical, but neither occurring in America. Consider something like the 2008 Mumbai attacks in which 10 men with rifles and explosives terrorized an entire city causing hundreds of casualties. Is there any particular reason to think such a thing couldn't happen in America, where rifles and explosives aren't hard to get? Against that sort of threat, I think the police having a f…

Is there any particular reason to think such a thing couldn't happen in America, where rifles and explosives aren't hard to get?

Mainly because gurs in general aren't hard to get in America. Any would-be shooter has to fear not only cops, but armed civilians. And if they are spanning an entire city and the police aren't able to keep up, you'd definitely get recreational hunters with their rifles trying to take them down.

Re: Police killings more likely in agencies that get military gear, data shows

#210

Post by 8note »

ptero wrote: post #92
Communitivity wrote: post #34

We should be careful to draw a causal relationship here. It might not be that getting the military equipment causes police to be more aggressive and therefore have more killings. It might instead be that the more aggressive police departments are the ones that more seek to purchase military equipment, and the more aggressive police are the ones with more killings. I tend to think that's the case. Regardless, there is…

I agree with your first part that there is not necessarily a causal relationship between military equipment and killings. But your "no need, ever, for police to have automatic weapons" part is, to me, just wrong. In general, police should have enough kit to easily overpower the criminals they expect to face. We have been fortunate in many areas (e.g., most of the US, Europe and practically all urban areas) for the po…

I disagree; there's some range the police should be equipped to handle. When the danger escalates out of that range, they should step back and have a better equipped group step in like the national guard
Post reply on HN