Just part of this article
Today, there are currently more than
18,000 local, state, and federal law enforcement agencies in the United States. These agencies employ over
420,000 law enforcement officers tasked with protecting public safety in our communities. Each year, law enforcement conducts over
10 million arrests, resulting in more than
600,000 admissions to state or federal prisons. These activities cost taxpayers over
$126 billion each year for federal, state, and local police protection. It is essential that we ensure that these investments in public safety are focused on maintaining a safe and orderly society where individual liberty and property rights are secure.
The Rise of the Militarization of Police
What is Police Militarization?
Police militarization is
defined by scholars as the “process whereby civilian police increasingly draw from and pattern themselves around, the tenets of militarism and the military model.” This process
tangibly occurs when a civilian police force adopts the equipment, operational tactics, mindsets, or culture of the military.
Public Opinion of Police
Public awareness and coverage of police militarization has largely focused on the acquisition of military equipment by police, such as
armored vehicles,
aircraft, and
weapons. Since the early 1990s, the Department of Defense’s
1033 program has provided local law enforcement agencies access to military-grade equipment. This program, now
expanded by President Trump after President Obama attempted to
limit its use, allows local law enforcement agencies to receive excess Department of Defense equipment that would otherwise be destroyed because it was no longer useful to the military. Over
8,000 law enforcement agencies have utilized the 1033 program to access more than
$6 billion worth of military equipment such as night-vision goggles, machine guns, armored vehicles,
bayonets,
grenade launchers, and military aircraft. Other
items that can be accessed by local law enforcement agencies through the program include field packs, canteens, sleeping bags, and ponchos.
The increased use of military equipment has coincided with an increased use of military tactics, such as SWAT teams and no-knock raids, by law enforcement agencies. In recent years, police departments from
Ferguson,
Charlotte, and
Southampton have received criticism for their use of military tactics. One study found that use of paramilitary-style teams by law enforcement increased by more than
1,400 percent since 1980.
The Potential Dangers of Police Militarization
The increased militarization of police has occurred alongside a significant decline in public trust for law enforcement agencies. While the public continues to
respect their own community’s law enforcement agencies, public
confidence and trust in law enforcement as an institution have decreased since the early 2000s. In a national survey from 2016, a
majority of Americans stated that they believe the use of military equipment by police is “going too far.”
This same study also found that
most Americans believe that police should be required to receive a warrant before conducting a search of homes and vehicles or monitoring phone calls. This erosion of public confidence in law enforcement and low support for militarization impedes law enforcement’s ability to effectively secure public safety.
Police Militarization Statistics
Drawing conclusions about the impact of militarization on public safety and police use of force is difficult because research on this topic is both scarce and mixed. One
study from 2017 found that every 10 percent increase in the value of military equipment received by a county results in 5.9 fewer crimes per 100,000 residents. However, when looking at military-grade weapons specifically, the same study found that receipt of these weapons had minimal or no deterrent impact on crime. Multiple studies have confirmed concerns about the militarization of police, showing that it results in law enforcement using
higher levels of force against citizens. Overall,
police militarization statistics seem to suggest that utilizing certain types of military equipment may result in reduced crime within a community but increased use of force by police officers against community members.
The
responses of many jurisdictions following the incidents in Ferguson are illustrative of other problems with the militarization of police: infringements upon federalism and a lack of oversight by the people law enforcement is sworn to serve and protect. For example, to secure equipment through the 1033 program, law enforcement agencies send applications directly to
state coordinators in each jurisdiction. This allows local law enforcement agencies to acquire the military equipment, purchased with federal tax dollars, without any appropriate oversight by state lawmakers or local city officials. The current structure of the 1033 program allows law enforcement agencies to circumvent the traditional principles of federalism and avoid the appropriations process meant to protect citizens from excessive government spending.
Furthermore, regulations that accompany the receipt of property under the 1033 program create perverse incentives for local law enforcement agencies to ensure they are able to retain the property for their department’s use. First, police must use any property acquired through the program
within one year of receipt, otherwise they must return it to the Department of Defense. Second, law enforcement agencies are
responsible for all of the transportation, maintenance, and conversion costs of this equipment. Although the initial zero cost for the equipment may be appealing, the insurance, fuel, storage, training, and cost to convert the equipment for law enforcement’s use can be extremely high. In some instances, these costs are too expensive for many jurisdictions to justify retaining the equipment if it is not being used on a frequent basis. This creates an incentive for the agency to utilize the equipment in circumstances where it may not appropriate or reasonably necessary simply to justify its retention by the agency. It also encourages police to shift resources away from catching individuals who are the largest threat to public safety to activities that will
reap financial benefits for the department through
civil asset forfeiture or
seizure of property associated with low-level drug possession.