This is the oath that all police officers take. This says that they will serve the community, but is rolling down the streets in older models of current military vehicles considered serving? The definition of militarization is to equip with military forces and defenses and also to adapt for military use (Merriam-Webster) .The police departments around the nation are over militarized and instead of a riot shield barrier between the police and its community I advocate for the police personnel to actually be a part of the community they are working in and to become more involved and therefore cause less harm to the public.
“To serve and protect”, this has become a common phrase to associate with police, but is this actually how police departments …show more content…
In August of 2014, protests and riots erupted in Ferguson, Missouri, over the fatal shooting of Michael Brown. Peaceful demonstrations were said to be dispersed by over 50 officers dressed in riot gear and equipped with materials for a foreign battlefield. A former U.S. Marine, “broke down” some of the equipment the officers were seen with, rifles,high powered scopes, over 100 rounds of ammunition, body armor, and camouflage. They were wearing and toting all this while riding in armoured vehicles, similar to mine-resistant trucks used in warfare. Not just this one veteran but many others said that these officers were “more heavily armed and outfitted than they themselves were while patrolling the streets of Iraq and Afghanistan” (Wing). But the veterans said there were key differences between soldiers and these police officers. These officers were reported pointing assault rifles at civilians, arresting without reason, and “behaving generally like an occupying force on high alert” (Wing). All this for what began as a peaceful protest. When the report came back that the officer would not be charged with murder of Michael Brown, peaceful protest turned to riots and to “chaos”. When the riots were full fledged chaos, SWAT arrived and attempted to disperse the crowds but they would return with even more members. Even with the help of the National Guard the police were unable to contain the disorder among the streets. In attempt to control the area police “ fir[ed] teargas and hornet’s nest sting grenades, which disperse rubber bullets and a toxic chemical powder” (Lewis). The police were struggling to control the situation, so why should they be armed with this military grade equipment if; they cannot use it without harming,without cause in some cases, call in the National Guard anyways, and scare citizens? They should not
“To serve and protect”, this has become a common phrase to associate with police, but is this actually how police departments …show more content…
In August of 2014, protests and riots erupted in Ferguson, Missouri, over the fatal shooting of Michael Brown. Peaceful demonstrations were said to be dispersed by over 50 officers dressed in riot gear and equipped with materials for a foreign battlefield. A former U.S. Marine, “broke down” some of the equipment the officers were seen with, rifles,high powered scopes, over 100 rounds of ammunition, body armor, and camouflage. They were wearing and toting all this while riding in armoured vehicles, similar to mine-resistant trucks used in warfare. Not just this one veteran but many others said that these officers were “more heavily armed and outfitted than they themselves were while patrolling the streets of Iraq and Afghanistan” (Wing). But the veterans said there were key differences between soldiers and these police officers. These officers were reported pointing assault rifles at civilians, arresting without reason, and “behaving generally like an occupying force on high alert” (Wing). All this for what began as a peaceful protest. When the report came back that the officer would not be charged with murder of Michael Brown, peaceful protest turned to riots and to “chaos”. When the riots were full fledged chaos, SWAT arrived and attempted to disperse the crowds but they would return with even more members. Even with the help of the National Guard the police were unable to contain the disorder among the streets. In attempt to control the area police “ fir[ed] teargas and hornet’s nest sting grenades, which disperse rubber bullets and a toxic chemical powder” (Lewis). The police were struggling to control the situation, so why should they be armed with this military grade equipment if; they cannot use it without harming,without cause in some cases, call in the National Guard anyways, and scare citizens? They should not