The defense industry has become a major player in the
domestic homeland security market, estimated to be worth
over 20 billion dollars in goods and services.
Flash bangs, tear gas, rubber bullets, helicopters, armored
vehicles. Historically, going back to the 1960s and 70s,
police had shields and riot truncheons and tear gas, but
they didn't tend to drive armored vehicles down city
streets. The militarization of police is a trend that's
grown for decades.
It first came into the limelight during the Ferguson
protests in 2014.
We had this outsized what I would characterize it as a hyper
exaggerated response on the part of the police who looked
like soldiers. In America, every 40 hours, a black person
is killed by police and every 1 out of 1000 black people
can expect to die due to police violence.
These are statistics that should unnerve us all that.
Did you know, they have this kind of firepower?
No not at all.
With military equipment and training on full display across
the country. Many are questioning its implications.
How exactly is local law enforcement acquiring military
equipment? And does the gear help keep communities safe?
Since 2005, the defense industry has spent over 100 million
dollars in lobbying efforts annually, partially to secure
their interests in the domestic homeland security market,
worth over 20 billion dollars in goods and services.
Their contributions play a major role in maintaining a
steady flow of militarized equipment to local law
enforcements. Certainly vendors.
People who companies that manufacture the technology that
the police are purchasing are profiting from this.
The police, obviously, they're not in the business of of
profiting from private acquisitions.
We've seen extensive lobbying from defense industries who
produce educational videos for police who were spending
hundreds of millions of dollars to directly lobby Congress
for defense spending, but also for these police programs.
The police also have their own lobbying organizations that
work toward security budgets and equipment for local law
enforcement. The National Fraternal Order of Police is one
of them and has lobbied in favor of federal grants that are
responsible for the militarization of police.
It's really a variety of Homeland Security grants
administered by the cops office, the home, the Department
of Homeland Security, etc., that have allowed departments
to directly purchase military grade equipment.
And this has been essential to stimulating a domestic law
enforcement market for military contractors.
In some cases, the folks who provide the equipment actually
directly assist police departments in making these grants.
There's even a Web site that is sponsored by these defense
contractors and other providers of police equipment to aid
departments in the production of these grant proposals.
This whole industry grew significantly during the War on
Drugs campaign in the 1970s.
Congress passed a law that focused on incorporating
cooperation between the military and the local law
enforcement, particularly related to countering drug crimes
and the war on drugs. Right.
That was sort of the first connection between the military
and domestic law enforcement.
In 1989, Congress passed the National Defense Authorization
Act, temporarily allowing the Department of Defense to
transfer excess military equipment to federal and state
agencies. The program continued until the 1997 National
Defense Authorization Act expanded it to include local law
enforcement and made it permanent under a new name.
The 1033 program that began a massive transfer of military
equipment to local police departments free of charge as
long as they paid for shipping and maintenance.
That 1033 program was the congressional
authorization that allowed police departments to basically
go online. There were catalogs of of weapons and vehicles
and aircraft and watercraft and any kind of military
surplus military equipment was available for the asking.
And it was at no cost to law enforcement agencies.
Departments may purchase shotguns that are placed in police
vehicles as a routine matter, and some departments are
purchasing a variety of less lethal weaponry with their own
resources. But when we see sniper equipment, armored
vehicles, large amounts of body armor, this is often
the result of federal spending.
Since its inception, over 11,500 domestic law enforcement
agencies have taken part in the ten thirty three program,
receiving more than 7.4 billion dollars in military
equipment. What you end up seeing is as a result of the
1033 program, local law enforcements continue to ramp up
what we call special task force, like SWAT teams, gang task
force, drug task force.
Right. That all utilize this excess military material.
In July 2014, Congressman Alan Grayson proposed that
legislation to limit the transfer of certain weapons
through the 1033 program.
The amendment was met with immense opposition failing on a
bipartisan vote of 62 to 355.
The people who voted not to change the 1033 program
received 70 percent more money in campaign contributions
from the defense sector than those who wanted restrictions.
One of the really troubling developments about the
involvement of the federal government in the direct subsidy
of purchases of militarized equipment is that this is
really about creating a new market for defense contractors
rather than really putting questions of public safety
first. Besides providing free military equipment, the
federal government also allows the police to purchase new
equipment using their own funds.
Under the 1122 program, it also gives local police
departments the same discounts enjoyed by the federal
government. We've seen instances across the country where
local governing bodies, like boards of selectmen and mayors
and city councilors are often unaware that tax
dollars have been expended to acquire these kinds of
military weapons and military vehicles.
What makes both 1033 and 1122 programs so powerful is the
lack of clear oversight and accountability.
The 1122 program, for instance, is not a grant or transfer
program and thus is not required to be monitored by the
federal government. Meanwhile, the 1033 program has put
lethal weapons in the hands of officers who have no
justifiable need for such equipment.
We've seen instances reported of some small towns, even some
college and university police departments that were
acquiring military grade weapons without any demonstrable
need for the use of these or the acquisition of these
weapons. After the events in Ferguson, the Obama
administration sought to tighten the 1033 program with
additional requirements and restrictions after months of
confrontations on America's streets.
President Obama today banned the federal government from
giving some types of military equipment to local police.
We've seen how militarized gear can sometimes give
people a feeling like there's an occupying force as opposed
to a force that's part of the community that's protecting
them and serving them. And this led to calls in Congress to
eliminate 1033 and eventually measure an executive order by
the Obama administration to place some limits on the type
of equipment that could be used, things like bayonets and
turreted armored vehicles.
The Obama administration also required police agencies to
justify purchases of equipment considered potentially
lethal. President Trump, however, rescinded all of those
measures within two years in office.
Obama administration made some efforts to increase
accountability in auditing of this.
But even then, the restrictions and oversight were quite
limited. Under the Trump administration, there's even less
evidence of any oversight.
Any sense that we know how this equipment is being used or
whether or not officers are being properly trained and how
to use it. In some cases, equipment transfer through these
programs has simply vanished due to a lack of oversight and
poor bookkeeping. There've been a number of situations
where there have been audits of local police departments to
try to figure out what they've done with this equipment.
And these departments have been unable to provide adequate
records. We don't know if this is a local sheriff taking
home camping supplies or if this is about, you know, stuff
that's really gone missing, has been resold or has just
simply been lost.
Oftentimes, the militarization of the police force might be
what's distracting them from their original purpose,
protecting our communities.
There is no direct correlation between having military
equipment from the 1033 program and seeing a reduction in
crime or an increase in officer safety.
When you increase the military equipment to police
departments, you often increase the likelihood of violence
within communities from police.
The research I've overwhelmingly done shows that police
officers are trained for tactics in worst case scenarios.
However, their interactions on a regular basis are not
worst case scenario. They are not dealing oftentimes with
school shootings or mass shootings.
They deal with those. But instead, primarily what they're
doing is having a conversation with someone.
And if they're only spending eight hours on de-escalation
and nearly 60 hours firing a gun and then another large
chunk of time driving a vehicle well when they get in this
situation. This is why they pull guns when people don't
think those guns should be pulled, because that's what they
have been trained to do.
When they bring this kind of this military hardware and this
kind of potential for the use of force and violence to a
protest. That's something that's not going to produce the
desired outcome.
It's going to make people angry.
It's going to make them outraged.
It's going to frighten them.
It's going to make them feel that the police are not there
to ensure that they are safely able to engage in the
activities that they are engaging in that are protected by
the Constitution.