How We See It: Military Might On The March At Local Agencies

Sunday, July 13, 2014

Boys and their toys.

That's the familiar refrain when the U.S. military wants to shed heavy equipment from its inventory and finds eager takers among the nation's law enforcement agencies.

What’s The Point?

Local law enforcement agencies must use great care when deciding how, and how often, to deploy massive military vehicles converted to use by local deputies and officers.

The Benton County Sheriff's Office is one of the recent recipients. In their desire to have a armored vehicle, deputies have acquired a mine-resistant ambush-protected, or MRAP, vehicle through military surplus. The agency bought the six-wheeled, 48,000-pound vehicle for $5,000.

USA Today recently reported local law enforcement agencies are shoring up their defenses against local criminals with military equipment once used to protect soldiers from roadside bombs and attacks from terrorist organizations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

"The Department of Defense's 1033 program, which Congress passed in 1997 to expand on a 1991 initiative, initially aimed to give surplus military equipment for police use in counter-narcotic and counter-terrorism situations," the newspaper reported. "Now, with the government giving away thousands of Mine-Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles, weapons and more pedestrian items such as cars and clothing, even smaller police departments in cities and towns with low crime rates are acquiring items."

Bentonville and Rogers police departments have similar vehicles.

The trend has some people worried. Critics say law enforcement agencies' missions are far different from the military. Law officers in American communities should try to resolve situations with the least amount of force, whereas the U.S. military is trained to overcome resistance with shock and awe, they say.

It's a fair concern. The existence of such behemoth vehicles in the inventory of local law enforcement agencies isn't really a problem in and of itself. But having one ready to go no doubt encourages officers to look for opportunities to put their new gear into action. These agencies have done pretty well for decades without need of massive military machines. The potential for using a retooled MRAP in daily law enforcement will be extraordinarily limited. It's use certainly should be.

We don't so much worry "militarization." The vehicles aren't tanks; they don't carry big cannons or guns. What they do best is protect the men and women inside them. Hey, if someone intended to shoot at you, would you not want some serious armor between you and them?

Without question, these are not necessary pieces of equipment. If Sheriff Kelley Cradduck showed up at a Quorum Court meeting asking for $600,000 or $800,000 for such a piece of equipment, he'd be shut down quickly. The fact is, Cradduck wouldn't even ask because the cost is too high for its potential use.

But when the U.S. government is virtually giving them away, which agency can resist?

The vehicle will be worth its weight in gold if it deflects a single bullet that would have otherwise struck a law enforcement officer or civilian. It will also create a heavy burden if it's used in such a way that it creates tension within the community or makes the sheriff's office more aggressive than it might be if the military vehicle wasn't part of the equation.

So let's celebrate these bargains (unless one remembers we're all U.S. taxpayers) while also embracing the value of reasonable reaction by law enforcement officers. Just as when one wears a gun on his or her hip, it's crucial public policy and professional decision-making guide how, and how often, these huge vehicles are put into action.

Commentary on 07/13/2014