A Reflection on Police Militarization
By Maggie Hannick
Black Lives Matter, protests, riot police, and police brutality are connected. One of the answers to the connection may be in a new study that found militarized police units are used in communities of color more often. Living in St. Louis, I am familiar with this. After numerous killings of unarmed and innocent black men and women by the police, I have seen how police militarization affects these communities. When people think about police brutality, they think of “the unrest in Ferguson,” a phrase we hear a lot. For some, it represents the cry for justice and the need for an end to police violence. For others, it’s used to ignore this cry and show the protests in a negative light. Regardless of how you think of it, which I personally believe empirical evidence recognizes the greater likelihood of minorities being pulled over and shot by police, the militarization of our police forces is wrong. In addition, such militarization doesn’t reduce violent crime or prevent officers from being killed, which is found from a study of 9,000 law enforcement agencies in the U.S. – one of the first studies to research systematically the use and consequences of militarized police forces. For example, in Maryland, militarized police units are more likely to be deployed in black neighborhoods. The study also showed that militarized units hurt public confidence in law enforcement and portray police departments as being overfunded.
Some in the world of policing say that SWAT teams and other militarized forces are necessary for police and public safety, particularly in situations involving active shooters or hostages. Another statistic of note, the Department of Defense gave local law agencies over $4 billion in military equipment between 1997 and 2014. In a different report by the Proceedings of the National Academies of Science in August, it stated that police militarization works against law enforcement in the court of public opinion.
The events surrounding the shooting of Michael Brown on August of 2014 received lots of media attention. In reaction to this deadly event between a young (only 18 years old) unarmed black man and a white police officer, protestors and law enforcement were pitted against one another in the streets. Pictures show unarmed racial minorities standing just feet from police officers’ guns. I, myself, was at the protests on West Florissant Avenue in Ferguson and witnessed the terrifying police presence on this one block of the street. Right beyond it was a Walmart that looked like a warzone. Tanks were everywhere, SWAT teams were heavily present, and tear gas and weapons were all around me. As a child during this time, I didn’t understand the show of force. Why was there so much police militarization on one street and why were police tear gassing people? However, I am white. Yes, I was scared, but I cannot imagine how any person of color would feel. The police were not targeting me, and they never will because of the color of my skin. We protested because of a racist, prejudice, bias, discriminatory, unjust, and institutional system.
The events in Ferguson led to national coverage on police brutality and to some reform of policing, such as demilitarization and body cameras. Also, people started looking into the connection between police militarization and race. Others became curious about the costs of militarization on police forces. Researchers and scientists found that it was hard to study police and their impact on communities of color because recordkeeping differs and varies widely from each agency. Some forces do not even have data.
To further explain the example in Maryland, in 2008, a SWAT team went to the house of Cheye Calvo, who served as the mayor of a small city in the state. He was suspected of drug trafficking. Instead of intercepting a shipment that was 32 pounds, the police raid Calvo’s home after the package was delivered, killed his two dogs, and interrogated him and his wife. They were innocent, and, thus, Maryland issued a new statute requiring all state agencies to record the activity of SWAT teams from 2010 to 2014. Maryland had organized records of deployments, having the when, where, and why of the actions. It turns out that, in four years alone, there were over 8,000 SWAT missions, and 92 percent of them performed search or arrest warrants, while only around 5 percent were barricades. SWAT originally started as only barricading armed people and in a hostage crises; however, now, teams are involved with drug busts and patrolling high crime areas. Black neighborhoods, even with lower rates of crime than white ones, have experienced more SWAT deployments than white areas. A PBS article wrote that “every 10 percent increase in the number of African-Americans living in an area corresponded with a 10 percent increase in SWAT deployments per 100,000 residents.”
Researchers have examined state and local law enforcement agencies, which are conducted every four years by the federal government. One study showed that 9,000 of 15,000 law agencies in the U.S. used SWAT units at some time between 2000 and 2008, and this also affected the crime and violence statistics. It revealed that SWAT forces do not help police safety, the number of officers assaulted, hurt, or killed, nationally. For the millions of police officers in the U.S., the number of officers that are killed every year is in the low hundreds, which provides evidence for the rarity of these events and the insignificance of SWAT teams on protecting police forces. According to The Atlantic, “in one year, 57,375 years of life were lost to police violence.” With the data of Maryland, civilians are twice as likely to be injured during SWAT raids as officers.
Some argue police militarization infringes civil liberties for public safety’s sake, and some strive to implement it in all police forces. I believe that the studies and statistics tell us a lot and that SWAT should take care of high intensity, dangerous situations nationwide, while our police forces should protect their communities and not kill them. Military tactics and weapons used by police in communities, especially those of color, not only take away civil liberties but also target and hurt people. Individuals feel less safe, secure, and protected and more fearful and at risk when the military of police is present on their own streets.
