OPINION 7
OCT. 18, 2017 | STMURATTLERNEWS.COM
Police militarization: effective or ineffective way of guarding communities? Jamira
Richardson
COPY EDITOR
In light of the recent onslaught of backlash against police brutality, the government has implemented the most plausible countermeasure in its arsenal—police militarization. If modern law enforcement lacks the ability to subdue unarmed protesters with handguns and Tasers alone, what better way to combat this controversy than to reduce majority-minority cities to rubble? For ideal American citizens, this militarization will reap only fruitful benefits, protecting them from the minority-driven violence riddling the streets. Additionally, it is clear that this subsection of the population knows exactly what’s best for America, if the results of the 2016 election are any indication. By equipping the police force with weapons reminiscent of those employed in times ravaged by war, the government has constructed a second, more compartmentalized U.S. military— and the one thing a nation with the most powerful military in the world needs is to instill a militarized mindset into every law enforcement officer imaginable. “The military is conditioned and prepared for war against ‘the enemy.’ In war, there are only ‘good guys’ and ‘bad guys,’” said Dr. Milo Colton, associate professor of criminal justice. “Those of us in uniform were ‘the good guys,’ and our job was to destroy the ‘bad guys.’” Who are these “bad guys” the police force is expected to destroy? Look not to a white shooter who police treated to Burger King after slaughtering nine black churchgoers. Look instead to a 12-year-old black boy who was killed for the mere possession of a toy gun. This comparison alone marks the essence of police militarization, for the
former reflects the ideal American citizen Julissa and must be protected. After all, citizens Cantu like the latter are considered minorities CONTRIBUTING WRITER for a reason. Since they fail to reflect the demographic makeup of much of the U.S. Police forces are obligated to protect population, a police force aligning with the and serve the people. However, they have racial majority might be designed only to not personified that duty in a long time. protect said majority, with which police It seems society in general has taken steps officers have done an amazing job due away from this mindset of rehabilitation to militarization. and has moved toward capital punishment “Police forces should look like their on the streets, making the police forces communities with more minorities and become an entity of unquestioned power women throughout the ranks,” said Colton. and fear rather than civil servants of “Too many police our communities. forces are dominated In early August, by Anglos at the top President Trump and throughout the rolled back former ranks, and they are president Obama’s expected to keep order to withhold minorities, the poor military-grade and the alienated in weaponry from the check.” If police police. With this m i l i t a r i z a t i o n ’s overture, tensions Graphic by Samantha Ramos underlying purpose will rise for the entirety is to keep these non-ideal of the United States. citizens in check, it is Firstly, America is not a civilization evident that its implementation has been filled with savagery and barbarity. nothing but a success. As evidenced by American citizens are not by any means at the increasing police turnout for each war as people drive to Starbucks to pick up minority-organized protest, militarization their regular Frappuccino order. Therefore, has definitely allowed police officers to there is no purpose for these machines work with greater efficiency in protecting of mass destruction to be in the hands of the citizens that matter most. police officers, whose training includes “Our police should be focused on… shooting first and shooting to kill. keep[ing] the peace while promoting equal Police departments around the country rights and encouraging opportunities for have stated that they appreciate the their brothers and sisters,” said Colton. supplement of military weapons in order to “The police need to perceive themselves combat terrorism, which is a lovely excuse. not as the ‘good guys,’ but as members of However, there is a reason countries those communities they have sworn to separate their military and police. The protect and serve.” military is designed to fight the enemies Would this objective be fulfilled by of the state and when this mindset is police militarization? Absolutely—for transferred to local police officers, citizens the communities comprised of the white often turn into enemies of the state, fighting citizenry the police force seems hell-bent for their lives when police are supposed to on protecting. After all, this is America.
be keeping streets safe. Additionally, the aspect of giving dangerous weapons to the police is highly concerning. According to Dr. Henry Flores, a professor in the political science department, the police already have a very intimidating formation “in their all black uniform and weapons” and an increase in their militarization will intensify the “police versus community attitude” many populations hold to this day. This does not align with the original purpose of law enforcement, rehabilitating and deterring criminals. In this era, there seems to be the notion that police forces are here to shoot every suspected criminal, but they are not. Law enforcement is just one part of our criminal justice system, which was put in place so that people within our borders can live without an impeachment on their rights and liberties. There’s nothing that impedes these rights and liberties more than staring down the barrel of an M16, knowing that’ll be the last thing one will see. Dr. Flores recounted how difficult it was to get rid of two of his firearms and his fear that, eventually, they would end up on the streets. He holds firm in his belief that “guns have no place in civilian territory.” One should agree with his belief of the demilitarization of police and society. The American people do not need to be firing 500 rounds per minute or grenade launchers, nor do they need these weapons used against them. Society deserves to be shown unity through rehabilitation and social programs to educate, prevent and fix criminal tendencies. VIEW MORE ONLINE AT
www.stmurattlernews.com
Second amendment rights are a necessity for a free society Louie
Diaz
OPINION EDITOR
In lieu of the recent tragedy in Las Vegas, the debate over gun control has made itself a part of the zeitgeist, with politicians, late night comedians, celebrities and everyday Americans chiming in. Gun control can entail many different aspects, from enforcing stringent background checks to rescinding the second amendment, the latter being the most extreme. There are certain cases of gun control legislation that are reasonable. For instance, Project Exile, which was implemented in Richmond, Virginia, during the late 90s, aimed to reduce firearm homicides and had promising results, as rated by the National Institute of Justice. This project implemented harsher penalties for felons caught in possession of firearms. Mentally ill people who pose a danger to themselves and others also should not be able to possess a firearm. However, there are still many myths that politicians use to push gun control legislation, primarily the infamous “Gun Show Loophole.” A person cannot attend a gun show and purchase a firearm from an FFL dealer without having a background
check. It is required by federal law that every firearm purchase goes through a NICS Background Check. Another myth states that people can go into any gun store and buy machine guns. Fully automatic weapons manufactured prior to or manufactured on May 19, 1986, may be purchased, but only if the dealer is Class III licensed. Private citizens must fill out a “Form 4” application with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, and the background check can take about a year to process. Statistics also prove that the rate of gun violence is decreasing. According to FBI crime statistics, gun violence has been increasingly lowered since 1993, even with the largest amount of registered guns in the country. Gun control laws have had little success in places like Chicago, which has some of the strictest gun laws in the country yet ranks among the highest in rates of gun violence, mainly due to gang violence. In fact, guns are often used defensively. “Gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million per year,” according to a study conducted by the CDC. “A lot of people who own guns or automatic weapons do not even know what a round of a certain caliber can do to a
human being … It can end life in a very dramatic sort of way,” said Dr. Flores, political science professor. This is true; most violent media, like movies, does not accurately depict what a bullet can do to a person. Gun owners should be properly informed on how to keep, maintain and use their firearms. Firearms do have the potential to cause extreme harm and death, but it is even more important to recognize the evil within humanity. That is not to say that humanity at its core is evil, but that humans have the capacity to commit heinous acts. Because of these heinous acts, the original intent of the second amendment has been debated by many. However, the 2008 case Washington D.C. v. Heller clearly defined that citizens have the legal right to
bear arms. The majority opinion written by Justice Scalia argued that the operative clause “right of the people” is used to express an individual right. “Nowhere else in the Constitution does a ‘right’ attributed to ‘the people’ refer to anything other than an individual right,” wrote Scalia. The founders of the country also expressed their ideas about people owning weapons. “I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people....To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them,” said George Mason during the Virginia Convention debates regarding ratification of the Constitution on June 16, 1788. The ability to own a weapon is a marker of a free society and should be treated as such with care.
Firearms cannot be purchased without an approved background check. | Source from Flickr.com