Police use of military tools presents a growing danger

The White House recently issued an executive order titled “Strengthening and Unleashing America’s Law Enforcement to Pursue Criminals and Protect Innocent Citizens.” Claiming that local leaders “demonize” law enforcement and shackle it with “political handcuffs,” the order directs resources toward expanded police training, higher pay, and increased prison security and capacity. It also instructs the attorney general, secretary of Defense, and secretary of Homeland Security to “increase the provision of excess military and national security assets in local jurisdictions to assist State and local law enforcement.” While this may sound reasonable, extending military equipment and tactics to civilian policing may do more harm than good. Most critically, it would further blur the line between police and military — two institutions designed for fundamentally different purposes.

- Abigail R. Hall, Tribune News Service

Since the nation’s founding, laws have aimed to separate the roles of police and military. The police are civilian peacekeepers. They are expected to protect the rights of all individuals they encounter—victims and suspects alike — and to use force only as a last resort. The military, in contrast, is trained for war: to engage and destroy enemies. Proactive, often violent engagement with enemy combatants is part of the job. I've written elsewhere about how this separation has eroded over time, largely because of US foreign policy efforts such as the war on drugs and the war on terror. The tools and tactics developed for campaigns abroad inevitably find their way home. What begins with foreign targets ends up being applied domestically — turning American citizens into targets. These “enemies” are often vaguely defined or not identifiable at all. Consequently, local police have been recast as front-line warriors. Given this shift, they have adopted the tools and strategies of war.