Pros And Cons Of Militarization Of Policing

The militarization of police has become an increasingly contentious issue in the United States, with concerns raised about the scope, mission, and perception of law enforcement agencies across the country. The concept of militarization refers to the adoption of military tactics, equipment, and strategies by police departments, a process which began in 1965 with the inception of SWAT teams in Philadelphia (). With the aim of law enforcement being the enhancement of capabilities in high-risk situations, this outcome was inevitable. The militarization of police has intensified and expanded since that time, with military vehicles, equipment, and weapons becoming commonplace across the country. A large contributor to this phenomenon has been the

Proponents of the militarization of police argue that such tactics can provide important benefits in high-risk situations. One key advantage is the enhanced tactical capabilities that militarized police units possess, which can allow them to effectively address situations with significant potential risk to officers or the public. Examples include superior weaponry in comparison to any criminal element they face, personal armor and safety equipment, as well as enhanced vehicles to transport more officers or secure thoroughfares. Unfortunately, these situations have become more common in recent years, with a drastic rise in mass shootings and terrorist attacks (). These kinds of attacks are precisely why proponents of militarizing the police insist on its importance. In addition, militarization of police can improve response times, allowing officers to respond to threats more quickly and effectively. This is achieved through higher powered vehicles, greater communication abilities, and an encompassing domestic surveillance apparatus. Furthermore, militarization of police can increase officer safety, ensuring that law enforcement personnel have access to the necessary equipment and protective gear to carry out their duties in hazardous

Critics argue that militarization can lead to over-policing in communities of color, leading to unnecessary and sometimes deadly confrontations between law enforcement and citizens. Several high-profile cases have demonstrated the negative consequences of militarization of police, including excessive use of force and civil unrest. One example is the 2014 protests in Ferguson, Missouri, which were sparked by the killing of an unarmed black teenager by a white police officer. The police response to the protests, including the use of military-style tactics and equipment, was widely criticized for exacerbating tensions and leading to excessive use of force. While violence may not have been avoided by downscaling the armaments of the police, it may have lessened the severity of the fallout. Similarly, the 2020 protests across the country following the killing of George Floyd highlighted concerns about police militarization and its impact on civil liberties and community trust. While the killing was not a direct result of militarization, it raised tensions about entrusting officers with the level of weaponry that the military