General – history/causes of milit. police

War on terror – connects w/ milit. police

War on terror helps fuel militarized policing

The militarization phenomenon has gained even greater zeal since the events of September 11, 2001, the creation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and the declaration of the so-called “War on Terror.” Since the early 2000s, the infusion of DHS money and assistance to state and local law enforcement anti-terrorism work has led to even more police militarization and even greater militarylaw enforcement contact, and DHS grants have allowed police departments to stockpile specialized equipment in the name of anti-terror readiness.//// The main source of DHS funding to state and local law enforcement is the Homeland Security Grant Program (HSGP) and its two main components, the State Homeland Security Program (SHSP) and the Urban Areas Security Initiative (UASI).20 Both grant programs require recipients to dedicate at least 25 percent of grant funds to “terrorism prevention-related law enforcement activities,” though that phrase does not appear to be clearly defined.21 The stated justification for DHS grants to state and local law enforcement is to support efforts to protect against terrorism, but even the DHS acknowledges that it has a larger mission, which includes ordinary law enforcement activities. In 2010, the DHS announced a new “anticrime campaign,” which appears to have a minimal nexus to terrorism prevention.22//// By invoking the imagery of war, aggressively funding the enforcement of U.S. drug laws, and creating an over- hyped fear of siege from within our borders, the federal government has justified and encouraged the militarization of local law enforcement. The ACLU found throughout the course of this investigation that the excessive militarism in policing, particularly through the use of paramilitary policing teams, escalates the risk of violence, threatens individual liberties, and unfairly impacts people of color. In addition, because use of unnecessarily aggressive techniques has a documented impact on public confidence in law enforcement, there is reason to be concerned that excessive militarization undermines public trust and community safety as well.

9/11 is a key catalyst for military infiltration of police

KRASKA professor and senior research fellow, college of justice and strategy @ Eastern Kentucky University 2009 (Peter, “Militarization and Policing – It’s Relevance to 21^st Century Police”, Policing: A Journal of Policy and Practice, Vol 1, Issue 4, p.8-10 ,note://// indicates par. breaks)[AR SPRING16]

By 11 September 2001, then, the stage was thoroughly prepared for a rapid acceleration of the military-police blur. The mission sprint of the USmilitary into law-enforcement functions involved entirely new levels of cooperation and collaboration between civilian police and the armed forces, and the military has become a central player in a host of homeland security and war-on-terror initiatives. With little objection or discussion, the US Congress passed legislation that established the military as a central feature of homeland security known as Northcom. Its most controversial role, besides establishing close operational and training ties with civilian police, is a surveillance and information program that is currently the largest federal domestic surveillance initiative outside of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (Pincus, 2005).

_General – social science/policy re: police is good

Future of police policy should be based in empirical research, i.e. practices known to work

TELEP professor school of criminology @ George Mason University WEISBURD 2012 (Cody, assistant prof, and David, who at time of writing was associated with Hebrew University, Jerusalem, and is now distinguished professor police innovation, geography of crime, “What is Known About the Effectiveness of Police Practices in Reducing Crime and Disorder?”, Police Quarterly, 15(4), p.347 note://// indicates par. breaks)[AR SRPING16]

More generally, police today should ensure that new strategies and approaches are grounded in the existing literature on what is effective. This means drawing upon approaches that have been proven to work. A major goal then for the future of policing is relying more on rigorous evidence to guide practice (see Weisburd & Neyroud, 2011). We strongly advocate for continued growth in the number of rigorous studies evaluating policing strategies, particularly in the areas above where we do not know enough to make strong recommendations. Still, with the evidence base today police can be increasingly evidence-based in addressing crime and disorder. Such a focus is critical in a time of diminishing resources in policing.

Download 1 Mb.

Share with your friends: