Militarization of the Homeland

I find it very disturbing how much of our tax money is currently being spent by local police to procure what can only be called "military grade" equipment under DHS grants.

http://reason.com/archives/2012/12/11/homeland-security-grants-subsidize-dysto

"For example, Fargo, N.D., which averages two homicides a year, bought a "new $256,643 armored truck, complete with a rotating [gun] turret" using homeland security funds."

Really????

Tried to open the link, it asked for a contribution and then I had to log in to read the article.

Probably a good article but not signing up to read.

It is concerning. Wonder when they will get armed drones to fly over areas. Maybe that is why many won't cut their trees in the mountains?

And imagine that some people can see this news and not realize that the 2nd amendment recognizes the right for us to be armed in order to fight that same equipment should the government become tyrannical.

It's just mind boggling.

sorry about that! In a nutshell it describes Sen. Tom Coburn's new report on DHS spending. Here's an excerpt:

"Both examples are drawn from Sen. Tom Coburn's newly released study "Safety at Any Price: Assessing the Impact of Homeland Security Spending in U.S. Cities," which is funnier than a congressional report has any right to be. (Check page 43 for a cameo by 1980s action-star has-been Steven Seagal, who accompanied a California SWAT team storming a suspected cockfighting ring in two DHS-funded military assault vehicles).

As Coburn describes, the $7 billion DHS has doled out over the past decade in its Urban Areas Security Initiative program is replete with appalling waste: 13 sno-cone machines for terror-warriors in Michigan, a latrine on wheels for Fort Worth, Texas, and a $100,000 underwater robot for Columbus, Ohio.

But the media focus on "waste, fraud, and abuse" misses a graver problem with DHS's decade-long spending spree. Sno-cone machines and "zombie apocalypse" parties aren't the worst things DHS is underwriting. We ought to worry more about the proliferation of surveillance cameras, mobile biometric scanners, armored personnel carriers and police drones."

I would also add the amazing amount of both video, audio and digital surveillance, that government at all levels is engaging in.

I agree with you guys on this. The proliferation of constant surveillance is a great loss of freedom for all of us. But how do we stop it? Do we stop it? I mean, there is some case for maintaining a department that is charged with protecting our nation, but how do we control that agency from controlling us? Of course, we all voluntarily submit to this to some extent with our own internet usage, or carrying our cell phones with us, as these have become conveniences we appreciate...but can we have our conveniences and our liberties? Does one require the sacrifice of the other?

This doesn't seem to be a partisan issue to me. Both parties have supported the creation of this situation. It seems more a condition of our modern society. Society has requested increased security (or, at least, the impression of security), and increased technological conveniences. Is technology driving us towards sacrificing individual liberty and privacy?

The little town of Morrison CO has aquired an amored vehicle as well as a full on swat team.
Guess going to the Morrison in and parking the wrong way could result in some wild actions.

plaidvillain wrote: I agree with you guys on this. The proliferation of constant surveillance is a great loss of freedom for all of us. But how do we stop it? Do we stop it? I mean, there is some case for maintaining a department that is charged with protecting our nation, but how do we control that agency from controlling us? Of course, we all voluntarily submit to this to some extent with our own internet usage, or carrying our cell phones with us, as these have become conveniences we appreciate...but can we have our conveniences and our liberties? Does one require the sacrifice of the other?

This doesn't seem to be a partisan issue to me. Both parties have supported the creation of this situation. It seems more a condition of our modern society. Society has requested increased security (or, at least, the impression of security), and increased technological conveniences. Is technology driving us towards sacrificing individual liberty and privacy?

We get what what we vote for. All this happening under our current Pres and Congress. Change it in 2014 and 2016.

plaidvillain wrote: Is technology driving us towards sacrificing individual liberty and privacy?

I think it is, and I don't know that there is a way to stop it. Even if one "unplugs" from the internet and cellular service and whathaveyou, is that really a viable option? How about payroll? Most companies don't want to give you a check - they want to do direct deposit. If you go to the bank to a teller window they want you to swipe your ATM card. But I think that technology is merely a symptom of the bigger problem - overpopulation - and that's another debate.

In the case of local law enforcement gearing up with military equipment there's always the option of stopping funding for that, but the congressional cry of "we need to combat terrorism" has become a mantra that no one seems to want to dispute - even at the cost of our civil liberties.

I think we're headed for scary times.

Martin Ent Inc wrote: The little town of Morrison CO has aquired an amored vehicle as well as a full on swat team.
Guess going to the Morrison in and parking the wrong way could result in some wild actions.

That's a perfect example. I mean really??? WTF???!!! I can picture sending the SWAT team into Tony Rigatoni's to nab that guy who tried to walk on his bar tab...