USAToday writes that the feds have been giving away MRAPs, the mine-resistant ambush-protected trucks that are coming back from Iraq and Afghanistan to your local police departments;
MRAPs did their job saving the lives of thousands of troops from roadside bombs in Iraq and Afghanistan. Now, they’ll be hitting the mean streets of Columbus, Ohio, where campus police at The Ohio State University can presumably bust beer bashes with the behemoths. Cops in Madison, Wis., another Big Ten party town, can presumably do the same with theirs.
They’re free. Mostly. Which is a pretty good deal considering a fully tricked-out MRAP with bomb-signal jammers, radios and a .50-caliber machine gun in the turret can run about $1 million.
But like buying a new car, there’s a destination charge involved, according to Mimi Schirmacher, a spokeswoman for the Defense Logistics Agency. If local police or state government pay shipping costs and justify the need, DLA is happy to put them behind the wheel of a 37,000-pound MaxxPro from Navistar.
My biggest concern, among many that I have about this subject, is that criminals will take this as a challenge to up their games. I also think that the government should at least charge the police departments some money, provide some kind of reimbursement, anyway. Perhaps paying a couple hundred thousand dollars for these beasts would discourage police departments from looking like they’re at war with the rest of us. I’m all for saving lives, but do the police really need a vehicle designed to counter IEDs? And what the hell are campus security going to do with them?
Not only do the cops NOT need shit like this, the don’t need a lot of the toys they currently have.
As stated previously, they’ve gone from dealing with the public to turning them into the enemy. I know this isn’t a universally-held truth, but it’s true far too often to be comfortable.
I know New Hampshire State Police already have at least one of those beast. They brought it down here after the Marathon Bombing.
I really see no need to have these things on our streets, unless of course we are expecting a huge increase in the number of attacks on US Soil that is.
Not like we are immune to it, and I hardly trust the brain Trust in DC to keep us safe. The idea of some of our local cops drving MRAPS though…
Not only that, but look at their weight per wheel and per axle, and the damage they’ll do to streets, roads & bridges!!
OH, and since when did gangsters start using ATR’s and RPG’s here in the US as well? Those trucks are also VERY top-heavy, rollover training on them is mandatory for deploying Military Personnel, and what’s it going to take to recover one when some “Hot Dog” Bo Duke wannabe rolls one, let alone the collateral damage here from a rollover wreck!!
I imagine ride-alongs will be a lot more interesting.
Now this IS the militarization that Poetrooper alluded to in an earlier post and this IS rediculous and a veiled threat to all of us. Sure, it’s to ‘combat crime’ but the real message is, “We have some serious shit and we’re not afraid to use it against YOU, if ordered to do so.”
Campus police with an MRAP?
Party wagon! Paint it yellow with pink and orange flames, trick it out with twinkle lights and a booming sound system and roll it!
Where can I get one?
The Dallas County, TX S.O. just received one. The county had to pay the out-of-pocket expense to have it shipped from Ft. Hood to Dallas. The $600,000.00 price tag was covered by the federal gov’t.
http://blogs.dallasobserver.com/unfairpark/2013/09/dallas_county_now_has_its_very.php
Sure looked like one of the state buildings at this year’s Eastern States Exposition had one sporting state police logos for one the New England States….guess protecting and serving the cheese farmers of Vermont is way more dangerous than anyone ever knew…the problem with all of this gear is nobody likes to train with gear they never intend to use…so you eventually start seeing this gear showing up where it’s never needed with the unintended consequences that correspond to such use.
Kind of like letting little men and women be cops to make everyone more equal…my favorite episode of cops is watching two women cops get their 4sses kicked in a bar until a couple of the patrons step in to help…I was expecting those women to have to shoot the guy they were trying unsuccessfully to subdue…perhaps that would have been a righteous outcome, but it would also be unnecessary. Kind of like when we attempt to serve a warrant to one man and somehow manage to kill 79 others in the process….
Great. Police departments will have nice shiny MRAP’s, while the National Guard and Reserves will still be training with non-armored HUMVEE’s.
Frankly I don’t give a damn. One will never roll up on my driveway … in fact I hope we get one in our town, because as soon as the town can’t properly maintain or operate it, it will go out to bid and I may be seen driving my on MCPO MRAP through your town on my way to a relaxing vacation!
Have fun buying fuel for it, MCPO, those things get about half the fuel mileage of a 1954 Cadillac when you’re on the highway going downhill with a tailwind!!
@11. You live in New York. You own guns, even a black one. Whaddaya mean they’re not gonna roll up in your driveway? Of course they are, just not quite yet.
For PD’s that can’t afford to put enough cruisers on the street, now they’re gonna be able to afford to put fuel in one of these? And, train someone who can’t drive a cruiser around the block without having at least one accident how to drive an MRAP? Yeah, right.
What’s that? The police at OSU need a fucking MRAP to deal with drunken students and alumni at football games?
Seriously. How the fuck do they prove need for these things?
‘Yes, we need one for, um, crowd control and shit. Even though Columbus, OH is a city that most people outside of Ohio don’t even know exists, and it’s pretty much the definition of a college town, filled with mostly students and hipsters. But yeah, we’ve got a tough crowd out here’.
I can’t wait for the departments to go bankrupt paying for these things and the training they’ll require, OR cleaning up after they wreck them.
Militarization continues. What next? A need for M240s and M249s? Crowd control, right?
@3-AriCav, an MRAP weighs 14+ tons, just over 28,000 pounds. Chicago city buses empty weigh around 40,000 pounds, and fully loaded they weigh much more. 18-wheelers on the highways definitely have a higher gross weight, empty or loaded (62,000 pounds loaded).
These silly machines (MRAPs) are mostly ego feeds for police departments that have a wannabe thing about milgear, which they can get as surplus equipment. But then, what happens if the US starts sending troops back into the Middle East? Will they recall all those gashogs? Probably not. The USGov will just waste more money buying more from Navistar. It’s not that I object to people working. It’s just the brain-dead mentality that says ‘put it in surplus’ and then ‘go spend more money on it’.
Again, I suggest that the only weapons a police department needs is one handgun for every officer, one shotgun per vehicle, and bullet-resistant vests all around.
Police departments need to stop using intimidation tactics and start using their brains. A little more of that whole “hearts & minds” concept would do them a lot of good. Right now they seem to be fixated on the “search & destroy” mode.
Any cop that wants to dress in cammies, wear body armor and have an automatic weapon needs to resign and join the military. There’s absolutely no place in our communities for such people.
Ex-PH2, a standard semi-truck is allowed a maximum GVW (Gross Vehicle Weight) of 80,000 pounds, and they are allowed a maximum weight per axle, 12,000 on steering, 17,000 pounds per drive and trailer axle. These MRAPs exceed that, and will cause more damage to roads & bridges, not to mention their top-heaviness, and their engine compartments are NOT up armored. They’re good for transporting personnel in a Combat Zone, but a well-placed shot can take out the engine.
@10, Dave, that’s already going on.
@17… Absodamlutely!
@17, you know how we ended up going down this road of Police Departments becoming small armies, or combinations of local P.D.’s becoming small armies? Do you remember the shootout in L.A.? The bank Robbery where the two guys were armed with Automatic AK’s? The Police were mostly armed as you describe and it was a freaking horror show for them.
I do not think they all have to be armed with M-4’s, but some of them should be.
As to MRAPS, not seeing a whole lot of need for them at this point but all it iwll take is a few more succesful bombings like in Boston, and or some Mall takeovers like in Africa…
rb325th: a large urban area like NYC or LA might actually be able to justify one or two. Ohio State University? Um, don’t think so.
This is merely the “it’s free, it look badass and cool, so let’s ask for one” mindset run amok.
They’re really gonna get their comeuppance when they start paying to maintain and operate these things.
@15: I don’t know, their students and alumni can get pretty ugly when Michigan kicks their @$$ at football. Just sayin’
Go Blue!
I know of a police department that has an HK21. Really? It is for their SWAT Team.
#21 – if the Police used real handguns instead of puny 9mm that wouldn’t have been as bad of a problem. Case in point – after the FBI Miami debacle, they(the FBI) identified the 10mm as the ideal round, but then due to political correctness had to lower the powder in the round for females that couldn’t handle it.
What good is an M4 when you cant, or at least shouldn’t, use concepts of suppressing fire around a civilian populace? A straight up bolt action .308 would give you much better penetration and keep you from killing bystanders.
Quote:
rb325th Says:
September 30th, 2013 at 12:03 pm
@17, you know how we ended up going down this road of Police Departments becoming small armies, or combinations of local P.D.’s becoming small armies? Do you remember the shootout in L.A.? The bank Robbery where the two guys were armed with Automatic AK’s? The Police were mostly armed as you describe and it was a freaking horror show for them.
I do not think they all have to be armed with M-4?s, but some of them should be.
—————————————————–
Those two bank robbers didn’t have any head armor. Had the cops tried shooting at their heads that situation wouldn’t have lasted near as long as it did. Revolvers, pistols or even shotguns would have worked considering the ranges involved. Instead, the cops were shooting (when they bothered to actually aim) at center of mass.
That’s no different than when armies fought in lines of battle and used battalion fire. Center of mass might get you a hit, though honestly, I am beginning to question the need for actual firearm qualifications for the police in light of all the number of non-criminal fatalities/casualties each year.
Of course they need all this hardware, I mean look at all the crazy, unhinged, and disturbed vets coming back from Afghanistan, how can the local police hope to contend wit these combat hardened warriors?
The funny thing, the P.D. here in Jacksonville, NC, home to 50,000 Marines and roughly 20 combat arms battalions don’t have this type of firepower, just a reserve SWAT Team, which hasn’t been called out in it’s entire existence.
Also want to point out, M.P. Companies aren’t even asa heavily armed and equipped as some P.D.’s out there. Most stateside units have a command van and patrol cruisers.
Many police departments have just as much gear as Security Force companies guarding nukes.
You did not hear it from me but, much of the heavy equipment, SWAT gear, fire trucks, hazmat units, comms equip, and the like are paid via Homeland Security Grants administered by FEMA.
But what the hell do I know!
@21: How long ago was the bank robbery in LA? Yeah, it’s time to quit using that one instance as an example. If you look at the excuses given by PD’s that get these, they say “it will help us to serve warrants”. How’s that going to help? Are they going to drive them through the fricken door? Most warrants being served are done by the SWAT team in their best tacticool outfits these days. Why? Not everything is a run and gun situation. I believe it’s because most police don’t have any connection to the community they work in. Plus, they don’t know the people in the communities, either. They quit being the “cop on the beat” and started with the “us versus them” mentality. Look at what they did in Watertown looking for 1 guy. Then, their tactics weren’t even effective at finding him to begin with, it was someone that noticed their boat cover was disheveled and called the cops.
As #17 says: If they wanna dress up like they’re in the military, then join the damn military.
Nice of the government, handing out battle damaged MRAPS to the police. Most of the ones (about 70 percent of them) I seen while working in Kuwait were all battle damaged.
@31: The stories about these say they are coming from training here in CONUS, not battle damaged units from the war zones.
Hondo, I am not trying to justify them being obtained. I actually find it pretty much a useless venture outside of maybe a major city or State Police Dept. For a college/university it is an absolute farce.
@26, I stand by what I said. Taking that head shot with a pistol at short range is easy when you are shooting at paper targets. Doing it at moving targets weaving in and out of cover while they return fire with automatic weapons… not so easy.
An MRAP would make an awesome POV.
http://www.odmp.org/officer/9293-sergeant-louis-a-millard
Just to play the devils advocate, my friend in this story might be alive today if they would have had an armored vehicle. This shoot out happened on the Colville Indian Reservation in Washington. When I was sheriff I had an opportunity to receive a “Peacekeeper” from Minot AFB. The cost was just the shipping to have it trucked to Washington. Now I too am not in favor of law enforcement being militarized. I did see what happened though in King County when a crazy bastard murdered several people including two old ladies with a garden hoe. He barricaded himself in a house of another victim while on his rampage he found a high powered rifle and started shooting at the police. One bullet hit the windshield of their peacekeeper which would have killed the driver if the glass was not bullet proof. I had a friend present at the shootout who was injured by shrapnel. I decided to get the peacekeeper for our tactical team after that.
My intentions were to protect my deputies. The vehicle is no more than a large bullet proof shield. I am surprised at some of the comments coming from combat vets on this thread. I am guessing that you all used whatever cover and concealment you had available when the lead flew. I personally felt it would have been irresponsible to not give my guys all the protection and tools they needed to do the job and go home at the end of the shift. I have been to way too many LE funerals.
Should LE not wear body armor too? Hell we never wore body armor in Vietnam, why not lose that too? LE armored vehicles make sense for tactical teams as a Defensive vehicle, they are not equipped or at least should not be with any machine guns.
As for my late friend Louis Millard Colville Tribal PD, he was out in the country many miles from any back up, he and his partner could have used a little more protection.
I can imagine a somewhat defensible reason for the equipment (e.g., it’s thought that something like the OSU v. U of M game could be an enticing target).
The problem, though, is that it’s kinda like giving a 16-year-old a 400-hp Mustang or a Hummer: he’s suddenly got lots of power and an inflated sense of self, without the requisite judgment or skills.
@35- While I feel for your loss, and I do believe most of the posters here are supporters of Law Enforcement, you guys are not the military. As such you should not be utilizing military vehicles or equipment to serve and protect. Should your friend ave been driving an MRAP as he patrolled the reservation? Should he have been carrying a military style rifle? I don’t understand what the solution would have been, short of going out on a combat patrol.
Are you arguing for armored vehicles for everyday patrolling? Should the police show up to every domestic disturbance, simply because it as the potential to get violent, with M4’s and MRAP’s? Where do you draw the line? Where do you say, enough is enough? You claim to be against the militarization of the police force, yet in the same breath support the use of armored vehicles. You can’t have it both ways.
While you have been to way too many LE funerals, I have been to way too many military funerals. Despite the armor, and weapons, and tactics, and gear, people will still be killed in the line of duty, it’s part of being in a dangerous profession, and it is a risk we take.
Many of your comments are what is wrong with many of the mentalities of police officers today, comparing combat to police work. Many in the LE field ave truly begun to believe that, that they are fighting an insurgency, that the populace as become their enemy.
The MaxxPro was a ugly vehicle to drive. The suspension is terrible and hope whoever ends up driving them isn’t stuck driving it hours on end. I know others who had back related problems from just the ride. If anything the LE might want to pick up the caimans which was a whole lot better.
Agreeing with 31, I know the ones we had most of the MaxxpPro’s were damaged from wear and tear that I saw. So the chances that they’ll get a 100% working one would be rare. Hell it might be down for repairs when it is needed most. That might be a arguing point for the LE to pick up more.
Fact of the matter is that in entirely too many of our cities and states the streets have indeed become combat zones. Sure, there are and always will be some idiots out there who should not be wearing a badge at all. Sure, there are some who do not have the maturity to serve in the military much less in a police department. Meanwhile, should the rest of them suffer and die because of the fools among them?
There is no one size fits all in good policing any more than there is in the military. Too many variables to even compare much less expect police officers to conform to a single way to do much of anything. (Shoot the bad guys and leave the rest of us alone might be one which they should all manage to do, but getting there will vary widely.)
I do not feel more secure knowing that my own county sheriff now has a fancy schmancy big, heavy, scary black armored vehicle. They paid quite a lot for it and we have neither the crime rate nor the tax base to support it. However, I used to live in a city with neighborhoods where such a vehicle could have been used effectively.
@35. I am neither indifferent nor insensitive to the loss of Sergeant Millard in 1986. I have participated in Fallen Officers funerals, though I have not lost a friend to a death on duty. That said, there are many, many issues that could be spotlighted regarding that particular incident and the “if only, [fill in here]” exercise is, to me, an empty one. It goes as much to tactics as it does to equipment. But that matter aside, what is the limit for militarizing police? At what point does the public, the citizenry, say “Whoa!” The problem with certain issues is the emotional aspect, whether an argument is for greater safety or “for the children.” And under the current regime, especially, more and more of us are starting to be concerned for the blurring line between the police mission and the military mission here at home. It’s not a pro or anti-police matter and I personally resent it being touted as such.
It’s rather like the so-called gun control argument, AC. All most of us are asking for is that the police effectively do their job – and I don’t mind buying them whatever equipment they need to do that, along with the training to use the equipment.
But, as with the “gun-control” advocates who define their opposition incorrectly, so is this argument being defined incorrectly. Apples are being compared to oranges, and we who point that out are vilified.
@37, no I am not advocating for everyday use of armored vehicles, but I do believe having some sort of armored vehicle available makes sense. As far as not having a good rifle, (we had surplus M-16’s) are you suggesting that a rural deputy sheriff should not have such a rifle?
We know that the job is dangerous but that does not mean one has to take unnecessary risks. I too am not a fan of making police “militarized”. I also understand that the MRAP is probably way too big for most occasions. I like many have concerns that there are far too many “swat” teams across the country now.
@35Cacti35
No serious person objects to equipping LE with body armor; or probably even long guns in many cases. Excluding economic concerns (which, though, are far from trivial), there’s probably not much objection to the idea of SWAT.
The problem comes when everything from dogs to Bearcats is advertised and pleaded for as “revenue enhancers” (though forfeiture, etc.). And that skepticism is reinforced when, for example, one hears about cases like Guerena (chosen principally for its notoriety, and because video and transcripts are readily available). It’s not just that that the raid was breathtakingly amateurish (an assessment reinforced by a $3 million settlement before discovery), it’s that it was a product of policy that preferred a no-knock raid to controlled buys and other actual police work (used when criminality is uncertain) chiefly because it was cheaper and faster.
And, it’s one thing to want everyone to make it home alive. And while it’s not acceptable, i.e., for departments to mandate escalating levels before lethal force is justified for even known/obviously violent offenders, saying officers in a no-knock raid are not only justified in shooting first, but can plan ahead of time to do so, is grotesque. It’s no small secret that many in LE see the hierarchy of protection as: (1) LE, (2) victims, (3) anyone else, and (4) “Perps.” Sorry, but fuck anyone who per se prioritizes LE ahead of anyone who’s not holding a gun to someone’s head, etc.
@41 OWB
“Apples are being compared to oranges”
Okay, pet peeve: There’s nothing wrong with comparing apples and oranges (and comparing apples to apples is, well, trivial). Plus, we do compare the two: by price, by calories or fiber, for use as half-time snacks or in pies….
@43. No, there’s nothing wrong with comparing apples to apples. There are different types of apples. I like ’em green, hard, and sour. But when one compares apples to oranges, there really is no point in it. They can quite easily be contrasted, and that exercise may bear fruit (bahdahbing!) but apples and oranges ought not be compared (or com-peared, if you like.)
@43,
I think we can agree on that. I too shudder when I read about some of the raids that are conducted. I know people that were involved in the Ruby Ridge fiasco, I also shuddered while watching the Waco thing unfold.
Mothball the fucking things.
@ 43 and 44: While there are many legitimate reasons to compare and contrast apples and oranges, my general objection often falls in one these categories:
a. When a box of apples insists that they are oranges in spite of evidence to the contrary,
b. When folks study apples and oranges with no possible useful result beyond lining the pockets of the studious, or
c. When the conclusion of an exhaustive comparison of apples and oranges is that pears make the best grape juice.
OWB: “When the conclusion of an exhaustive comparison of apples and oranges is that pears make the best grape juice.” Sounds like a federally funded study to me.
The operative word in this apples and oranges controversy is compare. Things alike are compared. Things different are contrasted. Thus, one can contrast apples and oranges but one ought not compare apples to oranges. I think that you will agree!
Depending upon one’s assumption of how many varieties of apples and/or oranges are included in the study, of course. (Do NOT try to sneak in a grapefruit or a kumquat, please.)
@44, et seq.
I have no idea if your apples and oranges are literal or metaphorical; but yes, there have in fact been studies (tongue-in-cheek) comparing apples and oranges. See, e.g., “Apples and Oranges — A Comparison (“Not only was this comparison easy to make, but it is apparent from the figure that apples and oranges are very similar. Thus, it would appear that the comparing apples and oranges defense should no longer be considered valid. This is a somewhat startling revelation. It can be anticipated to have a dramatic effect on the strategies used in arguments and discussions in the future.”)
@45Cacti35
Operational fuck-ups don’t bother me so much — they’ll happen — as much as the CYA that comes after. I attribute the bad PR to the measurably declining support for LE among the well-educated, traditionally a decidedly pro-LE group.
(Also, an odd fact: The most common LE injuries from those and like operational disasters are trauma to knees, elbows, jaws/teeth. In other words: cops fall like drunk yaks.)