My latest Daily Beast column argues that one of the key reasons events in Ferguson have started a tragically delayed discussion on militarized policing is because "minority outrage at police mistreatment has intersected with the libertarian critique of state power in a way that has brought the concerns of both groups to a national audience." Snippets:
What has helped the story to go fully national, however, is that the events surrounding it exemplify the concerns that libertarians have been raising for decades about the militarization of police, which has its roots both in the drug war and the post-9/11 terror-industrial complex. As my former colleague Radley Balko, now at The Washington Post, has documented for years (first at The Cato Institute, then at Reason, and most fully in last year's Rise of the Warrior Cop), "The buzz phrase in policing today is officer safety. You'll also hear lots of references to preserving order, and fighting wars, be it on crime, drugs, or terrorism. Those are all concepts that emphasize confrontation. It's a view that pits the officers as the enforcer, and the public as the entity upon which laws and policies and procedures are to be enforced."
Balko is just one of many libertarians who worked to highlight these issues long before Ferguson erupted. "Dress like a soldier and you think you're at war," Glenn Reynolds, a law professor at University of Tennessee and the proprietor of the massively influential libertarian aggregator site Instapundit, wrote in 2006. "And, in wartime, civil liberties—or possible innocence—of the people on 'the other side' don't come up much. But the police aren't at war with the citizens they serve, or at least they're not supposed to be."…
What Ferguson demonstrates is how tightly related abstract concerns libertarians have about the government's power and the very real-life fears of police harassment that many African Americans have really are. So too are other issues of interest to both groups, ranging from school choice to sentencing reform to occupational licensing. As these sorts of newly recognized common causes filter through the culture, all sorts of new coalitions and possibilities can come to fruition. Glimpses of this are already visible in actions such as the nearly successful effort by Republican Rep. Justin Amash and Democratic Rep. John Conyers to defund National Security Agency surveillance programs last summer.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com
posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary
period.
Subscribe
here to preserve your ability to comment. Your
Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the
digital
edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do
not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments
do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and
ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
The debate on whether Brown was a martyr, sanctus et innocentius, or whether he was a rage-filled ape-man bent on rape and mayhem has nothing to do with the police's decision to first approach the protesters (not the looters, the protesters) as if they were storming the beaches at Normandy.
I will here applaud myself for having called this angle several days ago.
Whether or not Brown's shooting was justified, in no way justifies the cops coming out in full battle dress to break up a candle-light vigil with tear gas and flash-bang grenades.
And the few lefties that are actually talking militarization instead of the easier to digest 'race relations' arguments, are claiming that libertarians are silent on the issue of militarization and it's in fact the left who've been so concerned with this issue all along.
Libertarian?
Most people talking about Ferguson are thinking the best countermeasure is full-time video/audio on every police officer. All without ever talking about how such video/audio is inappropriate seizure as defined by the 4th Amendment.
Wow man sounds like some crazy stuff dude.
http://www.Anon-Surf.tk
I could be wrong, but it seemed Big News didn't jump on the obviously outrageous militarization of police until Rand Paul went off on Ferguson.
When did they get interested in militarization, all I'm seeing is race relation arguments and cop fellating on the news.
^THIS^
The debate on whether Brown was a martyr, sanctus et innocentius, or whether he was a rage-filled ape-man bent on rape and mayhem has nothing to do with the police's decision to first approach the protesters (not the looters, the protesters) as if they were storming the beaches at Normandy.
I will here applaud myself for having called this angle several days ago.
Whether or not Brown's shooting was justified, in no way justifies the cops coming out in full battle dress to break up a candle-light vigil with tear gas and flash-bang grenades.
INTIMIDATE.
ESCALATE.
SUBJUGATE.
Is that from an INXS song?
And the few lefties that are actually talking militarization instead of the easier to digest 'race relations' arguments, are claiming that libertarians are silent on the issue of militarization and it's in fact the left who've been so concerned with this issue all along.
Well to be fair, the are in charge of the news and write all the history books so if they say it's true than in all practicality it is.
That was my recollection of public school.
I know this is unlikely to get a response being that this has fallen off the front page, but what is up with that cops arm?
His palm is toward the crowd, and his forearm is more parallel to his chest, rather than perpendicular.
Libertarian?
Most people talking about Ferguson are thinking the best countermeasure is full-time video/audio on every police officer. All without ever talking about how such video/audio is inappropriate seizure as defined by the 4th Amendment.