Opinion: Pentagon program only encourages abuse of power

T he events in Ferguson, Mo., constitute the latest battle in the war between the public and local authorities.

This might seem like a crude metaphor, but the problem represented by the over-militarization of local police has necessitated its use.

In this conflict, the public, unlike police departments in Orange County, does not have tanks at its disposal. If we want to de-escalate the nationwide tensions that have surfaced in the wake of the shooting of unarmed black teenager Michael Brown, federal program 1033, which dumps old military equipment into the hands of local police, should be abolished. In the meantime, local police everywhere should make easily available a list of the military equipment they hold.

What the continuing events in Ferguson reveal is that people like Brown, and those who have mobilized on his behalf, are treated as enemies by those who have sworn to serve and protect them. Given how little the public knows of the police’s capabilities, these actions constitute an ambush.

In an unnecessary use of force, the assault-weapon-assisted arrests of trespassers at the Yates Motor Company building on Franklin Street in 2011 served as a chilling reminder of this fact.

The Chapel Hill Police Department’s Special Emergency Response Team (SERT) receives powerful military equipment, which is more costly to dispose of than to maintain.

Under the initiative, which began in 1997, the Pentagon recycles and donates its old equipment, which includes grenade launchers, military vehicles, night vision equipment and body armor.

In a conversation with The Daily Tar Heel, Lt. Joshua Mecimore, a spokesman for the Chapel Hill Police Department, said all the materials obtained through the 1033 program have been publicized. They include: a tank with no weapon attachments, surplus uniforms and a spotting scope. There is reason to believe that this armored vehicle is one of the six in Orange County obtained through this program by various local police departments, and it is unclear whether the others have weapon attachments.

Last year, the American Civil Liberties Union demanded records of county authorities’ receipt of military equipment. The written response given by Chapel Hill Police was defensive, saying North Carolina’s public records laws don’t apply to sensitive information. They’ve released more details recently, and other Triangle police departments ought to follow this example.

The militarization of local police began in the 1990s as part of the ill-conceived War on Drugs and continues to this day.

The phrase originated with former President Richard Nixon and was popularized by former President Ronald Reagan. Under former President George H.W. Bush, congress approved the targeting of drug dealers and users with military force. These targets were disproportionately black.

Chapel Hill Police Department’s possession of military equipment must, therefore, be considered in a broader context as part of racist policy.

And Chapel Hill is not immune to the type of racial profiling that has turned Ferguson upside down in recent weeks.

In 2011, junior Cameron Horne said the Chapel Hill Police Department racially profiled him. Police were searching for a shooting suspect described as white and driving a gold car. Horne is black and was driving a blue car when police detained him at gunpoint.

In a letter to The Daily Tar Heel, Horne claimed he had been “one misunderstanding away from being potentially shot, and God forbid, killed.”

The line between military action and community protection is not one local police departments can afford to blur. And with the extravagant violence encouraged by the Pentagon’s bequeathal of high-powered assault weapons, the line becomes even less distinct.

We expect continued transparency from the police in addition to a renewed commitment to racial justice.