PDA

View Full Version : Pentagon orders state officials to account for military weapons, suspends program Re


vantec08
06-08-2012, 6:26 AM
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/06/08/pentagon-putting-brakes-on-program-that-gives-weapons-to-law-enforcement-until/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+foxnews%2Fpolitics+%28Interna l+-+Politics+-+Text%29&utm_content=Google+Fe


"A report in March by California Watch, which was founded by the Center for Investigative Reporting, found that California police accumulated more equipment during 2011 than any other year in the program's two-decade history. That follows the overall trend in the program, which last year doled out almost $500 million in gear, up by more than double from the year before."


Remember the days of A-1 Surplus and like stores?

someR1
06-08-2012, 8:44 AM
http://xfinity.comcast.net/articles/news-general/20120608/US.Military.Weapons.Police/

This sickens me. We have free money for the crackheads that have no job and 80 children.....but we don't have money for our POLICE ?! Good Lord....

robcoe
06-08-2012, 8:51 AM
http://xfinity.comcast.net/articles/news-general/20120608/US.Military.Weapons.Police/

This sickens me. We have free money for the crackheads that have no job and 80 children.....but we don't have money for our POLICE ?! Good Lord....


The Defense Department has stopped issuing weapons to thousands of law enforcement agencies until it is satisfied that state officials can account for all the surplus guns, aircraft, Humvees and armored personnel carriers it has given police under a $2.6 billion program, The Associated Press has learned.
.
.
.
The Arizona Republic reported last month that the Pinal County Sheriff's Office has stockpiled millions of dollars' worth of equipment through the program, distributing some of the gear to non-police agencies, and intended to sell other property, which would violate the program's rules.

Rules apply to police too.

They haven't disbanded the program, they suspended it until these agency's can account for where all this stuff is and show they haven't been selling it or using it in ways that violate the agreement. It's an audit. Do you think the government should just throw around billions of dollars in equipment with no oversight?

crackerman
06-08-2012, 8:52 AM
I think you are seriously misreading the article. The pentagon is just calling for an audit of a program that loans stuff they own. Sounds like someone whistleblew abuse of that and they need to stop it. Departments selling equipment they don't own is like a druggie selling food stamps. Benefits not being used as designed. Lower the abuse, lower the waste.

How is this a bad thing?

Intimid8tor
06-08-2012, 8:53 AM
http://xfinity.comcast.net/articles/news-general/20120608/US.Military.Weapons.Police/

This sickens me. We have free money for the crackheads that have no job and 80 children.....but we don't have money for our POLICE ?! Good Lord....

Did you read the article?

It has nothing to do with money and everything to do with accountability to the items already given.

Nevermind the fact that the feds shouldn't be arming our police forces.

But, this is an example of rare accountability in the government. Of course it was brought on by reports of LEO agencies not using the items appropriately so it is not self imposed accountability.

The part that scares me.

"There are over 800 Illinois law enforcement agencies that submit applications to the state under the LESO program," agency employee Sunny Clark wrote. "CMS would need to go through each file individually in order to gather the records requested, which would be a difficult and time-consuming process."

800 Law Enforcement Agencies in Illinois alone. Do the math. Cut that in half to create a conservative average, now multiply by 50. That's 20,000 law enforcement agencies in the US, not including the feds.

someR1
06-08-2012, 8:54 AM
I believe it should be the governments job to track all this crap. Afterall, they track civilian weapons like a hawk.

someR1
06-08-2012, 9:07 AM
obviously the government isn't tracking the police weapons system sufficiently if there is so much "surplus" that is being illegally distributed

my logic is: the more weapons the better. Why should our government limit the amount of weapons available to our LEOs and forces?

This "audit" by the govt just sounds like a ploy to save money while everyone takes inventory

em9sredbeam
06-08-2012, 9:21 AM
After reading the about the new $400,000 armored transports the police are trying to get, and I am sure Solo will have a comment about this, but I don't blame the audit. Now we, the people just need to audit the rest of the govt and private bank accounts to see where the rest is going.

Mesa Tactical
06-08-2012, 10:08 AM
my logic is: the more weapons the better. Why should our government limit the amount of weapons available to our LEOs and forces?

Because it's their money and they are kinda interested in how it is being spent?

cadurand
06-08-2012, 10:20 AM
My guess is the people who make armored cars and special weapons for LEOs dropped a dime on a few agencies not keeping track of this hardware being given to them from the Pentagon.

They would rather SELL the LEOs a new APC than have them get a free one from the Feds.

robcoe
06-08-2012, 10:20 AM
Because it's our money and we are kinda interested in how it is being spent?

FIFY

I'm glad they are doing an audit, I wish they would do this with the rest of the government as well.

pHredd9mm
06-08-2012, 10:30 AM
EVERYTHING the U.S. Federal government buys should be tracked and audited. Especially when they give or loan it to state, county and city governments. IT'S OUR MONEY! (sorry for yelling). :chris:

nick
06-08-2012, 10:33 AM
Rules apply to police too.

They haven't disbanded the program, they suspended it until these agency's can account for where all this stuff is and show they haven't been selling it or using it in ways that violate the agreement. It's an audit. Do you think the government should just throw around billions of dollars in equipment with no oversight?

Umm, generally, yes :)

kotetu
06-08-2012, 10:38 AM
obviously the government isn't tracking the police weapons system sufficiently if there is so much "surplus" that is being illegally distributedThe recipient police forces are required to keep track of the equipment - that is how the program is supposed to work.

my logic is: the more weapons the better. Why should our government limit the amount of weapons available to our LEOs and forces? For one thing, tanks are difficult to parallel park.
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Fdhekvh8eTQ/T59vqO6dJqI/AAAAAAAAAIk/SUlKJUwPgzQ/s1600/phoenix.jpg

For another, are you sure you want a police state here at home? Don't we have enough trouble with police states abroad?
http://legendarykotetu.blogspot.com/2012/04/looming-police-state.html

This "audit" by the govt just sounds like a ploy to save money while everyone takes inventoryNo - they are giving and selling surplus equipment to the local police forces. Shutting down this program, even temporarily, doesn't save money.

MistWolf
06-08-2012, 11:21 AM
Interesting that the article specifically accuses the Pinal County Sheriff's Department of violating regulations of this program, the same department that is investigating the authenticity of Obama's birth certificate

Flintlock Tom
06-08-2012, 11:24 AM
Interesting that the article specifically accuses the Pinal County Sheriff's Department of violating regulations of this program, the same department that is investigating the authenticity of Obama's birth certificate

Hmmm...

Coded-Dude
06-08-2012, 11:43 AM
well...if they can't track guns going to enemies, how can they even consider tracking weapons that go to allies?

johnthomas
06-08-2012, 11:45 AM
Holding the police accountable sickens you? Really?

oni.dori
06-08-2012, 12:09 PM
Rules apply to police too.

They haven't disbanded the program, they suspended it until these agency's can account for where all this stuff is and show they haven't been selling it or using it in ways that violate the agreement. It's an audit. Do you think the government should just throw around billions of dollars in equipment with no oversight?

I think you are seriously misreading the article. The pentagon is just calling for an audit of a program that loans stuff they own. Sounds like someone whistleblew abuse of that and they need to stop it. Departments selling equipment they don't own is like a druggie selling food stamps. Benefits not being used as designed. Lower the abuse, lower the waste.

How is this a bad thing?

The federal government is demanding someone else be accountable for their spending of taxpayer money? How laughably ironic.

Ron-Solo
06-09-2012, 12:17 AM
After reading the about the new $400,000 armored transports the police are trying to get, and I am sure Solo will have a comment about this, but I don't blame the audit. Now we, the people just need to audit the rest of the govt and private bank accounts to see where the rest is going.

Why the personal dig at me? Where have you ever seen me post that a LEA shouldn't be accountable for their actions, and what does this have to do with armored transports.

My former department has benefited greatly from this program, and so has the public we serve. Every person who is plucked off the side of a mountain or flown to a trauma center in Air Rescue 5 owes their life to that program, which is where LASD got the H3 Sikorsky Helicopters from. I saw them when they were still painted Navy grey.

We also got many M-16 rifles fom the program, which were converted to semi-auto for patrol use after having a flat top receiver and an EoTech optic put on them. The Department keeps very close track on every weapon it owns. I should know, I was in charge of our station armory for several years. There are regular audits in place Departmentally and procedures in place when a firearm can not be located, which is very rare. They are usually found at another station after they were sent to the main armory for repair and the computers didn't get updated.

Audit, ABSOLUTELY! Sanction agencies that can't follow the rules, ABSOLUTELY!

Needless bashing of LE, ABSOLUTELY NOT!

No reason for personal insults either. We can disagree on things, and that's ok. That is one of the things I put my life in the line for 32 years to protect. Eveyone has their own opinion.

gh0stface
06-09-2012, 5:07 AM
I'm glad they are doing the audit. I really don't like the idea of arming civilian police agencies with military weapons and equipment. Law enforcement agencies should not be a para-military organization. Anyways, I agree with the others that the whole government should be audit.

dantodd
06-09-2012, 7:03 AM
Why the personal dig at me? Where have you ever seen me post that a LEA shouldn't be accountable for their actions, and what does this have to do with armored transports.

Ron, I'm not sure if you have had problems with em9sredbeam before but I didn't get a "dig" in his post. I thought he was merely pointing out that you often chime in, with good info, on LEO related threads. I guess it's just that I have such respect for you that it didn't even occur to me that his comment would be anything but expectation of a reasoned post from you in a thread like this.

vantec08
06-09-2012, 7:45 AM
Interesting that the article specifically accuses the Pinal County Sheriff's Department of violating regulations of this program, the same department that is investigating the authenticity of Obama's birth certificate

That would be the Maricopa County Sheriff, Joe Arpaio. Its interesting to note that the two biggest defiers of obammy are - -- Joe Arpaio and Scott Walker. Guess who has federal agents camped on their doorstep and crawling up their guts with microscopes? -- that would be . .. Joe Arpaio and Scott Walker. How did you guess.

azthig69
06-09-2012, 7:53 AM
obviously the government isn't tracking the police weapons system sufficiently if there is so much "surplus" that is being illegally distributed

my logic is: the more weapons the better. Why should our government limit the amount of weapons available to our LEOs and forces?

This "audit" by the govt just sounds like a ploy to save money while everyone takes inventory


Maybe it's just me... but an over militarized police force is not a good thing.

Sunday
06-09-2012, 7:59 AM
EVERYTHING the U.S. Federal government buys should be tracked and audited. Especially when they give or loan it to state, county and city governments. IT'S OUR MONEY! (sorry for yelling). :chris:
It really isn't their money they are just accountable for where it went.

donw
06-09-2012, 8:00 AM
Did you read the article?

It has nothing to do with money and everything to do with accountability to the items already given.

Nevermind the fact that the feds shouldn't be arming our police forces.

But, this is an example of rare accountability in the government. Of course it was brought on by reports of LEO agencies not using the items appropriately so it is not self imposed accountability.

[B]The part that scares me.[/



800 Law Enforcement Agencies in Illinois alone. Do the math. Cut that in half to create a conservative average, now multiply by 50. That's 20,000 law enforcement agencies in the US, not including the feds.

my thoughts exactly! why do civilian police forces need military grade weaponry and equipment?

Sunday
06-09-2012, 8:08 AM
I'm glad they are doing the audit. I really don't like the idea of arming civilian police agencies with military weapons and equipment. Law enforcement agencies should not be a para-military organization. Anyways, I agree with the others that the whole government should be audit.
It is to protect the government from its enemy and the enemy us. I am not bashing the cops there are some really great ones I have interacted with that were truly honorable! IMO I thank the good cops with all my heart. Sadly there are too many that aren't ,read the paper watch the news or the internet articles.

Eirerogue
06-09-2012, 8:26 AM
It's my understanding that the issue derived from the Pinal County S.O. (not to be confused with Maricopa S.O.) RECEIVING equipment from DOD and stating it was for THEIR Department's use, but the passed it on to other organizations that needed the equipment. That is in violation of the DOD policy. The surplus gear is designated soley for the department that receives it.

They are not the only LE organization that has passed on these surplus items to other agencies for their use. DOD wants to ensure where the equipment has gone. Forget politics, it's about accountability and I applaud DOD for verifying.

If you've ever been involved in the DOD surplus program, it's amazing what agencies can get! I've got no issues with audits.

morfeeis
06-09-2012, 2:58 PM
It really isn't their money they are just accountable for where it went.
That is the main problem i see. I cant think of one reason any city cop would need an APC.

ojisan
06-09-2012, 4:11 PM
Ron, I'm not sure if you have had problems with em9sredbeam before but I didn't get a "dig" in his post. I thought he was merely pointing out that you often chime in, with good info, on LEO related threads. I guess it's just that I have such respect for you that it didn't even occur to me that his comment would be anything but expectation of a reasoned post from you in a thread like this.

I know of what was referred to and it was a dig.
:(

I enjoy both em9's and Ron's posts.
Ron is one of the really good guys and if I ever have LE interaction I would hope it to be him or someone like him.
If anyone wants to grind on a cop, please find another one 'cause Ron does not deserve it.

(Not directed at you Dantodd).

Now, let's return to this thread's topic...an audit.
Sounds good to me.