No More Military Weapons for Local Police

No More Military Weapons for Local Police


Print page

The Facts: A response to injustice.

On May 18, the Obama administration put forth a plan that prohibits police officers from having or obtaining military equipment such as grenades, rocket launchers, etc.

The president has created a “controlled equipment” list that categorizes what should be given to the cops and what shouldn’t. Due to all the incidents of police violence that have occurred like Furgeson, MO and the Baltimore riots just a few weeks ago, police are now downgrading to more humane weapons that should cause less deaths and bring more justice to the local city streets. Officers could still bypass this federal restriction by buying equipment from private sellers instead of the military as they have done in the past. This is an interesting case of Federalism at work.  How much independence to local governments have from the regulation of the National executive?

The banned list includes: tank-like armored vehicles that move on tracks, certain types of camouflage uniforms, bayonets, firearms and ammunition of .50 caliber or higher, grenade launchers, and weaponized aircraft.


I agree with what the President is doing. Police officers get carried away using such dangerous and deadly weapons. It seems that anyone they see as a threat is shot first and questioned later. Obtaining such weapons causes a big hazard in riots or in personal citizen defense. The US Military forces should be the only ones to have such deadly assault weapons. But what about the FBI or the CIA or special force SWAT teams?

Obama has made it clear that the cause of so many deaths is the use of these certain weapons on city streets. Controlling what the cops carry is a good way to keep us the people in less of a threat of danger. Officers have obviously shown over the past actions that have occurred that they do not know how to use the equipment in a correct manner. Do you think this new restriction will make any positive difference?