Skip to main content icon/video/no-internet

Examining the militarization of civilian police in the United States may seem, at first glance, an odd pursuit in light of the preoccupation in the literature with community policing, a trend that espouses moving away from the traditional paramilitary professional model toward a democratization of police organizations and services. To some police observers, a momentous shift has occurred in the relationship between the police and military: The traditional delineations between the military, police, and criminal justice system are blurring. In breaking with a long-standing tenet of democratic governance and a central feature of the modern nation-state, the traditional roles of the military handling threats to our nation's external security through threatening or actually waging war, and the police targeting internal security problems such as crime and illegal drugs, are becoming increasingly intermingled. This blurring began with the military's heavy involvement in drug law enforcement during the Reagan/Bush drug war and has only broadened and deepened over the past 10 years. It is within this broader sociopolitical context that we can understand the recent and certain trend toward the militarization of a key component of U.S. police.

Defining Militarism and Militarization

The concepts of militarism and militarization are at times used in an ideologically charged fashion. This diminishes their power to help us think clearly about the influence the military model has on different aspects of our society.

Militarism, in the most basic terms, is an ideology geared toward solving problems. It is a set of beliefs, values, and assumptions that stresses the use of force and violence as the most appropriate and efficacious means to solve problems. It emphasizes the use of military power, hardware, operations, and technology as its primary problem-solving tools. Similarly, militarization is the implementation of militarism. It is the process of arming, organizing, planning, training for, and sometimes implementing violent conflict. To militarize means adopting and applying the central elements of the military model to an organization or particular situation.

To say that the police are becoming more militarized is simply referring to the process whereby civilian police increasingly draw from, and pattern themselves around, the military model. Four dimensions of the military model provide us with tangible indicators of militarization:

  • Culturally—martial language, style (appearance), thinking
  • Organizationally—martial arrangements such as “command and control” centers, or elite teams of officers patterned after military special operations squads
  • Operationally—patterns of activity modeled after the military, such as in the areas of intelligence, supervision, or handling of high-risk situations
  • Materially—martial equipment and technology

Put in this way, it should be clear that since their inception, the civilian police have shared many of these features, at least to some extent, with the military. After all, the foundation of military and police power is the same—the state-sanctioned capacity to use physical violence to accomplish their respective objectives (external and internal security). The police were developed, in fact, as a civilian alternative to the military for the sake of maintaining domestic security.

When discerning police militarization, the real concern is one of degree, or the extent to which a civilian police body is militarized. Militarization must be conceived of on a continuum.

...

  • Loading...
locked icon

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day FREE TRIAL

  • Watch videos from a variety of sources bringing classroom topics to life
  • Read modern, diverse business cases
  • Explore hundreds of books and reference titles

Sage Recommends

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

Loading