America’s Militarized Police | STUFF YOU SHOULD KNOW

Welcome to Stuff You Should Know, a. production of iHeart Radio. Hey, and welcome to the podcast. I'm. Josh and there's Chuck and it's just us. today. But that's okay because this is. stuff you should know. The um. is this a good idea edition? >> Oh, I think it's a good idea. uh you. know, we're just going to kind of report. what's happened over the last, you know,

60. years or so in the United States. >> Yeah. There's been this increasing trend. that Yeah, I guess it's about how long. it's been going on where the the police. departments across the US have become. increasingly militarized. And to be specific, it's not just a. question of wearing tactical helmets and. vests, carrying assault rifles, sometimes driving through cities and.

MRAPs and tanks. Um, it's also a ch a. change in attitude that it's created. where people are no longer citizens who. are presumed innocent until proven. guilty. they are the enemy and the. police at that moment are an occupying. force coming in full force to that. person's house um or even when they're. not doing that just looking intimidating. to basically everyone who sees them. That's essentially what people who talk.

about this stuff consider the full scope. of the militarization of the police. >> Yeah, for sure. Um and like I said, this. has h been happening since about the. 1960s. Um, if you go back in time uh to. like the 1800s when cops first started. being a thing in the United States, they. were initially just hired as. politicians. It was called a patronage. system. So, they were kind of appointed. Uh, it wasn't until the 19th century. that um they started to get a little.

more like, hey, let's let's squash that. patronage. Um, let's hire police instead. of appointing them so they basically. don't work for politicians. Mhm. >> And that's when unions started being. founded. That's when formal training. programs started. Uh I know we've a lot. of this stuff we've covered in other. episodes, but I know if we talked about. Robert Peele and the London Metropolitan. Police as sort of a big um north star. that uh when America started their like. real police force, they often look to.

London and how how he did it. >> Yeah, for sure. And part of that was um. what's called the professionalism. movement of police. like you said, no. longer making them political appointees. in the pocket of some politician who. wants him to go rough up his opponent. And part of professionalism, one of the. central tenants is that essentially the. police is its own silo within society. It's not influenced by politics and all. that stuff which is good in that sense. but in the other sense the police then. kind of become their own um well police.

force and they make a lot of decisions. about society and as as there's less I. guess control or input or influence from. society things can start to get out of. hand. On the other hand, professionalism. also meant like no people who are. trained as police now know what they're. doing. they're actually getting. professional training. >> Yeah. I mean, it was in some ways it was. a progressive era at first when the. professionalism movement started, but. even early on, uh, there was a guy in.

California in Berkeley of all places, uh, the chief of police there named. August August. >> Wulmar. >> who, you know, even way back then was. like, hey, I I think, you know, it. should be more like the military. He had. a quote where he said, after all, we're. conducting a war, a war against the. enemies of society. So even back then. there was some ideological um seeds. being planted. Um other people have. defended Wulmer in this movement and. saying hey you know he actually is one. of the people who first started formal.

training. He's the first person to. encourage deescalation and hired the. first black and women police officer. So. he also had you know people um kind of. sticking up for his his movement as. well. >> Yeah. he's become kind of the poster. child for who started all this and other. people are like that's just not really. fair. So, um either way, he definitely. was a um a huge proponent of police. reform and kind of established a lot of. the ways that police thought uh and like.

you said, part of it was this idea that. there should be some degree of. militarization of the police. Um and. then after August Wulmer, nothing. happened for about 60 years. And then in. 1965, um, things. >> nothing happened. >> Nothing. The the police just went along doing. their thing and everybody was happy with. what they were doing. >> Yeah. Now I know what you mean. >> Um, in the 60s everything turned and you. can really trace the militarization of. the police back to a couple of years in.

the 60s. There are other things that. happened along the way. Um, I think in. the 80s there was a shootout in Miami. 1986 that ended up um leading to. fullthroated support for police getting. access to bulletproof vests, which I. really don't think is is problematic. Um, another one we we've done an entire. podcast on the North Hollywood shootout. in 1997. >> Yeah. >> That led access to police um being uh. equipped with long guns like assault.

rifles and stuff like that after that. And in both those cases, the police were. unprepared. They were shown to be. unprepared. So there were steps taken to. prepare them that you can kind of say um. are military in nature, I guess. But it. that's nothing compared to the effect. that the riots of the 1960s had on the. militarization of the police. >> Yeah, for sure. And um we covered some. of these in our episode on riots. But in. 1965, the Watts riots uh occurred. And.

then a couple a couple of years later in. 1967, there were riots in Newark and. Detroit. And this stuff was all over the. news. Uh it was, you know, being widely. reported. Americans were getting uh. pretty worried about just crime in. general sort of in the 1960s, you know, thinking things were kind of out of. control. Uh there was a poll in 1969 in. Newsweek uh that found that 66% of white. Americans thought police should be given. more power. >> and the Watts riots directly led to the.

creation of of SWAT units. Uh you know, we talked about this in our SWAT episode. >> all the way back in 2010. >> Wow. >> Uh but there was a a guy named Daryl. Gates who I'm pretty sure, isn't that. the same guy who was chief during the. Rodney King riots? >> Okay. Well, back then uh in ' 65, he was. a LAPD inspector and he he basically. said what what you said was like they. were just completely unprepared for how. to handle something like that at that. scale. So he went directly to the.

military and said, "Hey, I want to. create a special unit that's more like. you guys that can handle something like. this." And out of that came America's. first SWAT team in Los Angeles. >> Yeah. And SWAT teams are specifically. considered uh paramilitary police units. or PPUs. Like they are a sterling. example of militarization of the police, right? And so you can thank Daryl Gates. for for creating this like you said, although I suspect along the way. somebody would have come up with. something like this since they already.

existed in the military, right? >> So that was one big key point in the. militarization of police. Another big. one came from Lynden Johnson. Uh in 1965. under his uh guidance, I guess the the. United States passed the Law Enforcement. Assistance Act and Johnson had had. declared a war on crime and part of it. allowed the federal government to give. military weapons to local police. departments. So that was the first time. this is actually happening all the way. back in ' 65. And again, these riots,

there was 160 riots in one summer, 1967, um, alone. So, people were nervous and. like you said, a lot of people were in. support of the police having things like. access to military weapons. Then after. that, a year later, there was the. Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets. Act. And um, that created this permanent. administration that oversaw transferring. military weapons to local police. departments. Yeah, that was uh it was. called the Law Enforcement Assistance.

Administration. And because of that, cops were like, "All right, we can. start, you know, police departments. could start stockpiling these, you know, military grade weapons." And that's. really when it kicked off. >> Uh people did, and this is a pretty. important part of this episode, but um. not everyone was just saying, "Yeah, this this is awesome." Some people stood. back and said, "Wait a minute, why don't. we like kind of look at like why these. riots are happening?" Um, of course we. need to be able to deal with this stuff, but if we get to the root of the problem. and maybe try and stop them before they.

happen, that might be a good approach. And so in 1967, uh, Johnson formed a commission. Uh, it. ended up resulting in what's called the. Kerner Commission report. Uh, it was. officially called the National Advisory. Commission of on Civil Disorders, >> but it was named after its chairman, Otto Kerner. And he said, "I want to. find out three things. What happened? why it happened and how can we keep it. from happening again. Uh they surveyed.

different riots and uprisings in 23. cities and assigned people and. investigators to go out and you know. kind of get to the bottom of it and the. conclusions of the report didn't lead to. any substantive change. Uh it was. basically ignored. It was and that's I. mean it was like the most um. controversial. document ever produced by the US. government that basically said there's. institutional racism in the US and that. is directly responsible for riots in.

lowincome uh majority black areas, right? But part of it was like part of. the problem is heavy-handed policing. And the Colonel report went even further. and they said um the the commission. condemns moves to equip police. departments with mass destructive. weapons such as automatic rifles, machine guns, and tanks. Weapons that. are designed to destroy, not to control, have no place in densely populated urban. communities. So all all the way back in. the late60s, this governmentappointed.

panel is like we should not be. militarizing the police. That is the. wrong direction. And like you said, it. was just totally ignored. And not only. that, rather than um go in the direction. of getting to the bottom of the root. causes of this stuff and trying to cure. social ills that way probably forever, America went the other way and said, um, no, let's overwhelm these neighborhoods. with full military style force by.

equipping the police with military. weapons and armor and, um, we'll we'll. keep riots suppressed that way. And it. worked, but at a really huge cost, which. is um essentially an erosion of trust in. the police, uh not just in those. communities, but across the country. >> Yeah. And I mean, if you're wondering. like, wait a minute, Lyndon Johnson did. so much work for civil rights, this. doesn't quite add up. >> That was kind of one of the reasons he. he didn't bury the report. I mean, it's, you know, it came out and it was. published even in a book, so it got.

people talking at least, but he never. spoke publicly about it. And one of the. reasons why was because of his good. track record with civil rights. He was. like this report. He felt like it was an. indictment on his presidency. And he was. like, I don't like the way it makes me. look. >> And so, not only did he never even. address it, but uh apparently when you. have commissions like this, there are. these customary letters thanking the. commissioners for their service that. they draw up that the president sign. >> Uh I think they drew up those letters, but he he wouldn't even sign those. No,

they sent him out without his signature. because he was being a big fat baby. about the whole thing. >> That's essentially what happened. >> Yeah, sure. >> But yeah, because he ignored it publicly. and um because they they refused to. implement any of the stuff, it went um. well, they it wasn't implemented, but it. was also given a lot of media attention. and it kind of laid the groundwork for. discussions about race and the existence. of institutional racism in America from. that point on. So even though Johnson.

ignored it or his administration didn't. implement anything, um that it did get. some attention. That book you mentioned. became a bestseller. There's a lot of. media attention and it really laid the. groundwork for discussions about racism. in America and institutional racism that. would come. >> Yeah, for sure. Uh so should we take a. break and then talk about Nixon? >> Yeah, I think so because that's a really. big turning point as well. All right, we're going to take a break and we're. going to talk about Richard Nixon right.

after this. [Music]. [Music]. All. [Music].

right, we promised talk of Richard Nixon. uh and his war on drugs. And it I don't. know why it didn't occur to me until 10. minutes ago, but war on crime, war on. drugs. If we're talking about the. militarization of the police, maybe they. should stop using words like war about. everything. >> Yeah, that's that's a really good point. As a matter of fact, some people. basically laid the blame on the. militarization of police in America on.

Congress. Even Ran Paul, who I don't. necessarily agree with traditionally, he. wrote in 2014 in an op-ed in Time that. like it's basically all Congress's fault. for um police militarization happening. in the US because of all of these. policies that were passed over the. years. >> Yeah. So, Richard Nixon comes along and. uh in 1971 declared this war on drugs. Uh he very famously called drug abuse. public enemy number one. And uh you know.

there there has always been drug. problems in the United States and along. with that goes crime. I don't think. anyone disputes that. >> Um drug deaths were increasing at a. pretty pretty big rate in the 70s. >> and so he decides to do something about. it. Um if you talk to people on the. inside they'll say uh it actually has to. do with other things. Uh, one of his. advisers name was John Erlickman, who we. talked about before. But he said what. the war on drugs really was, if you knew. Nixon, it was a it was a ploy to attack.

his enemies, which was the anti-war. left, the progressive left and black. Americans. Uh, he has a quote. He said, "We knew we couldn't make it illegal to. be either against the war or black, but. by getting the public to associate the. hippies with marijuana and blacks with. heroin and then criminalizing both. heavily, we could disrupt those. communities.". >> Yeah. And one of the hallmarks of Nixon's war. on drugs was really aggressive policing, police tactics. Um, one of the things.

that they set up was the Office of Drug. Abuse Law Enforcement, Odale, which was. the predecessor to the DEA. And this. really aggressive approach moved the. focus of um of fighting drug trafficking. by targeting huge drug traffickers, which was traditionally how law. enforcement had done it, to basically. busting like not even just low-level. dealers, but drug users in their homes. And one of the big things that they came. up with to um facilitate those raids on.

their homes, military style raids on. homes, was the no knock warrant. Another. big concept in the militarization of. police. >> Yeah. And you know how how it. traditionally worked was uh you get a. warrant and you go and you knock on. someone's door. >> and you see if they answer the door and. then when they answer the door, you you. know start the process from there. A no. knock warrant is just what it sounds. like. We've seen them on the news when. they just go barging in a house. Uh, basically previous to this, the Drug.

Enforcement Agency or the predecessor. rather had conducted five no knock. searches in the 5 years leading up to. the formation of Odale. >> And in its first 6 months, um, they had. over 100 no knock raids. And over the. course of about 13 months from April 72. to May 73, they conducted almost 1,500. no knock raids. >> Yeah. And one of the huge problems that. people have with no knock raids is that. it's a. >> it's just rude.

>> It is very rude. It results in property. destruction. If they when if they or I. should say when they kick in your front. door, you're on the hook to replace your. front door. Even if your house was. mistakenly raided, they use flashbang. grenades that can injure people. Um and. I mean just police using grenades I. think should kind of stand out to you. um they uh will engage in gunfire with. assault rifles. It can be a really bad. jam. But even like on a more fundamental. level than the when those things go.

really wrong or even when they go right. and the destruction that can result is. the philosophical change that they. represent. something we talked about. earlier where if you go up to someone's. house and you say you have a warrant, you say you're the police, you knock on. their door, um that you're treating that. person like a citizen who is um. suspected of something but hasn't been. proven guilty. If you throw a flashbang. grenade through somebody's window and. kick in their front door and come in. like a SEAL team, >> Yeah. >> you're basically saying you're guilty.

We're here to remove you and take you to. jail and um you're you basically have. very little rights, if any. Yeah. And. any sudden movement, and I would imagine. there's probably nothing but sudden. movements when someone does that. >> Yeah. >> Uh you're probably shot. Uh and as an. animal lover, uh that that dog of yours. that runs up and barks at someone that. barges in the house is immediately shot. on the spot. >> Yeah. So, there's a lot of problems with. these no knock warrants. They've been a. target of police reform for years, but.

essentially there's nothing that's been. done about them. >> Yeah, for sure. So, while this is going. on, all this, you know, increase of of. militaristic approach, uh, Daryl Gates. is in LA. He's got his SWAT team up and. running in the 70s and, uh, there were. some really high-profile shootouts. We've we've talked about, it's funny how. many of these things have come up over. the years, but, >> um, one famous shootout with the Black. Panthers, uh, another one with the. Symbian Liberation Army, the SLA, uh,

that, uh, Patty Hurst was involved in. We covered that one. Uh but they were. very high-profile on the news kind of. things and the whole concept of SWAT. teams was all of a sudden like really in. the public eye and in cities all over. the country uh you know major cities for. sure and even smaller towns they were. like hey uh we want a SWAT team too. leading to the point where even though. they're no there are no official stats. uh there was a criminologist named Peter. Kroska who did some estimates that there. are between 50,000 and 80,000 SWAT raids.

a year in in the United States, >> right? >> So, that's the point where we're at now. >> It's um it's also well that and I think. he also determined that in 1980 there. were something like 3,000. So, that's quite a quite a um uptick. over the years. >> 3,000 to 80,000. >> Yeah. I think one of the other. overlooked um influences on on. normalizing SWAT teams was the TV show. SWAT from the mid70s. I think it just. was on a season or two, but it was.

really popular. So people were like, "SWAT teams are kind of awesome." Uh, like you said, even small towns were. getting these. Right now, from what I. could find, the smallest town that has. its own SWAT team, not just access to a. SWAT team, but they maintain their own. SWAT team, is a town called Kurville, Texas. And it has a population of. 25,000. So SWAT teams definitely spread. And one reason why is not so the police. can be like, "Man, this is so great. I. love carrying out these raids and using. flashbang grenades." I'm quite sure that.

is a sentiment among some cops, but. definitely not all. They are incentivized in every way, shape, or form to have SWAT teams and to. use them to carry out raids for. basically anything. And the reason why. they're incentivized to do that is. because, like Rand Paul said, the. federal government has been. incentivizing it over the years with. policy after policy, starting with. Johnson and leading up till today. >> Yeah. And you know, you get a TV show. like SWAT coming out and promoting uh.

and encouraging and sort of glorifying. the use of SWAT teams. Yet, MagnumPI. comes out and not every city is saying, "Hey, we need super hot guys and. Ferraris uh investigating things. privately.". >> No, but ironically, SWAT teams started. to wear short shorts after Magni came. out during their raids. It was a trend. for a little while. >> I sent you that picture of Tom Celich at. 80 years old the other day. Yeah. >> And you you said he looks better than I. do.

>> He He does, man. >> He's put on a little weight, but I gotta. say, man, Tom Zelic still looks pretty. dang good. >> He does, especially for 80. Sorry to be. agist, but it's true. >> Yeah. Handsome older man. Um, one thing. you mentioned a second ago, was the in. incentivization, is that the word? >> Of cops to carry out these no knock. raids and stuff like that. That really. ramped up with um President Ronald. Reagan in the 1980s. um under his presidency, they started. doing more and more drug raids. Uh a lot.

more frequent, a lot more um intense for. sure. And uh part of the reason is. because in 1984 he passed the federal. crime bill which expanded civil forfeite. laws uh relating to drug arrest. So. basically, hey, if you conduct a no. knock raid and you go in there and you. get, you know, a gym bag full of money. and cocaine, um, you get to keep that. keep those spoils. >> Yeah. Before they had to turn it all. over to the Department of Justice. The.

feds got all that. >> That's right. So it it literally um. financially incentivized these no not. grades. >> Yeah. Because if you're a a. budgetstrapped police department and all. of a sudden you can make millions of. dollars a year for your police. department or keep drug dealers cars and. auction them off or whatever, that's a. huge financial incentive to carry out. those raids and get as much of that. money as you possibly can. I don't think. that that's to say unfairly that that's.

the reason why cops are organizing raids. like that. Like I think that it's just. like I was saying or we both said a real. incentive to carry out those raids. rather than, you know, say non-military. policing. >> Uh yeah, for sure. Um that was 84 was. the federal crime bill. Then a few years. later in ' 87, Congress created a um a. new office basically that uh almost like. a a one-stop shop if you want to. militarize your local police department.

Um they helped with the transfer of. military equipment. They literally set. up a hotline and a cat and printed a. catalog. >> Yeah. Like the Sears wish book for. police chiefs. >> Yeah. That they would send out to police. chiefs and all of a sudden it just sort. of streamlined the whole process and. made it much easier. >> Yeah. Which is that's pretty easy as it. is. But the whole thing really kind of. got going under Bill Clinton. Um he kind. of tossed a bone to progressives by. coming up with the community oriented. policing services act I guess which is.

>> does that spell cops? >> Yes it does. >> Okay. >> good call. Uh and it's the opposite of. professionalization where they're like. no we need more input from the community. and society in how police police and all. that. Um that's that's one thing. So, it's like a a conceptually it makes. sense in that respect, but in practice, it really just gave more funding to. police departments to hire more cops. The really big part though came in 1997. as part of the National Defense.

Authorization Act that created what's. known as the 1033 program which is it. permanently authorized the Department of. Defense to funnel militaryra weapons and. supplies to police departments in the. US. It said this is official. These are. no longer executive orders. This is an. act of Congress saying you guys can do. this and let's make it happen. Yeah. And. since that uh which was in 1997 again um.

they have uh sold I guess I mean they're. selling the stuff right? >> No I well they just giving it to. >> I believe that they're essentially. giving it to them. If Yes. And if. they're selling it then police. departments can apply for grants from. the federal government to buy the stuff. from the federal government. >> They're like we're all on the same team. here. >> Ah Lou that was a very bad wiggum. I. used to do that better. Uh but since. then uh there has been more than $7.6. billion dollar worth of military.

equipment um given out to police. departments across the US. >> in less than 30 years. >> Yeah, >> that's a lot. Um the the 2000s really. kind of changed things as well. I guess. every decade really did. But um n the. 911 attack really kind of refocused. America's. thoughts on public safety, law. enforcement, that kind of thing. And one. of the upshots of it was the the. creation of the Department of Homeland.

Security um which created a program in. 2003 that that essentially gave um. grants to police departments for. training against terrorism and equipping. them with weapons to fight terrorism. And so terrorism also gave local police. departments a new justification and. rationalization for becoming. militarized. It's not only was it drug. users anymore. Now we had potential. terrorists coming to the US and police. departments needed to know how to deal. with a terrorist attack. Uh which I mean.

kind of it makes sense. It's tough to. argue with. It's just another kind of. ripple in the pond of this whole thing. though. >> Well, yeah, but what it did was, you. know, you've got these SWAT teams. sitting around in a maybe smaller town. and if they don't have any terrorists to. go fight, they don't want that that tank. to get rusty, >> right? So, in the 2000s, we saw SWAT. raids. It wasn't just drugs anymore, like you said. They were there have been. SWAT raids on uh barber shops because.

they didn't have a license. Uh there. have been SWAT raids against uh teenage. drinking, um small-time gamblers, like, you know, the backroom poker game, stuff. like that. It, you know, once they had. that system in place, they're like, "Well, we got to use this stuff for. something, >> right?" So, just having it makes you. want to use it. You're financially. incentivized. You can get it for free, all of this stuff. And so if you add all. that stuff up, you have every incentive. to not only have a SWAT team, but to use. them fairly often. And then also on top.

of that, they're further incentivized to. use no knock warrants because the. Supreme Court ruled in 2006 in a case. called Hudson v. Michigan that even if. you didn't obtain a no knock warrant, which is a warrant that says you don't. even have to knock, right? If you didn't. even bother to get that and you still. performed a no knock search, came. blazing in with flashbang grenades and. kicking down the door and coming in. through the window without a warrant, whatever evidence that you discovered.

was still admissible in court. >> That's right. So, just one more. incentive. Uh, and maybe we should take. a break. >> I think we should for sure. >> I'm incentivized to take a break right. now. >> Very nice, man. >> I'm going to dab your forehead with a. cool cloth. >> Okay. And we're going to pick up in the. 2010s right after this. >> Y. [Music].

[Music]. [Music]. So, Chuck, we've been basically going on. the premise this whole episode that the.

militarization of the police is. problematic in and of itself, right? And. I wanted to understand exactly why. Like, why didn't America just say, "Forget police forces. We'll just use. the military all the time. >> Yeah. >> And so I looked into it and essentially. the answer that I could find from. academia is that the military is well. aware that it could take over the. country anytime it wants. So it submits. to civilian rule. And part of that is.

based on the idea that civilian rule is. better for democracy than military rule. just because civilian politicians tend. to know how to run things better. more. there's more rights afforded to people. um who are citizens not being ruled by. the military. And so by militarizing the. police and having a police presence that. looks like a military occupation, it. normalizes the concept of the military. occupying its own country. And so it.

erodess that custom of the separation of. the military from domestic affairs that. could conceivably lead to the the idea. of the military actually starting to run. the show that it's supposed to be a. separation and the cops are moving that. Overton window by becoming militarized. That's essentially the basic argument. that I've seen against police. militarization. There's all sorts of. other symptoms and factors that it. creates too that people use to argue.

against it. >> Yeah, for sure. Uh and you know, we. can't ignore the fact because this is. happening in real time this week as we. record. Uh the current administration is. and this isn't militarizing the police. This is using the actual military on US. soil. Uh is you know the latest example. is the the federal um military takeover. of crime in Washington DC. So that's. that's kind of just happened over the. last couple of days as we record this, >> right? Yes. So one of the things that is.

um leading the huge push back of. militarization, aside from more and more. people being exposed to and unsettled by. a police officer in full tactical gear. holding an assault rifle um is the. advent of the smartphone and people can. actually record this stuff and then. broadcast it widely. And so it's kind of. captured the attention of uh the average. person, I would say. um to the to the. concept that that police militarization. is in and of itself a a heavy-handed.

police tactic that that is questionable. >> Yeah, for sure. Uh and I just had. another quick point. I I don't want to. get too much grief for this, but there's. a pretty obvious elephant in the room. here, which is if you're if you think. all this is great and you say, "Well, hey, they got those weapons, so why. can't the cops have those weapons, >> right? They have those weapons because. of policy as well, >> you know. >> Explain. >> Well, citizens like saying, "Hey, you. know, citizens have have assault rifles.

Like the cops should have assault. rifles.". >> Uh, and like the citizens have the. assault rifles because the US government. said it was okay to. So, >> you know, it's sort of I don't know. >> I had the same thought that you can. trace you can trace that argument back. to Okay. Well, that's actually an. argument in favor of gun control. Yeah, >> for sure. I I had the same thought. because yeah, that is a huge argument. People be like, "Well, if you take the. cops assault rifles away, only outlaws. will have assault rifles." It's like, "No, take the outlaw's assault rifles.

away first, then we can talk about the. cops giving theirs up, right?". >> They didn't used to have them, you know? >> Exactly. >> Okay. >> Yeah. So, no, I'm with you. I thought. that, too. >> So, you brought up smartphones. Uh, or. did you say smartphones? >> I did. I talked all about smartphones. I. talked about the iPhone 4, the iPhone 7, all the way up to the iPhone 13 and just. stopped there inexplicably. >> You know what's funny is uh month before. the new iPhone comes out, we talked. about planned obsolescence, my my trusty.

old iPhone 12 was finally dying. >> I think that's when that was during the. time when Apple was caught purposely. draining batteries to to make you have. to to replace your phone. I'm not. conspiracy guy, but I'm I'm just saying. like I was going to get the new one. anyway because it was I usually do every. three and I waited four this time. >> and u five. No, I waited five cuz I got. a 12 and it's a 17. >> Uh but yeah, it's my battery just. started going to zero and shutting off.

and rebooting and uh. >> Oh, wait. It just it just happened. Your. iPhone 12 just broke down. >> Oh, like last week. >> That's actually pretty good. >> Yeah, I guess so. But I was able to get. a aftermarket battery installed for 65. bucks from the local local guy. >> I know you know this, but um I want to. share it to everybody. >> Okay. >> Uh I had a lawn mower, a gas powered. lawn mower admittedly, but it was broken. like ready for the dump. And uh I was. like, "No, I'm going to repair this." So.

I called around, there was some repair. shops. They wanted to charge some dough. And I looked into what was probably. wrong. It's probably the carburetor. And. I said, "I'm going to replace this. carburetor." And by God, I replaced the. carburetor. And when I was done, the. first pull, that lawn mower started for. the first time in years. >> I got a text from Josh on Tuesday at. 8:26 p.m. >> Yeah. >> I just fixed my lawn mower by replacing. the carburetor and gas line started on. the first pull. And then I replied. eventually, "I put a radiator and a VW.

Jetta in my 30s.". >> Yeah. >> It's the only like real manly thing I've. ever done. >> You said bam. >> All right. All right, we should probably. get back. We had to have a laugh at some. point. So, >> that that part's over. >> That's it. That's the one laugh. Everybody be quiet. >> Back to smartphones changing the game. because all of a sudden, obviously, people can uh see the stuff on social. media with their own two eyes uh much. more than before. And in the mid2010s, in 2014, the Ferguson protests uh were a.

really good example of this kind of. happening. They were protesting um after. Michael Brown was killed by Officer. Darren Wilson. Uh the Obama. administration declined to prosecute. that and uh police got really aggressive. um on these protests. They were, you. know, the armored trucks came in, snipers came in, uh those flashbang. grenades that Josh loves talking about, uh and tear gas, and there was a big. public outcry after that such that Obama. said, "Hey, maybe we want to put some. guard rails around this 1033 program,

>> right?" And they did. They said, "Okay, no more tanks and grenade launchers,". among some other stuff. But this is, I. think, the first time anyone had stepped. in and been like, "We need to we need to. take some sort of prohibitions or bans. on what local police departments can get. from the military.". >> Yeah. And also, you know, um if if. you're saying like, "Why don't they just. get rid of 1033?" It's a it's not going. to happen. But, uh critics of that will. say, "Hey, it's not just military. weapons." They also take like our old.

air conditioners that we were going to. throw out if a cashstrapped police. department needs a new air conditioner. and stuff like that. >> Uh, and I guess my response to that is. like why don't you just create an act. about air conditioners then? >> Well, right. Exactly. Like there's no. reason you can't continue the 1033. program but ban um military style. weapons and armor, you know. Not. bulletproof vest. By armor, I mean like. M wraps and tanks and troop transports. and um like helicopters like Blackhawks. and stuff like that. There's It'd be.

easy as pie to do that. There's just not. >> I was kidding by the way about the Air. Conditioner Act. So, >> I know you were, but it is I mean it's a. it's a valid argument that there's. actually lots of stuff that doesn't make. the news that's really helpful to police. departments that comes from the 1033. program that's just you could really. easily adjust things. For sure. >> Yeah, absolutely. So Obama rolls back. some of this in 2015. Uh then the next. administration came in and very quickly. rolled back those 1033 reforms. Um and.

that's when the you know the sort of. ramped up use of paramilitary forces to. break up protest uh increase uh guarding. federal monuments and statues and stuff. like that because of vandalism. Uh, one. of the thing I just want to say one of. the things real quick that that um Trump. did when he rolled back those reforms, bayonets had been banned previously and. they got allowed again as part of that. executive order. And if there is one. thing that you do not need as a police. officer is a bayonet.

>> Yeah, think about it. >> We should do a shorty on bayonets. It's. interesting. Like the concept of putting. a weapon on the front of your weapon, like a less a less good weapon on the. front of your weapon. >> Yeah. That's meant to just stab somebody. through the chest or the neck or the. face or something like that. Like, and. the concept of those things showing up. at at a peaceful protest in case it. breaks out in a violence, like I I just. can't it just is mindboggling to me that.

bayonets were ever allowed. >> Well, it just seems very old school. I. mean, I know why they made bayonets is. because back then those the long rifles. took a long time to reload and maybe. were hard to shoot in close quarters. So, if you were all of a sudden had a. guy run up on you and battle, you got to. do some stabbing. And stabbing from, you. know, three and a half ft away is better. than stabbing in your hand. >> But this isn't the French Foreign. Legion, you know. >> No. And what you're talking about is a. military engagement, not a law. enforcement engagement. There's no place.

for bayonets in law enforcement. I think. that that is objectively true as far as. I'm concerned. >> Yeah, for sure. Um, so in 2022, President uh Biden signed uh an. executive order reinstating and. expanding some of these 1033 reforms. that the previous administration had. gotten rid of. Uh they limited the use. of no knock entries. Um and you know, basically tried to, you know, how it. happens when different administrations. come in, they try to undo what the. previous person did,

>> right? Um, and I looked high and low to. see if um, President Trump had come in. on his second term and reversed Biden. orders. Um, and I couldn't see anything. that said that. All the talk about the. reversal of the 1033 orders was from the. first term, but I did see that it's. possible that Biden's executive orders. were never implemented. So, there was. really nothing to roll back in in. practice. >> Well, I mean, that's another thing in. unto itself. It's you can get on TV and.

sign a thing, but implementation is. where it where the rubber meets the. road. >> That's where it's at. And you do get the. impression that there is a cynical thing. among politicians that like, yeah, we're. not going to touch this 1033 program in. reality. Like it's like you said, it's. not going anywhere. If it didn't go. anywhere after the summer of 2020 after. George Floyd's murder. >> Yeah. when there's never been more and. widespread focus on police, police. tactics, militarization of the police. So much ink was dropped. I actually.

found a Teen Vogue article from 2020. titled, "What's a no knock warrant?". Teen Vogue was talking about it. And if. it survived that, it's going to be. really tough to ever just fully get rid. of it if if you want it gotten rid of. >> Yeah. And you weren't even researching. You were just reading Teen Vogue on the. toilet. >> I couldn't believe it. I was like, he's. got to be a kid. Talking about COVID, talking about no knock warrants. Teen. Vogue had their finger on the pulse. >> Uh so the question remains, you know, is.

this move to militarize the police? Has. it rather um led to like better public. safety? I mean, because that's the. ultimate goal uh seemingly. Um and it. kind of depends on what you define, you. know, how you define public safety. because that's going to change depending. on who you are. Uh we have seen that. militarization uh can and has escalated. encounters. Uh there have, you know, it. it just this is anecdotal. I don't know. if there's a study on it, but I feel.

like every time there's a protest. happening uh and the tanks roll in, that's when it goes bad. >> Yeah, that's that's exactly what a lot. of people say about, say, for example, Ferguson. Um I I from what I could tell. the riots started before the police. responded but they started what? Like. after the police showed up. So yes, some. people are saying just seeing police. like that is intimidating and um. antagonizing I guess.

>> and that that um I think the next day. after the the whole world was like what. are you guys doing in Ferguson? the. governor of Missouri um told the. Ferguson Police Department to stand down. and sent out the um Missouri Highway. Patrol and they I they basically walked. step in step with the protesters, the. peaceful protesters and they used that. law enforcement tactic and apparently it. was to pretty good effect. >> Yeah. I mean, one thing is for sure is.

that uh it's led to um the killing of a. lot more citizens by the the police. Um. and this is a pretty shocking stat, and. you know, anytime you're comparing the. UK to the United States, it's I mean, some people might say that's not a fair. comparison because they just do things. so differently, but that's kind of the. point in in you know, delivering these. statistics. So, the Guardian reported. that in the first very first month in. January only of 2015, American police. killed more US citizens than police in.

the UK had in the last 24 years. combined. >> Yeah. >> One month, 24 years, >> right? Uh and those are typically um. like used most uh often. We guessed, we. should say there are very few states. that actually require police departments. to maintain statistics, including on. SWAT teams, how often they're used, where they're deployed. Uh again, anecdotally, they do seem to um be much. more present and much more used in uh. predominantly black communities.

>> Yeah. >> But there have been studies that have. shown like this is actually. counterproductive. Um, did you see that one from Princeton. from I think 2018. that uh it was it basically found that. um the militarization of police has a. counterproductive effect on police. themselves in that it affects it. negatively impacts public perception of. police. And the study showed that it. actually had a negative impact on public.

support for expanding police budgets. So. by militarizing you can make a case that. they're also shooting themselves in the. feet metaphorically. >> Yeah. No pun intended, >> right? >> Shooting themselves in the feet with a. grenade launcher. >> Right. And there was another study I. wanted to mention too. Um it was from. Emory here in Atlanta. Uh it was from. 2020. And there are these two studies. that came out in 2014 and 2017 that are. were pretty prominent and they're.

typically used to support the idea that. militarization of police actually has a. like increases public safety. And this. 2020 study looked at those studies and. said these studies did not have enough. data to come to these conclusions and. basically debunked them. And again the. reason why is because no statistics are. required in most states on things like. SWAT use. So you can't possibly say that. if you carry out 100 raids a year, public safety is going to go down by or.

going to increase by 10% or something. like that. You just you can't do it. So. studies on that are inherently faulty. and before you say, well, what about. that 2018 Princeton study that um that. looks specifically at Maryland, which is. one of those rare states that does. require reporting by police departments. >> Yeah. So, you got anything else to say about. it? >> Plenty, but I feel like this is a good. stopping point. >> Okay. Uh, I would love to hear from.

police officers who listen to stuff you. should know out there who are for. militarization and against it. I would. definitely love to hear those opinions. uh and points. >> Yeah, we'll read some of that stuff on. the air. >> Very nice. Well, since Chuck agreed to. read some stuff on the air, that means. it's time for listener mail. >> Uh, all right. We're getting a lot of. good feedback about our heavy metal. episodes. Uh, which makes our heart warm. because we uh we care about all the. episodes, but I think everyone could. tell we were pretty jazzed about those. >> Yep. >> Um, this one, and I'll probably be.

reading a lot of metal emails over the. next few weeks, but this one's from. Kevin. It's kind of fun. Hey guys, thanks for the metal eps. Uh, growing up. in the 80s, pop radio and MTV taught me. that metal's big three were tights, makeup, and hairspray. I was way too. cool for that and opted for the other. big three. The Smith, the Cure, and. Depes Mode. I was I was doing both, my. friend, >> cuz you can. Uh, but I always enjoy a. musical history lesson. So, thanks. Uh, later in life, I joined a cover band and. will grudgingly admit that some of the.

hair band songs worked well for us, which is why I'm still mythed that my. idea for naming our band was rejected. It was Cheryl Karu. >> Oh, that's a great one. That's up there. with B Turner Overdrive. Yeah, I'm generally not a pun band name. guy except for the Beatles and Cheryl. Crew. >> Yeah, that's pretty good. >> Uh that is from Kevin. Uh and I also. wanted to mention real quick that I read. uh in like 4 days I had the Nikki 6 uh.

Heroin Diaries book sitting on my shelf. for a couple of years and uh had just. finished um what did I just finish? I. finished the Bruce Springsteen book, uh, the one about the movie coming out, and. I dove right into the Heroin Diaries and. read it in three days, and it is, uh, oh. boy, I can't say it was a fun read. It. was harrowing. >> Yeah, I can imagine. >> to read the Diaries of of Nikki 6 in. those days, >> imagine. I just finished the letter N in. Encyclopedia Bratannica's suite of.

volumes. >> Oh, very nice. >> I'm just kidding. I am kidding, by the way. Oh, I know. >> Okay. Uh, who was that that wrote in? Kevin. >> Yeah, that was Kevin. >> Nice work, Kevin. Uh, we appreciate. that. And to all of you who enjoyed the. metal episodes, thank you. Rock on. And. if you want to get in touch with us, you. can send us an email, too. Send it off. to stuffodcast@ iheartradio.com.

Stuff You Should Know is a production of. iHeart Radio. For more podcasts, iHeart. Radio, visit the iHeart Radio app, Apple. Podcasts, or wherever you listen to your. favorite shows. [Music].