I feel like this is due to a peculiarity of how law enforcement works in the USA.<p>Every department and authority has their own law enforcement branch. You've got county sheriffs, state police, highway patrol, campus police, transport police etc. on a local authority level.<p>Then on a federal level, as the paper points out, everyone from the IRS to the Department of Education have their own law enforcement officers.<p>In the rest of the world, police is much more centralised.<p>Here in New Zealand (admittedly a small country), the Police are the only agency with general powers of arrest, and the only department outside the military with firearms.<p>The police don't have fancy equipment, if they need an APC, or helicopters or whatever (the police do have one), they'll borrow it from the Defence Force. It's not like they need to pay for and maintain their own stock to use once in a blue moon.<p>If an agency like the IRD (our tax department) need to raid or arrest someone, they'll get the police to do it.<p>I don't fully understand why the USA isn't like this. I understand why there's federal and local law enforcement, but if the FDA needs to raid and arrest people, why don't they second some FBI agents when they're needed?
Most of these agencies have some statutory responsibility to enforce law and investigate crimes under their purview. This includes enforcing court orders and arresting suspects in unknown and potentially dangerous situations. The report actually explains these things all the while sneering at the fact that these agencies need to employ investigative and enforcement personnel as part of their core mission.<p>Many of these agencies maintain large facilities to serve their core purposes and have to provide security for their facilities.<p>Little in this report is anywhere as alarming as the reports authors would like to make it out to be. OpenTheBooks.com seems to take the view that all government spending is wasteful, and by describing it out of context seeks to present it as abuse. For instance they present research grants to Ivy League schools as government subsidy of those schools [1] and The US Government employing a lot of lawyers as somehow suspect [2].<p>[1] <a href="http://www.openthebooks.com/openthebooks_oversight_report_%E2%80%93_the_federal_subsidy_of_the_ivy_league_preliminary_findings/" rel="nofollow">http://www.openthebooks.com/openthebooks_oversight_report_%E...</a><p>[2] <a href="http://www.openthebooks.com/openthebooks_snapshot_oversight_report_%E2%80%93_lawyered_up/" rel="nofollow">http://www.openthebooks.com/openthebooks_snapshot_oversight_...</a>
Ingenious work around to the Posse Comitatus Act. Turn the police into the military!<p><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posse_Comitatus_Act" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posse_Comitatus_Act</a><p>The rampant expansion and use of SWAT is disgusting.
If you're familiar with the use and types of firearms, this budget doesn't seem so odd. The alarmist nature of the paper gives the authors away. If they divided the cost per officer or the assets or notional value they presumably are protecting, it'd look like a fair budget!
I read the entire report and I find nothing particular exceptional about it, except the HHS shouldn't be involved in DOD purchases and everything seems gold plated. And no I'm not a gun owner or NRA member.<p>There has been an increase, but most of it is essentially due to post 911 mindset that every facility needs armed guards. In other countries that would just be unarmed (possibly contracted) guards, who ring the police if there are any problems. But then, other countries have fewer guns. Also, the fragmentation of policing in the States almost requires having an agency force, because of jurisdiction and funding wars.
I think the title is a little misleading. The report states that the findings are from 2006-2014 and that is when the rapid militarization of police forces with DHS funds was widely reported.<p>I fear that HN attributes all these to the current political atmosphere and how the foundation laid by the previous administration.
Sounded suspicious until I saw the list on page 5.<p>The Department of State, FBI, prison system, DEA, secret service, ICE, customs/border patrol, etc. are all on the top of the list, and I'd expect them to spend a lot of money on guns, ammo, and "military-style equipment".<p>A few of them are higher than I'd expect, but most of them seem reasonable. Any agency that uses armed security guards is going to spend some amount of money on guns, ammo, training, etc.
I thought the US Coast Guard was considered Military? If you want to have your mind blown by the shear number of federal law enforcement agencies check out the Wikipedia list below.<p><a href="https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_law_enforcement_in_the_United_States" rel="nofollow">https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_law_enforcement_in_t...</a>
Looking at the Customs and Border Protection case, did the CBP change standard-issued handguns during the period? The P2000, which they bought a bunch of, was introduced in 2001, and changing the standard issue is going to involve buying a lot of new guns.<p>Likewise, did ICE switch from some other caliber to .40S&W?
Also very interesting: ARtworks purchased by Veterans Affairs - <a href="http://www.openthebooks.com/the_vas_luxury_art_obsession/" rel="nofollow">http://www.openthebooks.com/the_vas_luxury_art_obsession/</a>
I'm as big an opponent of the militarization of police in the US as anyone, but I'm not sure consolidating police powers into one organization is going to immi the situation.
>"2005 to present the US Geological Survey agency spent $1,333,202.85 on guns, ammo and other military style equipment."<p>Citizens, pick up that rock.