America’s Militarized Police

Summary

Podcast Summary: “America’s Militarized Police”

Stuff You Should Know (iHeartPodcasts)
Hosts: Josh and Chuck
Air date: September 4, 2025

---

Episode Overview

This episode delves into the complex topic of police militarization in the United States. Hosts Josh and Chuck trace the evolution of American policing from its early days to the contemporary era, examining how local law enforcement has increasingly adopted military-grade weapons, tactics, and mentality. The discussion covers historical milestones, political influences, landmark legislation, and the social consequences of militarized policing—culminating in a frank conversation about trust, public safety, and potential reforms.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. What Is Police Militarization?

• Militarization refers to the adoption of military equipment and tactics by law enforcement (e.g., assault rifles, tactical gear, armored vehicles) and a mindset shift wherein police see themselves as an occupying force confronting an “enemy” rather than public servants interacting with citizens.
  • “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.” – Josh/Chuck (01:42)

---

2. Historical Evolution of American Policing

Early Policing and the Professionalism Movement

• 1800s: Police officers were appointed via patronage. Later, a push for professionalism aimed to make police more impartial and subject to formal training.
• August Vollmer (Berkeley, CA): Advocated for formal training but also likened policing to waging war against "enemies of society."
  • “After all, we're conducting a war, a war against the enemies of society.” – Quoting Vollmer (04:27)
• The seeds of militarization were present from the start, though often debated.

Pivotal Events in the 1960s

• Riots (Watts, Newark, Detroit, etc.): Unrest led to public fear and support for stronger police measures.
  • “There was a poll in 1969 in Newsweek that found that 66% of white Americans thought police should be given more power.” – (06:58)
• Creation of SWAT: Darryl Gates (LAPD) created the first SWAT team in direct response to riots, modeled on military tactics and equipment.
• Legislation: Lyndon Johnson’s “War on Crime” and subsequent acts enabled federal transfer of military equipment to police.

The Kerner Commission (1967)

• Concluded that institutional racism and heavy-handed policing contributed to unrest.
• Explicitly warned against giving police mass destruction weapons:
  • "Weapons that are designed to destroy, not to control, have no place in densely populated urban communities." – Kerner Report, quoted by hosts (11:29)
• The report was largely ignored, setting the stage for further militarization.

---

3. From Nixon to Clinton: Expanding Militarization

Nixon Era – "War on Drugs"

• Declared drug abuse "public enemy number one"; shifted focus to aggressive policing, often targeting Black communities and the anti-war left.
• No-knock warrants and home raids became common:
  • “In its first six months, they had over 100 no knock raids. And over the course of about 13 months… almost 1500 no knock raids.” – Josh (20:11)

1980s–1990s: Reagan and Clinton

• Civil Forfeiture: 1984 federal crime bill allowed police departments to keep assets seized in drug raids, incentivizing more frequent and aggressive tactics.
  • "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, you get to keep that." – Josh (26:39)
• Program 1033: Established in 1997, this still-active program permitted the Department of Defense to transfer military surplus to local law enforcement, resulting in $7.6 billion worth over 30 years.
  • “They have sold, I guess... more than $7.6 billion worth of military equipment given out to police departments across the US in less than 30 years.” – Josh (29:19)
• Even small towns began fielding SWAT teams, often influenced by media portrayals (e.g., the TV show SWAT).

---

4. 9/11 and the Homeland Security Era

• The post-9/11 climate brought more federal grants and equipment under the guise of anti-terrorism, and rationalized highly armed local police—even in small, non-terrorism-prone communities.
  • “Terrorism also gave local police departments a new justification and rationalization for becoming militarized.” – Chuck (30:41)
• SWAT and military tactics began to be used for routine, nonviolent offenses.

---

5. Judicial Endorsement and Growth of Raids

• Hudson v. Michigan (2006): Allowed evidence from illegal no-knock raids to remain admissible in court, further encouraging aggressive practices.
  • “Whatever evidence that you discovered was still admissible in court.” – Josh (32:05)
• SWAT raids surged from approximately 3,000 per year (1980) to 50,000–80,000 by the 2010s.
  • "3,000 to 80,000. That's quite an uptick over the years." – Josh and Chuck (23:38)

---

6. Social and Democratic Implications

• The military submits to civilian rule to preserve democratic norms; blurring military and police roles erodes this separation and sets a worrisome precedent.
  • “…the cops are moving that Overton window by becoming militarized.” – Chuck (36:04)
• The proliferation of smartphones has made police militarization far more visible, leading to greater public critique.

---

7. Recent Years – High-Profile Protests and Policy Reforms

Ferguson and the Rise of Public Scrutiny (2014)

• The aggressive, militarized police response to protests after Michael Brown's shooting drew nationwide backlash, prompting (temporary) federal reforms under Obama.
  • “The armored trucks came in, snipers came in, those flashbang grenades and tear gas… there was a big public outcry after that.” – Josh (41:54)
• Obama limited transfers of certain military equipment (e.g., tanks, grenade launchers); subsequently reversed by the following administration, which even restored bayonet access.
  • “If there is one thing that you do not need as a police officer is a bayonet.” – Chuck (44:20)

2020s and Ongoing Debates

• Biden issued new executive orders to again limit military equipment and no-knock raids, but real-world implementation remains limited.
• High-profile events (e.g., George Floyd protests, federal military actions in D.C.) intensified the debate but did not fundamentally change program 1033.

---

8. Does Militarization Increase Public Safety?

• American police kill vastly more citizens than police in countries like the UK.
  • “In January only of 2015, American police killed more U.S. citizens than police in the UK had in the last 24 years combined.” – Josh (49:06)
• Studies generally find no strong link between militarization and improved public safety; some suggest it erodes trust and public cooperation.
  • “Princeton found that the militarization of police… negatively impacts public perception of police… and public support for expanding police budgets.” – Chuck (50:08)
• There’s little standardized data—the “most states do not require reporting on SWAT or militarized police actions,” making conclusions and oversight difficult.

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On the philosophy behind policing:
  “After all, we're conducting a war, a war against the enemies of society.” – August Vollmer (quoted), (04:27)

• On the Kerner report’s prescience:
  “Weapons that are designed to destroy, not to control, have no place in densely populated urban communities.” – Kerner Report (11:29)

• On the perpetual arms race argument:
  “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?... Well, citizens have the assault rifles because the US government said it was okay to.” – Josh (38:42)

• On SWAT team proliferation:
  “Even small towns were getting these… from what I could find, the smallest town that has its own SWAT team… is Kerrville, Texas, and it has a population of 25,000.” – Chuck (23:50)

• On police department incentives:
  “You can make millions of dollars a year for your police department or keep drug dealers’ cars and auction them off… That’s a huge financial incentive.” – Chuck (26:39)

• On military gear for police:
  “If there is one thing that you do not need as a police officer is a bayonet.” – Chuck (44:20)

• On the disconnect between equipment sharing and its impact:
  “There’s no reason you can’t continue the 1033 program, but ban military style weapons and armor.” – Chuck (43:19)

---

Timestamps for Important Segments

• [01:42] What is police militarization?
• [04:27] Early roots: Vollmer and the war mindset
• [06:58] 1960s riots, polls, creation of SWAT
• [09:32] Johnson’s Law Enforcement Assistance Acts
• [11:22] Kerner Report findings and warnings
• [17:37] Nixon’s “War on Drugs” and escalation of raids
• [26:39] Reagan’s crime bill; financial incentives for raids
• [28:56] 1033 Program and military surplus to police
• [30:41] 9/11 and terrorism justifications
• [32:05] Hudson v. Michigan: judicial sanction for no-knock raids
• [36:04] Why militarization threatens democracy
• [41:54] Ferguson protests, Obama’s reforms
• [44:20] Bayonets and the absurdity of certain police equipment
• [49:06] Stats: U.S. vs UK police killings
• [50:08] Empirical studies on militarization’s public safety impact

---

Tone & Style

Josh and Chuck maintain their signature conversational, lightly humorous, but deeply thoughtful tone. They balance accessible summaries with informed historical and political analysis, occasionally calling out the absurdities and contradictions in policy development around police militarization.

---

Conclusion

This episode provides a thorough, nuanced portrait of how and why American policing has become so militarized—and at what cost. The hosts highlight the historical context, the policy decisions, the flawed rationales, and the mixed-to-negative consequences of militarized law enforcement, especially for marginalized communities and public trust. The episode encourages listeners to reflect on these developments and consider the future of policing and democracy in the U.S.

---

For those wishing to explore more or add their perspectives, Josh and Chuck invite feedback from law enforcement professionals and listeners at large.

Transcript

[Sarah Spain]

This is an I Heart podcast.

[Emily Tish Sussman]

Have you ever wished for a change but weren't sure how to make it? Maybe you felt stuck in a job, a place, or even a relationship. I'm Emily Tish Sussman and on she Pivots, I dive into the inspiring pivots of women who have taken big leaps in their lives and careers.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

I'm Gretchen Whitmer.

[Emily Tish Sussman]

Jody Sweetie, Monica Patton, Elaine Welteroth. Learn how to get comfortable pivoting because your life is going to be full of them. Listen to these women and more on she Pivots now on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

I was diagnosed with cancer on Friday and cancer free the next Friday. No chemo, no radiation, none of that.

[Warren Campbell]

On a recent episode of Culture Raises Us podcast, I sat down with Warren Campbell, Grammy winning producer, pastor and music executive to talk about the beats, the business and the legacy behind some of the biggest names in gospel, R and B and and hip hop professionally.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

I started at Death Row Records.

[Warren Campbell]

From Mary Mary to Jennifer Hudson, we get into the soul of the music and the purpose that drives it. Listen to Culture Raises us on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

[Emily Tish Sussman]

Welcome to Stuff youf Should Know, a production of iHeartRadio.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

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 the. Is this a good idea?

[Josh]

Oh, I think it's a good idea. You know, we're just gonna kind of report what's happened over the last, you know, 60 years or so in the United States.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

Yeah, there's been this increasing trend that. Yeah, I guess that's about how long it's been going on where 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. It's also 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, 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.

[Josh]

Yeah, for sure. And like I said, this has been happening since about the 1960s. If you go back in time 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. It wasn't until the 19th century that they started to get a little more like, hey, let's squash that patronage. Let's hire police instead of appointing them. So they basically don't work for politicians. And that's when union started being founded. That's when formal training programs started. I know we've a lot of this stuff we've covered in other episodes, but I know we talked about Robert Peel and the London Metropolitan Police as sort of a big north star, that when America started their real police force, they often looked to London and how he did it.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

Yeah, for sure. And part of that was 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 tenets, 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, well, police force. And they make a lot of decisions about society. And as there's less, I guess, control or input or influence from society and 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.

[Josh]

Yeah, I mean, in some ways it was a progressive era at first when the professionalism movement started. But even early on, there was a guy in California, in Berkeley of all places, the chief of police there named August, August Vollmar, who even way back then was like, hey, I think 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 seeds being planted. Other people have defended Vollmer in this movement and saying, hey, he actually is one of the people who first started formal training. He's the first person to encourage de escalation and hired the first black and women police officer. So he also had, you know, people kind of sticking up for his. His movement as well.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

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 either way, he definitely was A huge proponent of police reform and kind of established a lot of the ways that police thought. And like you said, part of it was this idea that there should be some degree of militarization of the police. And then after August Volmer, nothing happened for about 60 years. And then in 1965, things.

[Josh]

Nothing happened.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

Nothing. The police just went along doing their thing and everybody was happy with what they were doing.

[Josh]

Yeah, now I know what you mean.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

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. I think in the 80s, there was a shootout in Miami, 1986, that ended up leading to full throated support for police getting access to bulletproof vests, which I really don't think is problematic. Another one, we've done an entire podcast on the North Hollywood shootout in 1997 that led access to police being 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 are military in nature, I guess. But that's nothing compared to the effect that the riots of the 1960s had on the militarization of the police.

[Josh]

Yeah, for sure. And we covered some of these in our episode on riots. But in 1965, the Watts riots occurred, and then a couple of Years later in 1967, there were riots in Newark and Detroit. And this stuff was all over the news. It was being widely reported. Americans were getting pretty worried about just crime in general, sort of in the 1960s, thinking things were kind of out of control. There was a poll in 1969 in Newsweek that found that 66% of white Americans thought police should be given more power. And the Watts riots directly led to the creation of SWAT units. We talked about this in our SWAT episode all the way back in 2010.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

Wow.

[Josh]

But there was a guy named Darrell Gates, who I'm pretty sure. Isn't that the same guy who was chief during the Rodney King riots? Okay. Well, back then in 65, he was a LAPD inspector, and he basically said 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.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

Yeah. And SWAT teams are specifically considered 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 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 LYNDON JOHNSON. In 1965, under his guidance, I guess, the United States passed the Law Enforcement Assistance act. And Johnson 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 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 that created this permanent administration that oversaw transferring military weapons. Two local police departments.

[Josh]

Yeah, that was. 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. People did. And this is a pretty important part of this episode. But not everyone was just saying, yeah, 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? 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, Johnson formed a commission. It ended up resulting in what's called the Kerner Commission Report. It was officially called the National Advisory Commission 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? They surveyed different riots and uprisings in 23 cities and assigned people and investigators to go out and kind of get to the bottom of it. And the conclusions of the report didn't lead to any substantive change. It was basically ignored.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

It was. And that's. I mean, it was like the most 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 low income majority black areas. Right. But Part of it was like, part of the problem is heavy handed policing. And the Kerner report went even further and they said 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 the way back in the late 60s, this government appointed 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 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, no, let's overwhelm these neighborhoods with full military style force by equipping the police with military weapons and armor, and we'll keep riots suppressed that way. And it worked, but at a really huge cost, which is essentially an erosion of trust in the police, not just in those communities, but across the country.

[Josh]

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 didn't bury the report. I mean, 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 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. I think they drew up those letters, but he wouldn't even sign those.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

No, they sent them 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 because they refused to implement any of the stuff, it went well, 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 that 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.

[Josh]

Yeah, for sure. So should we take a break and then talk about Nixon?

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

Yeah, I think so, because that's a really big turning point as well.

[Josh]

All right, we're going to take a break and we're going to talk about Richard Nixon right after this.

[Sarah Spain]

The U.S. open is here and on my podcast, Good Game with Sarah Spain. I'm breaking down the players from rising stars to legends chasing history. The predictions will we see a first time winner and the pressure. Billie Jean King says pressure is a privilege, you know, plus the stories and events off the court. And of course, the honey deuces, the signature cocktail of the U.S. open.

[Emily Tish Sussman]

The U.S. open has gotten to be a very fancy, wonderfully experiential sporting event. I mean, listen, the whole aim is to be accessible and inclusive for all tennis fans, whether you play tennis or not.

[Sarah Spain]

Tennis is full of compelling stories of late. Have you heard about icon Venus Williams, recent wildcard bids? Or the young Canadian Victoria Mboko making a name for herself? How about Naomi Osaka getting back to form? To hear this and more, listen to Good Game with Sarah Spain, an iHeart women's sports production in partnership with Deep Blue Sports and Entertainment on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get.

[Emily Tish Sussman]

Your podcasts, presented by Capital One, founding partner of iHeart Women's Sports.

[Manny]

Imagine that you're on an airplane and all of a sudden you hear this.

[Noah and Devin]

Attention passengers. The pilot is having an emergency and.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

We need someone, anyone, to land this plane.

[Manny]

Think you could do it? It turns out that nearly 50% of men think that they could land the plane with the help of air traffic control. And they're saying like, okay, pull this. Until this, pull that, turn this. It's just, I can do my eyes closed. I'm Manny.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

I'm Noah. This is Devin.

[Manny]

And on our new show, no Such Thing, we get to the bottom of questions like these. Join us as we talk to the leading expert on overconfidence.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

Those who lack expertise lack the expertise they need to recognize that they lack expertise.

[Manny]

And then as we try the whole thing out for real. Wait, what? Oh, that's the run, right? I'm looking at this thing.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

See?

[Manny]

Listen to no Such thing on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you you get your podcasts.

[Noah and Devin]

Hi, I'm Jenica Lopez, and in the new season of the Overcomer podcast, I'm taking you on an exciting journey of self reflection. Am I ready to enter this new part of my life? Like, am I ready to be in a relationship? Am I ready to have kids and to really just devote myself and my time. I wanted to be successful on my own, not just because of who my mom is. Like, I felt like I needed to be better or work twice as hard as she did or join me for conversations about healing and growth. Life is freaking hard, and growth doesn't happen in comfort. It happens in motion, even when you're hurting. All from one of my favorite spaces, the kitchen. Honestly, these are going to come out so freaking amazing. Be a part of my new chapter and listen to the new season of the Overcome for podcast as part of the Michael Tura Podcast Network on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcast.

[Josh]

All right, we promised talk of Richard Nixon 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.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

Yeah, that's a really good point. As a matter of fact, some people basically lay the blame on the militarization of police in America, on Congress. Even Rand Paul, who I don't necessarily agree with traditionally, he wrote in 2014 in the op ed in Time that it's basically all Congress's fault for police militarization happening in the US because of all of these policies that were passed over the years.

[Josh]

Yeah. So Richard Nixon comes along and in 1971 declared this war on drugs. He very famously called drug abuse public enemy number one. And you know, there has always been drug problems in the United States. And along with that goes crime. I don't think anyone disputes that drug deaths were increasing at a pretty big rate in the 70s. And so he decides to do something about it. If you talk to people on the inside, they'll say it actually has to do with other things. One of his advisors name was John Ehrlichman, who we talked about before. But he said what the war on drugs really was. If you knew Nixon, it was a ploy to attack his enemies, which was the anti war left, the progressive left, and black Americans. 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.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

Yeah. And one of the hallmarks of Nixon's war on drugs was really aggressive policing, police tactics. 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 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 facilitate those raids on their homes, military style raids on homes, was the no knock warrant. Another big concept in the militarization of police.

[Josh]

Yeah. And you know how it traditionally worked was 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 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. Basically previous to this, the Drug Enforcement Agency, or the predecessor rather, had conducted five no knock searches in the five years leading up to the formation of ODALE. And in its first six months, they had over 100 no knock raids. And over the course of about 13 months, from April 72 to May 73, they conducted almost 1500 no knock raids.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

Yeah. And one of the huge problems that people have with no knock raids is that it's a.

[Josh]

It's just rude.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

It is very rude. It results in property destruction. 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. And I mean, just police using grenades, I think should kind of stand out to you. They 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, you're treating that person like a citizen who is 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, you're basically saying you're guilty, we're here to remove you and take you to jail. And you basically have very little rights, if any.

[Josh]

Yeah. And any sudden movement, and I would imagine there's probably nothing but sudden movements when someone does that. You're probably shot. And as an animal lover, that dog of yours that runs up and barks at someone, that barges in the house is immediately shot on the spot.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

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.

[Josh]

Yeah, for sure. So while this is going on, all this, you know, increase of militaristic approach, Daryl Gates is in LA. He's got his SWAT team up and running in the 70s and there were some really high profile shootouts we've talked about. It's funny how many of these things have come up over the years, but one famous shootout with the Black Panthers, another one with the Symbionese Liberation army, the SLA that Patty Hearst was involved in, we covered that one. But they were very high profile on the news kind of things. And the whole concept of SWAT teams was all of a sudden really in the public eye. And in cities all over the country, major cities for sure, and even smaller town, they were like, hey, we want a SWAT team too. Leading to the point where even though there are no official stats, there was a criminologist named Peter Kraska who did some estimates that There are between 50,000 and 80,000 SWAT raids a year in the United States.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

Right.

[Josh]

So that's the point where we're at now.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

It's also. Well, and I think he also determined that in 1980 there were something like 3,000. So that's quite a uptick over the years.

[Josh]

3,000 to 80,000.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

Yeah. I think one of the other overlooked influences on normalizing SWAT teams was the TV show SWAT from the mid-70s. 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. 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 own SWAT team, is a town called Kerrville, 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, 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.

[Josh]

Yeah. And you know, you get a TV show like SWAT coming out and promoting and encouraging and sort of glorifying the use of SWAT teams. Yet Magna PI comes out. And not every city is saying, hey, we need super hot guys and Ferraris investigating things privately.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

No, but ironically, SWAT teams started to wear short shorts after Magnum PI came out during their raids. It was a trend for a little while.

[Josh]

I sent you that picture of Tom Selleck at 80 years old the other day.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

Yeah.

[Josh]

And you said he looks better than I do.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

He does, man.

[Josh]

He's put on a little weight. But I gotta say, man, Tom Selleck still looks pretty dang good.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

He does. Especially for 80. Sorry to be ageist, but it's true.

[Josh]

Yeah, Handsome older man. One thing you mentioned a second ago was the incentivization, is that the word of cops to carry out these no knock raids and stuff like that. That really ramped up with President Ronald Reagan in the 1980s. Under his presidency, they started doing more and more drug raids. A lot more frequent, a lot more intense. For sure. And part of the reason is because in 1984 he passed the federal crime bill which expanded civil forfeiture laws 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, you get to keep that, keep those spoils.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

Yeah. Before they had to turn it all over to the Department of Justice. The Fed's got all that.

[Josh]

That's right. So it literally financially incentivized these no knock raids.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

Yeah, because if you're a budget strapped 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.

[Josh]

Yeah, for sure. That was 84 was the federal crime bill. Then a few Years later in 87, Congress created a, a new office basically that almost like a one stop shop. If you want to militarize your Local police department. They helped with the transfer of military equipment. They literally set up a hotline and a cat and printed a catalog.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

Yeah. Like the Sears wish book for police chiefs.

[Josh]

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.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

Yeah. Which is. That's pretty easy as it is. But the whole thing really kind of got going under Bill Clinton. He kind of tossed a bone to progressives by coming up with the Community Oriented Policing Services Act, I guess, which is.

[Josh]

Does that spell cops?

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

Yes, it does. Good call. 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. That's one thing. So it's like, 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 military grade weapons and supplies to police departments in the U.S. 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.

[Josh]

Yeah. And since that, which was in 1997, again, they have sold, I guess. I mean, they're selling this stuff, right?

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

No.

[Josh]

Are they just giving it to them?

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

I believe that they're essentially giving it to them. Yes. And if they're selling it, then police departments can apply for grants from the federal government to buy this stuff from the federal government.

[Josh]

They're like, man, we're all on the same team here. Ah, Lou, that was a very bad wiggum. I used to do that better. But since then, there has been more than $7.6 billion worth of military equipment given out to police departments across the.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

US in less than 30 years. Yeah, that's a lot. The 2000s really kind of changed things as well. I guess every decade really did. But 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 creation of the Department of Homeland Security, which created a program in 2003 that essentially gave 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 U.S. and police departments needed to know how to deal with a terrorist attack, 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.

[Josh]

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 terrors 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 barbershops because they didn't have a license. There have been SWAT raids against teenage drinking, small time gamblers, like the backroom poker game, stuff like that. Once they had that system in place, they're like, well, we got to use this stuff for something, right?

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

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.

[Josh]

That's right. So just one more incentive and maybe we should take a break.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

I think we should for sure.

[Josh]

I'm incentivized to take a break right now.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

Very nice, man.

[Josh]

I'm going to dab your forehead with a cool cloth.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

Okay.

[Josh]

And we're going to pick up in the 2000 and tens right after this.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

Yep.

[Sarah Spain]

The US Open is here. And on my podcast, Good Game with Sarah Spain, I'm breaking down the players, from rising stars to legends chasing history. The predictions will we see a first time winner and the pressure. Billie Jean King says pressure is a privilege, you know, plus the stories and events off the court, and of course, the honey deuces, the signature cocktail of the U.S. open.

[Emily Tish Sussman]

The U.S. open has gotten to be a very fancy, wonderfully experiential sporting event. I mean, listen, the whole aim is to be accessible and include inclusive for all tennis fans, whether you play tennis or not.

[Sarah Spain]

Tennis is full of compelling stories of late. Have you heard about icon Venus Williams, recent wild card bids? Or the young Canadian Victoria Mboko making a name for herself? How about Naomi Osaka getting back to form? To hear this and more, listen to Good Game with Sarah Spain, an iHeart women's sports production in partnership with Deep Blue Sports and Entertainment on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get.

[Emily Tish Sussman]

Your podcasts, presented by Capital One, founding partner of iHeart Women's Sports.

[Manny]

Imagine that you're on an airplane and all of a sudden you hear this.

[Noah and Devin]

Attention, passengers. The pilot is having an emergency and.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

We need someone, anyone, to land this plane.

[Manny]

Think you could do it? It turns out that nearly 50% of men think that they could land the plane with the help of air traffic control. And they're saying, like, okay, pull this, pull that, turn this. It's just I can do my eyes closed. I'm Manny.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

I'm Noah. This is Devin.

[Manny]

And on our new show, no Such Thing, we get to the bottom of questions like these. Join us as we talk to the leading expert on overconfidence.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

Those who lack expertise lack the expertise they need to recognize that they lack expertise.

[Manny]

And then as we try the whole thing out for real. Wait, what? Oh, that's the Runway. I'm looking at this thing.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

See?

[Manny]

Listen to no Such thing on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

[Honey German]

Hola, it's honey German. And my podcast, Gracias, Come Again is back. This season, we're going even deeper into the world of music and entertainment with raw and honest conversations with some of your favorite Latin artists and celebrities. You didn't have to audition.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

No, I didn't audition. I haven't auditioned in, like, over 25 years.

[Honey German]

Oh, wow. That's a real G talk right there.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

Oh, yeah.

[Honey German]

We've got some of the biggest actors, musicians, content creators, and culture shifters sharing their real stories of failure and success. You were destined to be a star. We talk all about what's viral and trending with a little bit of Cheeseman, a lot of laughs, and those amazing Vivras you've come to expect. And of course, we'll explore deeper topics dealing with identity struggles and all the issues affecting our Latin community. You feel like you get a little whitewashed because you have to do the code switching.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

I won't say whitewashed, because at the.

[Warren Campbell]

End of the day, you know, I'm me.

[Josh]

Yeah.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

But the whole pretending and coat, you.

[Warren Campbell]

Know, it takes a toll on you.

[Honey German]

Listen to the new season of Gracias. Come again as part of my Cultura podcast Network on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcast, or wherever you get your pod.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

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 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 erodes that custom of the separation of the military from domestic affairs that could conceivably lead to the idea of the military actually starting to run the show. There'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.

[Josh]

Yeah, for sure. And you know, we can't ignore the fact cause this is happening in real time this week as we record the current administration. And this isn't militarizing the police, this is using the actual military on US soil. The latest example is the federal military takeover of crime in Washington D.C. so that's kind of just happened over the last couple of days as we record this, right?

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

Yes. So one of the things that is leading the huge pushback 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, 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 the average person, I would say, to the concept that police militarization is in and of itself a heavy handed police tactic that is Questionable, Yeah, for sure.

[Josh]

And I just had another quick point. 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 think all this is great and you say, well, hey, they got those weapons, so why can't the cops have those weapons? They have those weapons because of policy as well. You know, explain. Well, citizens like saying, hey, you know, citizens have assault rifles like the cops should have assault rifles. 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.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

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 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 outlaws assault rifles away first. Then we can talk about the cops giving theirs up. Right?

[Josh]

They didn't used to have them, you know.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

Exactly. Okay, yeah, so. No, I'm with you. I thought that too.

[Josh]

So you brought up smartphones or did you say smartphones?

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

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 stop there inexplicably.

[Josh]

You know what's funny is a month before the new iPhone comes out, we talked about planned obsolescence. My trusty old iPhone 12 is finally dying.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

I think that's when. That was during the time when Apple was caught purposefully draining batteries to make you have to replace your phone.

[Josh]

I'm not conspiracy guy, but I'm just saying I was gonna get the new one anyway. Cause I usually do every three. And I waited four this time.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

And so you waited eight months?

[Josh]

Five. No, I waited five. Cause I got a 12 and it's a 17. But yeah, my battery just started going to zero and shutting off and rebooting.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

Oh wait, it just happened. Your iPhone 12 just broke down.

[Josh]

Oh, like last week.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

That's actually pretty good.

[Josh]

Yeah, I guess so. But I was able to get a aftermarket battery installed for 65 bucks from the local guy.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

I know you know this, but I want to share it to everybody. I had a lawnmower, a gas powered lawnmower, admittedly, but it was broken, like ready for the dump. And I was like, no, I'm going to repair this. So I called around, there's 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 lawnmower started for the first time in years.

[Josh]

I got a text from Josh on Tuesday at 8:26pm I just fixed my lawnmower 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.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

Yeah, it was the only, like, real.

[Josh]

Manly thing I've ever done.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

He said, bam.

[Josh]

All right, we should probably get back. We had to have a laugh at some point. So that part's over.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

That's it. That's the one laugh. Everybody be quiet.

[Josh]

Back to smartphones changing the game. Because all of a sudden, obviously, people can see this stuff on social media with their own two eyes, much more than before. And in the mid 2010s and 2014, the Ferguson protests were a really good example of this kind of happening. They were protesting after Michael Brown was killed by Officer Darren Wilson. The Obama administration declined to prosecute that. And police got really aggressive on these protests. They were, you know, the armored trucks came in, snipers came in, those flashbang grenades that Josh loves talking about and tear gas. And there was a big public outcry after that, such that Obama said, hey, maybe we want to put some guardrails around this 1033 program.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

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 take some sort of prohibitions or bans on what local police departments can get from the military.

[Josh]

Yeah. And also, you know, if you're saying, like, why don't they just get rid of 1033 A? It's not gonna happen. But critics of that will say, hey, it's not just military weapons. They also take, like, our old air conditioners that we were gonna throw out if a cash strapped police department needs a new air conditioner and stuff like that. And I guess my response to that is like, why don't you just create an act about air conditioners then?

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

Well, right, exactly. Like, there's no reason you can't continue the 1033 program, but ban military style weapons and armor. You know, not bulletproof vest. By armor, I mean like MRAPs and tanks and troop transports and like helicopters. Like Blackhawks and stuff like that. There's. It'd be easy as pie to do that. There's just not.

[Josh]

And I was kidding, by the way, about the air conditioner act, so.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

I know you were, but it is. I mean, 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.

[Josh]

Yeah, absolutely. So Obama rolls back some of this in 2015. Then the next administration came in and very quickly rolled back those 1033 reforms. And that's when the, you know, the sort of ramped up use of paramilitary forces to break up protest, increase guarding federal monuments and statues and stuff like that because of vandalism.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

One of the things, I just want to say one of the things real quick that 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.

[Josh]

We should do a shorty on bayonets. It's interesting. Like, yeah, it's the concept of putting a weapon on the front of your weapon.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

Yes.

[Josh]

Like a less good weapon on the front of your weapon.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

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 a peaceful protest in case it breaks out into violence, like, I just can't. It just is mind boggling to me that bayonets were ever allowed.

[Josh]

Well, it just seems very old school. I mean, I know why they made bayonets is because back then those 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 in battle, you gotta do some stabbing and stabbing from, you know, three and a half feet away is better. Then stab it in your hand. But this isn't the French Foreign Legion.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

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.

[Josh]

Yeah, for sure. So in 2022, President Biden signed an executive order reinstating and expanding some of these 1033 reforms that the previous administration had gotten rid of. They limited the use of no knock Entries 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.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

Right. And I looked high and low to see if President Trump had come in on his second term and reversed Biden orders. 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 practice.

[Josh]

Well, I mean, that's another thing unto itself. You can get on TV and sign a thing, but implementation is where the rubber meets the road.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

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 not. Like you said, it's not going anywhere. If it didn't go anywhere. After the summer of 2020, after George Floyd's murder, 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 gonna be really tough to ever just fully get rid of it if you want it gotten rid of.

[Josh]

Yeah. And you weren't even researching. You were just reading Teen Vogue on the toilet.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

I couldn't believe it. I was like, you gotta be kidding. Talking about COVID talking about no knock warrants. Teen Vogue had their finger on the pulse.

[Josh]

So the question remains, you know, is this move to militarize the police, has it rather led to, like, better public safety? I mean. Cause that's the ultimate goal, seemingly. 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. We have seen that militarization can and has escalated. Encounters there have. You know, 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 and the tanks roll in, that's when it goes bad.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

Yeah, that's exactly what a lot of people say about, say, for example, Ferguson. From what I could tell, the riots started before the police responded, but they started, like, after the police showed up. So, yes, some people are saying just seeing police like that is intimidating and antagonizing, I guess. And that, that I think the next day after the, the whole world was like, what are you guys doing in Ferguson? The governor of Missouri told the Ferguson Police Department to stand down and sent out the Missouri Highway Patrol. And they, 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.

[Josh]

Yeah, I mean, one thing is for sure is that it's led to the killing of a lot more citizens by the police. 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, 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 U.S. citizens than police in the UK had in the last 24 years combined. Yeah, one month. 24 years.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

Right. And those are typically, like, used most often, we guess 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. Again, anecdotally, they do seem to be much more present and much more used in predominantly black communities.

[Josh]

Yeah.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

But there have been studies that have shown like, this is actually counterproductive. Did you see that one from Princeton from, I think, 2018? It basically found that the militarization of police has a counterproductive effect on police themselves in that it affects police, 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.

[Josh]

The feet, metaphorically, no pun intended.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

Right.

[Josh]

Shooting themselves in the feet with a grenade launcher.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

Right. And there was another study I wanted to mention too. It was from Emory here in Atlanta. It was from 2020. And there are these two studies that came out in 2014 and 2017 that are 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 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. That looks specifically at Maryland, which is one of those rare states that does require reporting by police departments.

[Josh]

Yeah.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

So you got anything else to say about it?

[Josh]

Plenty. But I feel like this is a good stopping point.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

Okay. I would love to hear from police officers who listen to stuff youf should know out there who are for militarization and against it. I would definitely hear those opinions and points.

[Josh]

Yeah, we'll read some of that stuff on the air.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

Very nice. Well, since Chuck agreed to read some stuff on the air, that means it's time for. For listening mail.

[Josh]

All right. We're getting a lot of good feedback about our heavy metal episodes, which makes our heart warm because we care about all the episodes. But I think everyone could tell we were pretty jazzed about those. Yep, 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. 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 smiths, the cure, and depeche mode. I was doing both, my friend, because you can. But I always enjoy a musical history lesson, so thanks. 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 miffed that my idea for naming our band was rejected. It was Cheryl carew.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

Oh, that's a great one. That's up there with bachman or overdrive.

[Josh]

Yeah, I'm generally not a pun band name guy, except for the beatles and Cheryl crew.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

Yeah, that's pretty good.

[Josh]

That is from Kevin. And I also wanted to mention real quick that I read in, like, four days. I had the Nikki sixx heroin diary book Sitting on my shelf for a couple of years and had just finished. Where did I just finish? I finished the Bruce Springsteen book, the one about the movie coming out, and I dove right into the heroin diaries and read it in three days. And it is. Oh, boy. I can't say it was a fun read. It was harrowing.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

Yeah.

[Josh]

To read the diaries of Nikki sixx in those days.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

I just finished the letter n in encyclopedia britannicus suite of volumes.

[Josh]

Oh, very nice.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

I'M just kidding. I am kidding, by the way.

[Josh]

Oh, I know.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

Okay. Who was that that wrote in? Kevin?

[Josh]

Yeah, that was Kevin.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

Nice work, Kevin. 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 to send it off to stuffpodcastheartradio.com.

[Emily Tish Sussman]

Stuff youf Should Know is a production of iHeartRadio.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

For more podcasts My Heart Radio, visit the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts or wherever.

[Emily Tish Sussman]

You listen to your favorite shows. Have you ever wished for a change but weren't sure how to make it? Maybe you felt stuck in a job, a place, or even a relationship. I'm Emily Tish Sussman and on she Pivots I dive into the inspiring pivots of women who have taken big leaps in their lives and careers.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

I'm Gretchen Whitmer.

[Emily Tish Sussman]

Jody Sweetin, Monica Padme, Elaine Welteroth. Learn how to get comfortable pivoting because your life is going to be full of them. Listen to these women and more on she Pivots now on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts or wherever you get your podcasts.

[Sarah Spain]

The U.S. open is here. And on my podcast, Good Game with Sarah Spain, I'm breaking down the players, the predictions, the pressure, and of course the the honey deuces, the signature cocktail of the U.S. open.

[Emily Tish Sussman]

The U.S. open has gotten to be a very wonderfully experiential sporting event.

[Sarah Spain]

To hear this and more, listen to Good Game with Sarah Spain, an iHeart women's sports production in partnership with Deep Blue Sports and Entertainment on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts or wherever you get your podcasts. Brought to you by Novartis, founding partner of iHeart Women's Sports Network.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

I was diagnosed with cancer on Friday and cancer free the next Friday. No chemo, no radiation, none of that.

[Warren Campbell]

On a recent episode of Culture Raises Us podcast, I sat down with Warren Campbell, Grammy winning producer, pastor and music executive to talk about the beats, the business and the legacy behind some of the biggest names in gospel, R and B and hip hop professionally.

[Josh and Chuck (Stuff You Should Know hosts)]

I started at Death Row Records.

[Warren Campbell]

From Mary Mary to Jennifer Hudson, we get into the soul of the music and the purpose that drives it. Listen to Culture Raises us on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts or wherever you get your podcasts.

[Sarah Spain]

This is an iheart Pod.