Will Predictive Policing Make Militarized Police More Dangerous?

Defense One
by Patrick Tucker

policestate

As images of Ferguson, Missouri’s AR-15 totting police force made their way across the Internet, an ever-concerned public began to wonder who decided to give cops in an American city the sort of guns and gear that we provide to soldiers in the most dangerous places in the word?  We quickly discovered that the United States government did, under the so-called 1033 program, a program that allows the Defense Department to transfer military equipment to law enforcement (much to the delight, surely, of the companies that make that equipment.)

Of course, to call the Ferguson police force “militarized” is a misnomer. As Adam Weinstein points out at Gawker, gear alone does not a military member make—to wit: “Despite their expensive costuming, the police in Ferguson are putting on an unsophisticated, unscripted performance, a copy without an original. If these cops were to take a page out of the Army’s book on crowd control, it would be an improvement. But they seem to be making up tactics to go with the gear they’ve acquired.”

In terms of large nations that have, in fact, militarized their police forces, the model that we are now following looks Chinese in origin, a country that has been blurring the line between military and police for a long time. NATO and the Defense Department continuously point out that Chinese military funding and “public safety” funding overlap to large extent. A quick glance at Chinese spending on “internal” security versus formal “defense” reveals a country that views its citizens as a larger threat than any external foe.

In 2011, not long after the “Jasmine Revolution” swept Tunisia, Beijing—feeling the winds change in popular uprising—upped spending for police, jails, and other pieces of internal security by more than 13 percent to 624.4 billion yuan ($95 billion). Money for the Chinese Liberation Army, conversely, rose 12.7 percent that year to 601.1 billion yuan ($91.5 billion).

This would be the first time that the openly announced domestic security budget has surpassed military spending,” Tongji University political scientist Xie Yue told  Reuters. Yue said that the figure provides a good sense of China’s “stability protection” spend.

The trend slightly slowed but still continued through 2013. Chinese spending on its own police and internal security rose to 769.1 billion yuan last year compared to 740.6 billion yuan for the People’s Liberation Army.

This year, China withheld figures for what it would be spending on “stability maintenance,” but by the end of 2014, China will become the world’s number one market for surveillance equipment and technology, surpassing the U.S., according to a report from the Homeland Security Research Corporation.

The U.S. forbids the sale of military equipment to China with its Foreign Relations Authorization Act for FY1990-FY1991 (P.L. 101-246). But U.S. contractors from IBM China to GE Security Asia to Honeywell sell into the Chinese security market.

If China is a country that is at war with its own citizens, what does that mean for the future weapons that she might deploy?

Here’s where China may borrow from us. One of the most important new weapons that police forces around the country are experimenting with is so called predictive policing—the use of data and statistics to determine the location, and possibly even the perpetrators of crime. It’s a trend that’s sweeping police departments across America. Reporters at San Francisco Weekly have shown that a lot of today’s predictive policing marketers are peddling products that don’t meet the expectations that those marketers are advertising. But the thinking behind the concept is still sound, and there are some key cases where predictive policing has proven to be a force multiplier.

One such example is New York.

Read More

Police State: US Military Plans to Crush Dissident Political Groups, Target Leaders with Sniper Fire

miltarization.police.

Global Research
By Thomas Gaist

policestate

Links tweeted by WikiLeaks this week called attention to the development of crowd control doctrines by the US military, the most recent of which are codified in a US Army Techniques document dated April 2014, titled “Civil Disturbances.” Main concepts elaborated in the document include crowd dynamics, behavior theories, crowd types, and a “Graduated Response Matrix.”

The document points to various dissident political groups as main targets of the Army’s crowd control planning. “Examples of well-organized groups are anarchists, antiglobalization groups, and anti free enterprise groups,” the US Army document states.

The paper further cites demonstrations coordinated by labor groups, specifically citing the 2011 protests at the Wisconsin capitol. “Labor unions played a large role in the 2011 Wisconsin protests that included passing on information and transporting participants,” the document states.

Special attention is given to “organized protests,” which are said to have more growth potential than spontaneous protests as result of their “centralized planning” and use of “modern technologies that allow for rapid information dissemination.”

Techniques outlined in the document include the use non-lethal weapons, “pain compliance” measures, lethal overwatch teams (snipers), and deployment of aircraft overhead (said to have a “psychological effect”).

The use of military working dog (MWD) teams is highlighted as an especially effective “intimidation measure.” “The presence of the MWD may produce a profound psychological effect on the crowd,” the document states.

The document calls for deployment of “overwatch” sniper teams to intimidate crowds and pick off suspected leaders and organizers. Such use of snipers to terrorize demonstrators, recently on display in Ferguson, Missouri, where protests against the killing of Michael Brown were subject to a massive crackdown by militarized police forces, is part of the Army’s integrated Graduated Response Matrix (GRM). The GRM provides for numerous levels of escalating psychological and physical pressure against a targeted crowd, including:

* Exploit the psychological effect of shows of force.

* Escalate the Military Information Support Operations (MISO) message via loudspeakers and handbills—MISO is a more recently adopted military term for psychological operations (PSYOPS).

* Demonstrate sniper precision strike capability.

* Use riot control ammunition: tear gas, pepper spray, smoke bombs, stun grenades, rubber munitions, acoustic weapons, electro-muscular disruption weapons.

* Move through the crowd using riot control formations and movement techniques.

* Target leaders and “troublemakers” with sniper fire.

* Escalate from single shot small caliber fire to automatic large caliber.

* Close air support and indirect fire (artillery, mortars).

While stating that “coercion dispersal” of crowds may become necessary, the document notes that “negotiated management of crowds … is the preferred method especially if the demonstration or protest leaders are available and willing to participate,” and advises commanders to adhere to the “goldilocks principle,” saying crowd control activities should be “neither too hard nor too soft.”

The document also calls for the use of “high powered cameras mounted on towers and aerial vehicles” to create video recordings of both the crowd and the soldiers engaged in crowd control operations.

Ominously, the document outlines conditions under which the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, which prohibits the use of the US military for police actions on American soil, will not apply. Under a range of loosely defined “exceptional” conditions, the military can conduct unrestrained operations within the United States, the document notes.

In “emergency extraordinary circumstances,” including vaguely defined contingencies such as “unlawful obstruction or rebellion against the authority of the United States,” US military commanders are empowered to carry out, without requiring any form of civilian authorization, “activities that are necessary to quell large-scale, unexpected civil disturbances,” the document states.

Such sophisticated crowd control doctrines are an expression of the far advanced preparations by the US ruling elite, dating back decades, to establish martial law and transition to a police state dictatorship.

Congressional hearings in May of 1987 on the Iran-Contra scandal exposed plans, codenamed Operation Rex ’84, to suspend the US Constitution, transfer power to a shadow dictatorship consisting of agents of the military and intelligence apparatus, and conduct mass roundups of hundreds of thousands of political opponents of the American state.

In the immediate aftermath of the September 11 attacks, the George W. Bush administration implemented “continuity of government” (COG) procedures virtually identical to those laid out by Operation Rex, establishing a secret network of anonymous officials working from “undisclosed secure locations.” Without any consultation with or involvement of the legislative and judicial branches, between 75 and 150 members of the executive branch were ensconced in military bunkers and legal documents were drawn up to empower these officials with authoritarian powers.

Global Research

Will the Ferguson Shooting Mark a Historic Shift in the Police State?

Activist Post
by Bernie Suarez

ferguson_lessons

Only time will tell, but is it too soon to guess whether the Ferguson, Missouri shooting of unarmed teenager Michael Brown will mark a turning point in our march toward tyranny in America? There are signs that this could be the case. Yes this could be an overly optimistic assumption about the current direction of the police state in America, but there is a slight chance that the consciousness that came with the Ferguson shooting may have been a badly needed cure to the metastasizing police state problem.

Before anyone makes assumptions of how naive I’m being or overly optimistic, let’s clarify. We are in a battle of competing paradigms and competing consciousness. One important thing to note about the police state is that authority, control, intimidation and police state madness is itself a real-time live form of consciousness. In this police state consciousness we can confirm the typical officer becomes consumed in their role. This disconnected behavior had been confirmed in previous psychology experiments, and we know how governments carefully train police to do as they are told. Add to that, the influence of the culture of police and what we see is a group of people acting within their own (twisted) consciousness to oppress others without consequences. We saw this in Nazi Germany and many other examples throughout history.

This powerful competing consciousness, the police consciousness, took a step back after the Ferguson shooting. How do we know?

Some indicators are alternative and social media’s coverage of the images and sounds of the Ferguson police state brutality on American protesters. This mass media coverage of the police state forced mainstream media to pay attention to the police state brutality. Together, this brought an even greater mass awareness of police brutality in America that the control system wasn’t prepared for. The result?

a.  In San Antonio police launched a new program called ‘I Pledge to do the Right Thing‘ campaign.

b. In Ferguson a cop was actually suspended for illegally pointing a rifle at innocent protesters and threatening to kill one.

c. In Davis, California the city council just ordered police to get rid of their militaryMRAP vehicle given to them for free by the federal government.

d. St. Louis police officer (and Glendale police officer) suspended for violent hate talk.

e. The (same) cop who threatened to kill a reporter in Ferguson officially resigns.

f. Some police are speaking out. It is now revealed that the Pentagon forced military gear on local police departments

Does this mean that the police state problem is finally being addressed? Some optimists may see it this way, but it is far too soon to celebrate any long-term victories. At least this shows that the media is willing to give attention to this issue, and that officers and police departments nationwide have been served with a dose of consciousness. This consciousness of deliberately spewing hate needs to be exposed; and this idea that police have the right to do whatever they want has to be contained – perhaps the Ferguson shooting has contributed to this.

On the optimistic side of things it is possible that this attention brought to the violent out-of-control police state could be a starting point to limiting the equipment the local police receive from federal government. Yes, the Obama administration has stated concerns about this issue but this is inconsistent with what we know about federal government’s role in all of this. Perhaps this incident, however, will eventually force local communities to end their participation in the controversial 1033 program enacted in 1994 which made it possible for the Pentagon to dump military equipment on local police nationwide.

Perhaps we are finally reaching the initial point of critical reasoning that will allow us to debunk the argument that police need military gear to be “safe”. On the pessimistic side of things, however, perhaps these events will be used to engineer a new justification for brutal police force and militarization down the road. That is, perhaps we are being set up for a new series of false flags which will be designed to once again justify why police need military equipment. Perhaps they will stage a massacre involving police deaths (note to police!) and then make the argument that if they had access to military equipment none of this would have happened. Unfortunately, all victories must be taken with a grain of salt.

For now, we can’t live in a world overly-anticipating the new world order’s next move. We have to take our lessons from the real-time events and find ways of improving our experience. Those of us alive today have the power to use the Michael Brown murder in a positive way and take note of the things that went wrong.

Let’s remember Jake Tapper and CNN staging scaremongering political signs behind the crowd to twist Ferguson into ISIS scaring and warmongering. Let’s remember the mainstream media desperately trying to spin the shooting into a race issue. Let’s remember the psycho cop who threatened reporters with death if they didn’t listen to him. Let’s note the staged violence and the militarized presence of police treating peaceful American protesters as terrorists. Let us remember the images and sounds of a gun firing eleven times in a matter of seconds on an unarmed teenager. Let us remember the dead body thrown into an SUV as if it were a dead dog or road kill.

Everyone has their own memory of this incredible event as this event does carry the potential to be a game changer in the police state madness that has gripped the United States since the Occupy revolution of 2011. We all saw how the U.C. Davis officer who sprayed innocent peaceful student activists with pepper spray was demonized then later financially rewarded. Let us not allow these corrupt cops to be rewarded again.

We all know that the shooter, officer Darren Wilson, has been unusually quiet, out of sight and given protection by his police constituents from the general public and media. We know that he has been preparing his defense using mystery voices and sporadic spot supporters all spinning the narrative into one that paints Wilson as the victim instead of the aggressor. Let us not allow this narrative to open the door to injustice. Wilson supporters would sell you a narrative and philosophy that states that if Wilson felt in any danger or felt attacked, then he has the right to empty out his gun on an unarmed teenager. That is not what policing is all about. That is not what living in America is all about. Officers are equipped with radios, cameras, batons, tasers and mace to record, disable and potentially capture someone they want to question. Shooting someone to death execution style with eleven shots, six of which actually landed on the body is an execution any way you look at it, not a defensive action.

Hopefully the police defense argument, which holds the power to potentially divide America further, will be allowed to prove its case soundly. Hopefully, this story will culminate with reasonable justice based on the facts. Either way, we can expect the control system and its eager mainstream media mouthpiece to use the final verdict to create division amongst Americans. This should remind us that the end game is to destroy America, kill freedom, strengthen the police state and bring tyranny to America.

Let us use the circumstances we have now to turn this police state agenda in a different direction. This story has proven that we-the-people and the alternative media have the power to do just this. We have the power to share information and expose the new world order and its corrupt police state. Let us keep doing what we are doing and hope for the best. With events happening so fast, let us appreciate and focus on the bigger picture. As these events happen, practice thinking on your own.

We saw a lot of independent thinking in Ferguson and that was one of the great things. We saw and heard from people who are sick and tired of the police state brutality and the mainstream media coverage of it. Let’s keep this theme moving forward, for in this type of thinking is how we will find the answers and the solutions that we are looking for. Like the Bundy Ranch confrontation involving patriots willing to die for freedom and the Constitution, the Ferguson shooting (“hands up don’t shoot”) confrontation showed the power that peaceful demonstrations can have on the psyche of the police state. 

In the end, hopefully the Ferguson shooting will be talked about years from now as a key point in the awareness of the police state; and hopefully the path that it leads to will be one that many of us will be proud to look back on.

Bernie Suarez is an activist, critical thinker, radio host, musician, M.D, Veteran, lover of freedom and the Constitution, and creator of the Truth and Art TV project. He also has a background in psychology and highly recommends that everyone watch a documentary titled The Century of the Self. Bernie has concluded that the way to defeat the New World Order is to truly be the change that you want to see. Manifesting the solution and putting truth into action is the very thing that will defeat the globalists. 

Activist Post

FBI Terror Report: Militia, Sovereign Citizens Greater Threat Than Islamic Terrorists

InfoWars
by KIT DANIELS

police state
Image Credits: FBI / U.S. Air Force

The FBI’s latest national threat assessment lists so-called sovereign citizens and the militia as threats to “U.S. internal security” while completely omitting Islamic terrorists.

The Aug. 14 National Threat Assessment for Domestic Extremism, which was obtained by the Washington Free Beacon, claims that militia members and sovereign citizens are among those “aspired” to carry out violent attacks, yet it only indirectly mentions Islamic terrorism in a footnote describing “other” types of “domestic extremism” not included in the report.

“Of a sample of 50 credible violent threat intelligence reports analyzed for this assessment, nearly 60 percent expressed lethal violence as an ultimate goal,” the report asserts.

The report reads like a spiritual successor to previous publications by the Southern Poverty Law Center, which routinely demonized Constitutionalists and other libertarians by grouping them with white supremacists and other racist organizations.

And, unfortunately, it should be no surprise the FBI considers freedom-loving Americans a larger threat than violent Islamic extremists when previous actions by the federal government to suppress political dissidents are taken into consideration.

Earlier this month, a university consortium funded by the Department of Homeland Security designated sovereign citizens as the “number one domestic terrorist threat in America,” ranking them above Islamic extremism in agreement with the FBI’s terror assessment.

The University of Maryland’s National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START) said sovereign citizens were the “top concern of law enforcement.”

It recommended that state and federal law enforcement share intelligence on sovereign citizens and other targeted groups, develop “tactical responses” to threats and “act on that information to prevent or mitigate threats.”

Similarly, in 2011, the FBI said it “considers sovereign-citizen extremists as comprising a domestic terrorist movement.”

But, as journalist Kurt Nimmo pointed out, sovereign citizens do not actually constitute a cohesive movement despite the government’s attempts to characterize them as such.

“The START report also neglects to mention that virtually all high-profile domestic terrorism plots in the United States after 9/11 were directed by the FBI and the U.S. government, a fact reported by The New York Times,” he wrote.

Additionally, in 2009 the Missouri Information Analysis Center (MIAC) distributed a law enforcement bulletin entitled The Modern Militia Movement which instructed police to be on the lookout for Americans displaying “political paraphernalia” such as Gadsden flags and Ron Paul bumper stickers.

MIAC, a federal law enforcement information sharing hub more commonly known as a fusion center, described itself as a “mechanism to collect incident reports of suspicious activities” in order to “identify potential trends or patterns of terrorist or criminal operations within the state of Missouri.”

Similarly, and perhaps even more eerily, during the 2008 presidential election Obama’s campaign team asked Missouri law enforcement to “target anyone who lies or runs a misleading television ad,” as Russell Kinsaul with News 4 reported:

 
InfoWars

Vampire Cops to Establish Nazi-style Checkpoints Over Labor Day Weekend

InfoWars
by ADAN SALAZAR

Checkpoints, ‘no refusal’ blood draws now standard fare during national holidays

checkpoints
Image Credits: versageek, Flickr

The police state will be rolling out in full force this Labor Day weekend, as police departments in several states prepare to violate their citizens’ Fourth Amendment protections, under the guise of keeping drunk drivers off the road.

Cops nationwide are warning holiday revelers they will be subject to mandatory blood draws if an officer merely suspects them of driving under the influence.

The practice, termed “no refusal,” involves police administering roadside sobriety tests, alcohol breath tests or forcibly extracting blood samples without a person’s consent, securing evidence which would aid a future conviction. A judge is typically on hand to issue search warrants, attempting to give the illegal blood draws an air of legitimacy in the face of blatant constitutional violations.

In states like Florida, police went one step further by erecting guilty-until-proven-innocent roadside checkpoints in the week leading up to the Labor Day weekend, where officers inspected driver’s licenses, proofs of insurance, vehicle registrations and checked for seat belt violations.

“Saturation patrols, bar and tavern checks, and checkpoints will also be held at various locations in Tennessee, Georgia and the southeastern states,” according to WDEF.com.

Police in Georgia will also be working alongside Alabama, and North and South Carolina law enforcement agencies in an effort titled “Hands Across the Border,” which emphasizes law enforcement entities’ authority to stop drunk drivers visiting from other states.

Local police across the state of Texas, in cities such as Dallas, Austin, Galveston and the Rio Grande Valley, are also enforcing no refusal blood draws ostensibly to stem drunk driving fatalities.

A report from a Fox affiliate in Georgia last year showed police constraining unwilling participants’ arms, legs, hands, and feet when they refused to relent to a blood draw, while one restrained man asked, “What country is this?”

“We all are American citizens and you guys have me strapped to a table like I’m in Guantanamo f***ing Bay,” complained Mike Choroski while several officers hovered over him.

“I’m a taxpaying American who refused something….I refused to do this….what happened to me in that room was unnecessary and nobody should have to do that,” said Choroski.

As police in numerous states use the pretext of “safety” to circumvent freedoms prescribed in the Fourth Amendment, which is supposed to protect American citizens from unwarranted “unreasonable searches and seizures,” the U.S. Supreme Court has upheld efforts to go after people who refuse to consent to blood draws, indicating this represents “consciousness of guilt.” In other words, states may prosecute someone for refusing a blood draw on the grounds that doing so represents an admission of their guilt.

A January 2013 ruling affirmed that a warrant must be obtained for the process,” noted Paul Joseph Watson, adding, “although police could dispense with the warrant requirement in an ‘emergency.’”

The accuracy of results garnered through such procedures has been the subject of contention, however. “Breathalyzer tests have previously been proven to be inaccurate in a high percentage of cases, with many factors rendering the results ‘little more than scientific guesswork,’” reported Steve Watson in June. “Further research has shown that police officers often influence the results of breathalyzer tests, resulting in inaccurately high readings. Blood tests can also produce false high readings of alcohol levels if they are not conducted quickly and properly.”

InfoWars

DOT Proposes Mandating Cars Broadcast Location, Direction and Speed

CNSNews
By Terence P. Jeffrey

US Department of Transportation V2V image

(U.S. Department of Transportation image)

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, part of the Department of Transportation, published last week an “advanced notice of proposed rulemaking” on “vehicle-to-vehicle communications.”

What NHTSA is proposing could begin a transformation in the American transportation system that makes our lives better and freer — or gives government more power over where we go and when.

In announcing its proposed rulemaking, NHTSA is stressing its intention to protect the “privacy” of American drivers.

“This document initiates rulemaking that would propose to create a new Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard, FMVSS No. 150, to require vehicle-to-vehicle communication capability for light vehicles,” says NHTSA’s dryly-worded notice.

What do vehicle-to-vehicle communications entail?

NHTSA has crafted a nice phrase to describe the information cars would broadcast. It is the “Basic Safety Message.”

“An integrated V2V system is connected to proprietary data busses and can provide highly accurate information using in-vehicle information to generate the Basic Safety Message,” says NHTSA’s technical report on “Readiness of V2V for Application.”

“The integrated system both broadcasts and receives BSMs,” says the report. “In addition, it can process the content of received messages to provide advisories and/or warnings to the driver of the vehicle in which it is installed.”

The “Basic Safety Message” will be broadcast by the vehicle’s dedicated short-range communications system. According to NHTSA, this system will need to transmit certain specific information.

“For example,” says the technical report, “when a DSRC unit sends out a BSM, the BSM needs to: Contain the relevant elements and describe them accurately (e.g., vehicle speed; GPS position; vehicle heading; DSRC message ID, etc.).”

What NHTSA envisions mandating will not control people’s cars but create a uniform communication system built into all vehicles that will give automobile manufacturers the opportunity to equip their products with warning systems that alert drivers to potential accidents — such as one that might be caused by cross traffic at a blind intersection.

“NHTSA currently does not plan to propose to require specific V2V-based safety applications,” says the advanced notice of proposed rulemaking. “Rather, we plan to propose to require that new vehicles be equipped with DSRC devices, which will enable a variety of applications that may provide various safety-critical warnings to drivers.”

But NHTSA does not envision that the use of this type of technology will stop there.

The agency has published a “Preliminary Statement of Policy Concerning Automated Vehicles.” This statement describes V2V as part of a “continuum” leading to fully automated vehicles.

“Accordingly, three distinct but related streams of technological change and development are occurring simultaneously: (1) in-vehicle crash avoidance systems that provide warnings and/or limited automated control of safety functions; (2) V2V communications that support various crash avoidance applications; and (3) self-driving vehicles,” said NHTSA’s statement of policy.

“NHTSA finds that it is helpful to think of these emerging technologies as part of a continuum of vehicle control automation,” said the policy statement. “The continuum, discussed below, runs from vehicles with no active control systems all the way to full automation and self-driving.

“While the agency is conducting research along the entire automation continuum, our emphasis initially is on determining whether those crash avoidance and mitigation technologies that are currently available (or soon to be available) are not only safe, but effective,” said the statement. “However, because these same technologies are the building blocks for what may one day lead to a driverless vehicle, we have also begun research focused on safety principles that may apply to even higher levels of automation, such as driver behavior in the context of highly automated vehicle safety systems.”

In its technical report on V2V, published last week, NHTSA said: “At the outset, readers should understand some very important points about the V2V system as currently contemplated by NHTSA. The system will not collect or store any data identifying individuals or individual vehicles, nor will it enable the government to do so.”

“There is no data in the safety messages exchanged by vehicles or collected by the V2V system that could be used by law enforcement or private entities to personally identify a speeding or erratic driver,” the report said. “The system — operated by private entities — will not enable tracking through space and time of vehicles linked to specific owners or drivers.”

“Our research to date suggests that drivers may be concerned about the possibility that the government or a private entity could use V2V communications to track their daily activities and whereabouts,” said the report. “However, as designed, NHTSA is confident that the V2V system both achieves the agency’s safety goals and protects consumer privacy appropriately.”

Like any other instrument, the new automobile technology the federal government is now planning to mandate can be used for good or ill. Certainly, automated automobile warning systems based on accurate data broadcast by other people’s cars and roadway infrastructure can save lives.

But as vehicles become fully automated, as they surely will, and the people in them no longer have absolute control over the vehicle’s movements, a key question will be: Who does?

CNSNews

Heavily Armed SWAT Team Swarms Cal State… Because of an Umbrella

SHTFplan
by Mac Slavo

cal-state-1

These days you never know what could be used as a deadly weapon of mass destruction requiring a militarized SWAT response.

In San Marcos, California, where students and staff members are always looking out for potential domestic terrorists, a call to 9-1-1 prompted a full university lock-down and brought elite members of the police department out in force.

The incident began when someone called police to report a gunman on campus carrying an assault rifle.

It turns out, it was only an umbrella. Late Wednesday, 10News spoke with Bill Craig, who has been a staff member at the university for 17 years. He was walking with his umbrella on campus that morning because of the rain.

Little did he know that by the time he got back to his office, his umbrella would have been mistaken for a rifle and lead to a campus-wide lockdown. Craig was held at gunpoint by sheriff’s deputies during the lockdown.

“I guess you always think that when someone’s pointing a gun at you, you’re really going to freak out but I think I was just more focused on doing exactly what the officer said,” he told 10News.

Craig was the person – reported as being suspicious – they had been looking for. The person was described as a white male, wearing a black shirt and jeans and walking across campus carrying a rifle.

He says he knew it was him the second the alert went out.

“I was certain,” said Craig. “It could have certainly been someone else. I mean, I’m not the only tall, bald guy here, but it fit me to a tee.”

You never know what could pass as an assault rifle given the hyper-sensitivity surrounding the ownership and possession of firearms.

cal-state-4

Earlier this a month a man was shot and killed by police at a Walmart in Beavercreek, Ohio after a sharp-eyed shopper called in to report he was carrying around a loaded assault rifle. It turned out to be a BB gun that 22-year old John Crawford had picked up in the sporting goods section of the store.

In another BB gun incident in Houston, a Department of Homeland Security professional mistook an Airsoft rifle for an AR-15, prompting a fully mobilized deployment of the local SWAT team.

But to police, water pistols may be even more dangerous than BB guns or umbrellas. New York resident John Mayer was raided by police after his young son threatened to use a water gun and other children’s armaments against bullies who were terrorizing his friends. Police quickly responded by not only revoking Mayer’s pistol license, but confiscating his firearms, even though the guns were locked and totally inaccessible to his child.

This is only the beginning. As police departments around the country continue to acquire military grade equipment like mine-resistant vehicles, long rifles, night vision, and scores of other supplies, we can expect a further militarization of all federal, state and local employees.

(See what you’re local police department has been stockpiling)

Soon, they might even start arming IRS agents or Post Office employees.

Oh, wait. Too late… They’re already doing that.

But, God forbid an American citizen tries to purchase some body armor for protection. Soon, that will be a crime as well, and perhaps the next SWAT raid will occur as a result of someone wearing a bulky jacket or vest that resembles body armor.

This is America, 2014.

SHTFplan