Description

Scott talks to Jessica Katzenstein from the Costs of War Project about her recent paper on the effects of America’s foreign wars on police militarization. She and Scott trace police militarization to the escalation of the war on drugs in the 1990s, when SWAT raids became especially prevalent. Today that trend has reached all-time highs, with Katzenstein estimating 60,000 raids per year. With so much military equipment being funneled to police departments from the military and Homeland Security, Scott describes the situation as hardly any different than a foreign army patrolling—and subjugating—an occupied country.
Discussed on the show:
“The Wars Are Here: How the United States’ Post-9/11 Wars Helped Militarize U.S. Police” (Costs of War)
Nemesis: The Last Days of the American Republic
Rise of the Warrior Cop: The Militarization of America’s Police Forces
“War Comes Home” (ACLU)
“The Wire (TV Series 2002–2008)” (IMDb)
Jessica Katzenstein is a PhD candidate at Brown University, whose research interests include the militarization of U.S. policing, whiteness and racism and police reform. Follow her work at the Costs of War Project.
This episode of the Scott Horton Show is sponsored by: NoDev NoOps NoIT, by Hussein Badakhchani; The War State, by Mike Swanson; WallStreetWindow.com; Tom Woods’ Liberty Classroom; ExpandDesigns.com/Scott; Listen and Think Audio; TheBumperSticker.com; and LibertyStickers.com.
Donate to the show through Patreon, PayPal, or Bitcoin: 1Ct2FmcGrAGX56RnDtN9HncYghXfvF2GAh.

See More See Less

Subscribe

Leave us a review, comment or subscribe!

Meet the hosts

discussions

  • I am working on a business model to get this up off the ground. I need help to find the pit falls that might cause problems. Legal hurtles, practical hurtles, anything. Got an idea, had an idea, it will surely help. Just a few rules. 1. Anybody that would come to the court would have to come to it voluntarily. 2. You must be innocent until proven guilty. 3. Must be a quick and cost effective process. 4. It must be a system without a positive action enforcement process. 5. Must be as accurate as possible.

    Jump to Discussion Post 28 replies
  • For the past few years, police departments have been on something of a power trip in the United States. Only citing the lesser-known instances that come to my mind, cops have assaulted autistic teenagers and murdered unarmed civilians, and were subsequently cleared of all charges and let back on the force. A zealous, dogmatic conservative “fanbase,” alongside a legal system that actively defends police from facing charges of murder, manslaughter, or assault, assures that these men and women never see justice for their actions. It’s awful what police are doing in society, but it’s even worse that they can get off scot-free for it. Of course, most of you already know this. So here’s my question: has any United States representative or senator proposed a bill designed to fight against unjust acquittals or introduce charges that are harder to to be overturned? As an agorist, I’m partially convinced that this has never happened and that anyone who gets elected for public office in this day and age is a vapid authoritarian, but a sliver of hope remains for me somewhere. Have any of you heard of such legislation on a federal level? If not, then what about on a state level?

    Jump to Discussion Post 1 reply
  • Its seems they always skip over the issue. There is always this refusal to acknowledge or “give-in” in to the reality of what its happening on their part Does anyone know why this mentality exists? Is there anyway to stop it? Or try to get through to these people that’s its tyranny that is the enemy?

    Jump to Discussion Post 11 replies
  • When people are foolish into thinking that the “law” (police, written laws) protect them, does that afford them to not protecting themselves, because they think that the police, and or “law” is always going to be there for them? I feel this will only influence these ‘types’ of people to provoke others whom they dont like, because they know the “law will be on their side.” So as an example: When the person reacts, naturally, the instigator can turn around and say, “Help, help, police!” I feel that this is an abuse and exploitation of law and policing. When police and or law protects people, do people foolishly think that the law is on their side and they can bend it to their will, against their enemies AKA: people they dont like in society, and do they? My conclusion is that people use the police and law, to get THEM what they want against their enemies, because they KNOW the law will “protect” them in the process. So in many cases you find for example, bad co-workers, bosses, friends and family, who deliberately instigate a provocation KNOWING FULLY the other persons reaction, so that person they targeted, can be sent to jail or fined.  The police or laws are exploited as a mafia type agency for these types of people. One could say the strong arm of these types of people. All the while these people, DONT PROTECT THEMSELVES! Your thoughts?

    Jump to Discussion Post 2 replies
  • Or should there be prisons? There was one video I saw on You tube but I cant find it, stating “No prisons in a Free society.” If everyone carried guns, would we even need State/Federal prisons? I believe you should have private institutions like extended care living facilities that could be charity based, to look after so called, “criminals.” My idea, was that you can have one that looks after each-type-of-crime. Such as, having one facility for violent criminals, another for sex criminals, and another for theft. That way, each category can be examined separately instead of throwing them in all-together which is a festering danger. If any of you can help me find information on no prisons in a free society., please let me know. Videos are always great and easy.

    Jump to Discussion Post 4 replies