Read More: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/05/18/obama-military-equipment-police_n_7304504.html
By NEDRA PICKLER

WASHINGTON (AP) — Nine months after police in riot gear dispelled racially charged protests, President Barack Obama is prohibiting the federal government from providing some military-style equipment to local departments and putting stricter controls on other weapons and gear distributed to law enforcement.

The surprise announcement comes after the White House suggested last year that Obama would maintain programs that provide the type of military-style equipment used to respond to demonstrators last summer in Ferguson, Missouri, because of their broader contribution to public safety. But an interagency group found "substantial risk of misusing or overusing" items like tracked armored vehicles, high-powered firearms and camouflage could undermine trust in police.

With scrutiny on police only increasing in the ensuing months after a series of highly publicized deaths of black suspects nationwide, Obama also is unveiling the final report of a task force he created to help build confidence between police and minority communities in particular. The announcements come as Obama is visiting Camden, New Jersey, one of the country's most violent and poorest cities.
"We are without a doubt sitting at a defining moment for American policing," said Davis, a 30-year police veteran and former chief of the East Palo Alto (California) Police Department. "We have a unique opportunity to redefine policing in our democracy, to ensure that public safety becomes more than the absence of crime, that it must also include the presence of justice."

For or against?

1. Against the ban
2. With respects to the journalist, the violent ones are NOT protestors; when you decide it's time to burn cars and loot honest businesses, you've crossed the line into rioter.
3. What about the cop deaths? Last week (on National police week, mind you) two police officers in an unmarked car were shot dead after asking the shooter if the gun he had on him was legal. This was not considered national news, however. Why?
I've only seen one national report so far where it seems the officer is actually guilty, and people are still threatening to riot, even though the man is probably going to be convicted(the smoking gun was the video; anyone who assumes I just used a pun should feel ashamed).
I'm sorry if I sound angry; this is a serious subject with my family.

The simple fact is that the world is a messed up place. Laws and bans won't change that. People, on the other hand can do something if they just tried. Reaching out and being nice to others does a lot more than you think.

I'm alright with the ban on tank like vehicles, grenade launchers, and bayonets. I don't think any of those makes sense for a police department to have, especially bayonets. However the other policy that involves riot equipment and the likes seems rather pointless.