When I began this series back in December, I honestly did not know where it was going to take me as I researched the background materials for my essays. I originally figured that it might be three parts at the most, but it kept growing and growing. This week's essay takes a brief look back at highlights of previous essays and examines how the various government actions and programs that have led to the situation in which many of our police departments now operate as para military forces in our local streets and homes.

The warlike and reckless abandon with which the police conduct themselves in what should be routine operations, such as serving warrants, has often led to unnecessarily traumatic and even lethal consequences to innocent civilians. The use of para military operations has resulted in countless damage to private property, the killing of pets, the injury to and even the killing of innocent victims. Police are assassinating people at alarming rates and while overall crime has been going down, the rate of murder by cop is rising. In 2015, nearly 1,200 people have died at the hands of police officers, most of them shot to death. According to a paper published by Global Research in December 2013, a non-military US citizen is 29 times more likely to be killed by a police officer than by a terrorist. Another jarring statistic cited in that same paper covers the number of citizens killed by police as well as the increasing use of SWAT teams which can lead to even more police brutality.

Our own government, including the United States Supreme Court, has passed laws, developed programs, and rendered court decisions that have facilitated the militarization of police forces of all sizes through out the United States. Let's look at some of these laws and programs and how they have influenced the militarization of police and increased police brutality.

War on Drugs, which began under President Nixon in 1971, began what has been a downward slide to militarization of police in the United States.

The so-called War on Drugs has failed to stop drug use, diverted resources from addiction treatment, and had the absurd and dangerous effect of militarizing our law enforcement and our police.

The AlterNet ran an excellent article written by Alex Kane in 2014 which looked at the ACLU's report War Comes Home: The Excessive Militarization of American Policing. The ACLU's report was 98 pages long and Kane's article distilled its findings to eleven major issues which are listed below.

The information contained in the ACLU report, and in other investigations into the phenomenon, is sobering. From the killing of innocent people to the lack of debate on the issue, police militarization has turned into a key issue for Americans. It is harming civil liberties, ramping up the “war on drugs,” impacting the most marginalized members of society and transforming neighborhoods into war zones. Here are 11 important--and horrifying--things you should know about the militarization of police.

1. It harms, and sometimes kills innocent people.

So two days after the Lincoln is stolen, just before midnight, a blacked out SUV rolls up into the driveway. The wife sees this as men in camo and black hoods get out and head up to the house. The wife is of course freaked out, and wakes her husband up hollering about the burglars are back!

Robert Hooks, a 59 year old businessman jumped out of bed and grabbed his gun in order to protect his wife, and his stuff, from these masked intruders. Right as the door breached and the would be robbers moved in, gunshots rang out and chaos ensued.

Only it wasn’t the robbers. It was the task force, conducting some no knock bullshit on the tip of some tweaker trying to save his own skin. Mr. Hooks was lying dead, without even having returned fire.

2. Children are impacted.

In May 2014, police in Georgia threw a flash-bang grenade into the crib of a 19-month-old toddler during a SWAT raid. The toddler, Bounkham Phonesavanh, was burned so badly that he was placed into a medically-induced coma. In October, a grand jury decided the officers shouldn't be charged for injuring Phonesavanh.

3. The use of SWAT teams is unnecessary.

There isn't great data, but the ACLU's analysis showed that about 35 percent of SWAT drug raids turned up contraband, while 36 percent of them turned up nothing. (And 29 percent of SWAT reports didn't mention whether they found anything — a fact police are more likely to omit when they didn't find anything than when they did.) In forced-entry SWAT raids, the "success" rate of actually finding drugs dropped to about a 25 percent.

4. The “war on terror” is fueling militarization.

It was the “war on drugs” that introduced militarized policing to the U.S. But the “war on terror” has accelerated it.

5. It’s a boon to contractor profits.

Bill Moyers described the feeding frenzy in his usual erudite manner;

..." It’s a boon to contractor profits. The trend towards police militarization has given military contractors another lucrative market where they can shop their products. Companies like Lockheed Martin and Blackhawk Industries are making big bucks by selling their equipment to agencies flush with Department of Homeland Security grants.

In addition to selling equipment, contractors also sponsor training events for SWAT teams, like Urban Shield, a major arms expo that has attracted increasing attention from activists in recent years. SWAT teams, police agencies and military contractors converge on Urban Shield, which was held in California last year, to train SWAT teams and promote the equipment."

6. Border militarization and police militarization go hand in hand.

Border Patrol agents have deliberately stepped in the path of cars apparently to justify shooting at the drivers and have fired in frustration at people throwing rocks from the Mexican side of the border, according to an independent review of 67 cases that resulted in 19 deaths.

7. Police are cracking down on dissent.

Street protests today look a lot like those of the 1960s, but, with drug-war-driven militarization of local law enforcement agencies since then, the police response in Ferguson now looks a lot like urban warfare.

8. Civil asset forfeitures are funding police militarization.

These civil forfeiture laws are being used to line the coffers of police departments all over the country. For example, the DesMoines Register found that, in Iowa alone, law enforcement agencies have seized over $43 million worth of money and assets during a recent six year period, much of which was taken without a crime ever being charged.

9. Dubious informants are used for raids.

Most often, informants are “people who regularly seek out drug users and dealers and tip off the police in exchange for cash rewards” and other drug dealers, who inform to gain leniency or cash from the police. But these informants are quite unreliable--and the wrong information can lead to tragic consequences.

10. There’s been little debate and oversight.

According to the White House report, a lack of oversight with such programs can “facilitate excessive uses of force and serve as a highly visible barrier between police and the communities they serve.”

11. Communities of color bear the brunt.

As is true for most issues of excessive and abusive policing, police militarization is overwhelmingly and disproportionately directed at minorities and poor communities, ensuring that the problem largely festers in the dark. Americans are now so accustomed to seeing police officers decked in camouflage and Robocop-style costumes, riding in armored vehicles and carrying automatic weapons first introduced during the U.S. occupation of Baghdad, that it has become normalized. But those who bear the brunt of this transformation are those who lack loud megaphones; their complaints of the inevitable and severe abuse that results have largely been met with indifference.

Department of Defense's 1033 Program. In 1996, Congress gave the Department of Defense authorization to distribute surplus equipment to local police departments under the 1033 Program.

Our founders opposed using a "standing army" to patrol our streets. In fact, James Madison called this "one of the greatest mischiefs that can possibly happen." Under the "1033" program, however, America's streets are increasingly patrolled by police forces with all the trappings of an army ready for war.

The 1033 Program has effectively supplied police departments with military grade equipment that they once would never have considered or even needed. As a result, the use of these weapons for what was once very mundane policing, such as serving search warrants, has exploded.

Today police departments first load up on hand-me-down military equipment available from the Department of Defense thrift store. Once these SWAT teams are formed and equipped, police chiefs needed to keep their militarily armed and trained, violence-ready troopers busy, so they have turned to less violent tasks, such as serving court warrants. Actual situations for which SWAT teams are genuinely needed, such as the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre, are rare.

In addition, the US Department of Defense 1033 Program not only provides military grade equipment to local police but also stipulates that it must be used at least once a year, thus creating the self fulfilling prophesy of a militarized police force.

The 1033 program had transferred surplus military-grade equipment from the Pentagon to local police. But it didn't provide training or oversight for the equipment's use, although many local police departments provided their own training anyway.

The program was also loaded with what many experts view as a perverse incentive: to keep the equipment, local police must deploy it at least once within a year. This incentive, some experts argued, encouraged police to use the weapons even when they're not necessary.

No Knock Raids. The first SWAT teams were developed in the 1960's in Los Angeles for the purpose of addressing specifically dangerous situations and were rarely used until the War on Drugs. Now SWAT teams are being used regularly for the execution of search warrants. The ability of a SWAT team to enter a private home without announcing themselves or knocking on the door first came as a result of a Supreme Court decision in June of 2006 which basically rendered the Fourth Amendment null and void.

The June 15 decision, by a 5-4 vote, gives police a green light to break down doors at all hours of the day or night, terrorizing occupants and ransacking homes, without any meaningful legal consequences, even though the Constitution prohibits such actions.

The lead opinion, authored by Associate Justice Antonin Scalia, the ideological leader of the high court’s right wing, lays the groundwork for eliminating the “exclusionary rule” altogether, rendering the Fourth Amendment’s prohibition against “unreasonable searches and seizures”—a key provision of the Bill of Rights—a dead letter.

As a result, no knock raids executed by SWAT teams have become far too common especially in communities of color.

In theory, no-knock raids are supposed to be used in only the most dangerous situations. So what might be most surprising about them is how infrequently police officers get killed when they bust into suspected criminals' homes unannounced.

In reality, though, no-knock raids are a common tactic, even in less-than-dangerous circumstances. There are a staggering 20,000 or more estimated no-knock raids every year across America. By the numbers, it's clear that no-knock SWAT raids are far more dangerous to civilians than they are to police.

Civil Forfeiture Laws. It's hard to believe, but the police can seize your money or other assets without you ever having been charged with or convicted of a crime.

Police abuse of civil asset forfeiture laws has shaken our nation’s conscience. Civil forfeiture allows police to seize — and then keep or sell — any property they allege is involved in a crime. Owners need not ever be arrested or convicted of a crime for their cash, cars, or even real estate to be taken away permanently by the government.

Civil asset forfeiture laws have incentivized police departments to increase the use of SWAT teams to conduct no knock raids. The Drug Policy Alliance has produced a detailed report on civil asset forfeiture titled Above the Law: An Investigation of Civil Asset Forfeiture Abuses in California.

Civil asset forfeiture laws, which were popularized during the drug war hysteria of the 1980s, allows law enforcement to seize money and any other private property, regardless of whether its owner has been convicted of a crime. Not only does this constitute a violation of civil liberties and property rights, but it also fuels widespread abuse of power.

This is legal thievery for which the property owner rarely has recourse.

These are the main laws and programs that have facilitated the militarization of our police forces and its attendant brutality. Militarization has created a wall between the police and citizens that they are supposed to serve. It is a deadly wall that allows the police to act with impunity and one that needs to be broken down. No matter what suspicion the police may have toward a subject, they have no right to act as judge, jury, and even executioner when our justice system dictates the presumption of innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.