PR problem with police’s new armoured vehicle not solved with a joyride

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 22/06/2016 (3420 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

In the public relations campaign to win support for the purchase of a $343,000 armored vehicle, the Winnipeg Police Service is resorting to some pretty desperate measures.

Free rides for journalists.

And so it was Wednesday the WPS called journalists to the duck pond at Assiniboine Park to see and experience the newest weapon in the fight against crime. The “armoured rescue vehicle,” as it is dubbed, is both hideous and spectacular at the same time. With its dramatic, matte-black finish, tinted bulletproof windows and gun ports, it is a pretty menacing ride.

It is also, without a word of a lie, pretty cool. 

Journalists scurried to get their spot in the back of the vehicle, and enjoyed a leisurely, 10-minute tour of the park. 

When they returned, most appeared to have accepted the argument the vehicle was a tool to enhance public safety and not a tool of evil oppression.

Well played, Winnipeg Police Service. Well played.

All kidding aside, let it be said that appropriately deployed and responsibly utilized, the vehicle could be a positive thing. In a profession that is admittedly becoming more and more dangerous all the time, a bulletproof vehicle that can be used to shield police or innocent civilians from gun-toting criminals has great potential.

However, the very presence of the vehicle is also proof military tactics, equipment and sensibilities are now ingrained in civilian policing. In some cities, including some in Canada, military-style tools often promote a military-style mindset that is not always appropriate in urban policing. The public relations campaign accompanying the vehicle is a pretty obvious sign police are quite aware of the sensitivities at play here.

The name — armoured rescue vehicle — is in and of itself a pretty big tell for the police PR strategy. Although “rescue” is one possible use of the vehicle, it’s hardly the central purpose. Parking it beside a paramedic unit for the photo opportunity was also a clever, if not somewhat obvious, attempt to frame the vehicle more as a tool of humanity and less as an offensive anti-crime weapon.

The reality is police believe they need more military and paramilitary weapons, equipment and tactics to do their jobs more effectively, but they do not want to spook the public into thinking its police service is becoming a military unit. That is a very difficult and delicate line to balance.

Deputy Chief Gord Perrier acknowledged as much in an interview at the park when he conceded the WPS is very keen to convince the public the vehicle is not the beginning of a militarization of the police service. Perrier pointed out while the glass and plating in the vehicle are bulletproof, the Winnipeg vehicle is not up to military standards.

It is lighter and offers slightly less protection than true military APVs, he said. And it’s important to note Winnipeg’s armoured vehicle is brand new and built specifically for urban policing. Many vehicle in use by police forces in the United States, Perrier added, are converted surplus vehicles either purchased or donated by the military.

“I think our vehicle is different (than comparable U.S. police vehicles),” Perrier said. “I know there are going to be people who disagree, but you’re talking about two very different things.”

With this comment, Perrier is demonstrating he is aware of how police utilization of military-grade equipment and tactics has become a huge political issue. This was partly prompted by the tragic events in Ferguson, Mo., in the summer of 2014, where the world watched a military-style response by local police to the protests that followed the shooting of an unarmed black man.

The events in Ferguson were alarming enough that U.S. President Barack Obama waded into the debate, urging local governments to decommission or resist procuring military equipment out of a fear it was encouraging a toxic culture in urban police forces.

It is important to note that even without the vehicle, the WPS is already deep into paramilitary equipment and tactics, seen clearly in the equipment sported by the tactical support team. Critics in the justice system, including many defence lawyers, believe the WPS relies too heavily on tactical support and its hallmark manoeuvre, the so-called dynamic or “no-knock entry,” where police use force to enter a premises without warning to search for a suspect or to execute a warrant.

The WPS released statistics on the number of tactical support deployments that clearly show it is pretty common police response. In 2014 and 2015, tactical support was involved in 308 planned operations to execute warrants involving drugs, weapons and gang connections. However, police officials said tactical support responds to hundreds more “unplanned” incidents that include reports of suspects carrying firearms, or leaving an armed robbery and retreating to a dwelling.

It is reasonable to assume that workload for tactical support is a reflection of the increasingly dangerous environment police experience on a day-to-day basis. It also confirms tactical support and the vehicle — and their military sensibilities — are both here to stay.

This trend does not have to result in the same kinds of problems seen in Ferguson and other U.S. cities. Effective oversight by the Winnipeg Police Board and discretion on the part of the WPS in deciding where and when to deploy the tactical support team and the new vehicle will determine its combined effectiveness.

However, if police here fall into the traditions established by U.S. police forces and are tempted to send the vehicle out to a broader array of incidents or events simply to ensure it does not sit idle, the likelihood of tragedy will be very high. And that will be a public relations problem that cannot be solved by a joyride in an armoured vehicle.

dan.lett@freepess.mb.ca