On May 29th, 2020, the streets of Los Angeles were filled with the sound of helicopters and the sight of heavily armed military personnel. The city was under occupation by the National Guard, with the support of the Los Angeles Police Department. The reason? To prevent potential violence and looting in the aftermath of the George Floyd protests.
However, on the 40th day of this military occupation, the only significant detainment was that of a man rushing to an appointment in a federal building. This incident brings to light the question of whether the militarization of our cities is truly necessary and if it serves the purpose it claims to.
The man in question, who has chosen to remain anonymous, was simply trying to reach his appointment on time. But he was stopped by the military and detained for about an hour, causing him to miss his appointment. Despite being innocent and having no connection to the protests, he was still taken into custody by the very people who were supposed to protect him.
This raises serious concerns about the use of military force in civilian situations. The military is trained to handle combat situations, not to enforce domestic laws. The fact that they were patrolling the streets of LA for over a month with no significant incidents shows that their presence was unnecessary.
Moreover, the mere presence of heavily armed military personnel creates a sense of fear and intimidation among the public. This is in complete contrast to the principles of a free and democratic society, where citizens should feel safe and protected by their own government, not threatened by it.
The city of Los Angeles spent an estimated $50 million on this military occupation, which begs the question, was it money well spent? The resources could have been used to address the underlying issues that led to the George Floyd protests in the first place. The funds could have been allocated towards social programs, education, and community outreach initiatives to promote unity and understanding among the people.
But instead, the people of LA were subjected to a show of force that did not address the root cause of the protests. The military presence only served to suppress the voices of those who were standing up against racial injustice and police brutality. It is ironic that in the land of the free, people were silenced by the very institution that is meant to protect their freedom.
This incident also raises concerns about the excessive use of force by law enforcement agencies. The detainment of an innocent man for simply trying to reach an appointment shows how easy it is for even the most basic rights to be violated in such situations. The lack of accountability and transparency in the actions of those in power is a major cause for concern.
The government has a responsibility to protect its citizens, but it also has a responsibility to uphold their rights and freedoms. The over-militarization of our cities goes against these values and only serves to perpetuate fear and division among the people.
It is time for us to re-evaluate the role of the military in domestic situations and to prioritize peaceful and inclusive solutions to address social issues. The use of force should only be a last resort, and it should always be proportional to the situation at hand. We must hold our government accountable and demand transparency and accountability in their actions.
In conclusion, the 40-day military occupation of Los Angeles was a costly and unnecessary show of force that did not achieve its intended purpose. Instead, it violated the rights and freedoms of innocent citizens and created a climate of fear and intimidation. We must learn from this and strive towards peaceful and inclusive solutions to address social issues, rather than resorting to measures that only serve to divide us further. Let us work towards a society where citizens can exercise their rights and freedoms without fear of being detained for simply rushing to an appointment.
