top of page
Search
Writer's pictureAlex Kawa

The Money Behind Tear Gas


On Friday, Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA) announced that he would be introducing the No Tear Gas or Projectiles Act, which would ban the use of tear gas and rubber bullets by police officers. Markey is introducing this bill, along with Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), in the midst of nationwide protests against police brutality and racial injustice, where several peaceful protesters have been attacked by officers with weapons such as those aforementioned. In a statement introducing the bill, Markey stated:

"Our streets are not meant to be battlefields, and law enforcement shouldn’t be using weapons of war against protestors and other Americans. Law enforcement’s use of tear gas also compounds the effects of structural racism, because we know communities of color are already suffering disproportionately during this global respiratory pandemic. It’s time we stop using these potentially lethal weapons against our own people. I thank Senator Sanders for his partnership on this legislation and urge our colleagues to join us in protecting the health and rights of the American people."

Meanwhile, Sanders also released a statement on Friday saying:

"How can it be, in the United States of America, that militarized police forces can repress our people like occupying armies? Enough is enough. Americans should never have to worry about being blinded, injured, or even killed by police as they exercise their First Amendment rights. I am proud to be joining Senator Markey to introduce this legislation to ban tear gas and rubber bullets. We need to make certain that when people go to the street to protest, that they are not treated like criminals and that their basic constitutional rights are not denied."

This bill from Markey and Sanders comes shortly after Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) introduced in the House the Prohibiting Law Enforcement Use of Chemical Weapons Act, alongside Reps. Mark Takano (D-CA) and Chuy García (D-IL). However, the prospects of either bill passing is questionable. As Stephen Gandel of CBS News reported earlier this month:

"Safariland, the controversial maker of the tear gas used to clear protesters near the White House last week, and two of its distributors have generated more than $137 million in sales from the U.S. government in the past three and a half years, according to a CBS MoneyWatch review of federal spending data.
"The sales, up from $83 million in the prior three-and-a-half-year period, do not include money spent by local law-enforcement agencies on Safariland tear gas. There have been multiple reports of tear gas used on protesters in Minneapolis, where George Floyd died in police custody last month, and elsewhere in recent weeks as protests against police racism spread across the country.
"Federal records show the Department of Justice last year bought 160 canisters of Spede-Heat from distributor A2Z Supply. Spede-Heat canisters hold mace gas and can be shot from a distance of as much 150 feet. The canisters cost about $26 each and are manufactured by Safariland subsidiary Defense Technology."

The amount of money Safariland has received in recent year from the federal government (which would be even greater if money from law enforcement agencies were included in the count) should come as no surprise, as the company has spent $420,000 lobbying them since 2015. While Senate Democrats introduced a resolution several weeks ago condemning President Trump for using tear gas on the peaceful protesters, only Markey and Sanders have supported the bill in Senate to ban its use by law enforcement, and aside from Ocasio-Cortez, Takano, and García, only nine Democrats in the House have cosponsored the bill there. As it turns out, Jay C. Ghazal, the sole lobbyist from Safariland, has donated $44,700 to Democratic candidates, as well as causes, for national office since the 2016 election ($14,250 in 2016, $15,450 in 2018, and $15,000 in 2020 so far). Knowing this, it makes sense as to why many Democrats, who have previously condemned the president's use of tear gas in rhetoric, are not stepping up to support actual legislation to prevent the use of it on peaceful protesters.

6 views0 comments

Comments


Post: Blog2_Post
bottom of page