Fix: Mtcops

The term “MTCops” has quietly circulated within defense policy circles, academic journals on police militarization, and niche federal compliance agencies. MTCops are the specialized law enforcement and regulatory personnel tasked with a singular, high-stakes mission:

But the law left a gap: who monitors how this equipment is actually used once it’s in the hands of civilian cops? mtcops

Their existence stems from a blunt reality: the same thermal imaging systems that guide a Hellfire missile in Afghanistan can end up on a patrol car in Ohio. The same drones that scout enemy positions can hover over a protest in Oregon. Without dedicated oversight, the line between national defense and domestic policing vanishes. The modern MTCops framework traces directly to the 1033 Program (U.S. Department of Defense’s Excess Property Program), initiated in the 1990s but massively expanded after the 9/11 attacks and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Between 2006 and 2020, the Pentagon transferred over $7.4 billion in military-grade equipment to local police departments — including mine-resistant ambush-protected vehicles (MRAPs), night-vision goggles, assault rifles, and unmanned aerial systems. The term “MTCops” has quietly circulated within defense

By 2014, the public saw images of police in camouflage handling armored vehicles in Ferguson, Missouri. The backlash was immediate and bipartisan. In response, the Obama administration issued Executive Order 13688 (later partially rescinded) restricting transfers of certain “controlled equipment” — tanks, bayonets, grenade launchers, and tracked combat vehicles. The same drones that scout enemy positions can

As one veteran MTCop in Texas put it (anonymously, fearing retaliation): “I spent 12 years as an Army MP. Now I spend my days telling cops they can’t use the toys they begged for. The toys aren’t bad. But forgetting they’re military toys — that’s how democracies break.”