My perspective on the larger issue at play here: Police officers need to have the authority to defend themselves and others against dangerous people -- with lethal force, if necessary. But lethal force isnt ALWAYS necessary. It is inconceivable that no police officer EVER uses lethal force unnecessarily. (And it is the responsibility of the community -- not the police department -- to decide when lethal force is or is not necessary.) Police departments seem to want the freedom to use any amount of force in any situation without any accountability. That is pretty much the very definition of a police state. By refusing to accept their responsibility to wield lethal force with discretion -- and by painting those who seek to force departments into accepting such responsibility as anti-police or pro-criminal -- it is the police departments who are alienating themselves from the people they are supposed to protect and serve. I will concede that occurrences of police using excessive force are rare; that the current highlighting of such events in the media make them seem more frequent than they really are. My complaint isnt with the frequency of these events. My complaint is with the way they are handled and perceived by the departments themselves. Each such occurrence, rather than prompting department-wide soul-searching about the use of force, instead results in a reflexive defense of the officer or officers involved. It isnt healthy. Im not a 12-step expert, but Im pretty sure the first step is acknowledging that there is a problem...
Posted on: Fri, 16 Jan 2015 20:57:35 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015