RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Print

Boardman writes: "Two of the biggest police unions in the country are now on record in opposition to free speech. They are on record against constitutionally protected free speech that opposes the epidemic of police violence across America (more than 900 killed by police so far in 2015)."

New York City mayor Bill de Blasio addresses New York City Police at Madison Square Garden. (photo: European Pressphoto Agency)
New York City mayor Bill de Blasio addresses New York City Police at Madison Square Garden. (photo: European Pressphoto Agency)


Police Unions Sustain Police Violence Epidemic

By William Boardman, Reader Supported News

31 October 15

 

Since when did we decide that police officers should be above the law?

wo of the biggest police unions in the country are now on record in opposition to free speech. They are on record against constitutionally protected free speech that opposes the epidemic of police violence across America (more than 900 killed by police so far in 2015).

The current round of police union intimidation tactics started October 24, after filmmaker Quentin Tarantino spoke briefly to the “Rise Up October” protest, a “Call for a Major National Manifestation Against Police Terror.” The crowd of thousands marched peacefully up Sixth Avenue for two miles and included some 100 families impacted by police violence and killing. Police unions have reacted with violent rhetoric to Tarantino’s brief “speech,” which offered a non-specific truism (here in its entirety):

“Hey, everybody. I got something to say, but actually I would like to give my time to the families that want to talk. I want to give my time to the families. However, I just do also want to say: What am I doing here? I’m doing here because I am a human being with a conscience. And when I see murder, I cannot stand by, and I have to call the murdered the murdered, and I have to call the murderers the murderers. Now I’m going to give my time to the families.” [emphasis added] 

The event centered on victims of police violence [video]. There is no doubt that police have killed unarmed, innocent people. There is no doubt that a few cops have been convicted of murder. The reality of police violence is beyond dispute and longstanding. It goes with the territory, and responsible police leaders everywhere know perfectly well that part of their job is not only to keep their officers safe, but also, and arguably more important, to keep the public safe from their officers. The question is why they do so little about police violence.

In the aftermath of the Rise Up October rally, there were a reported 11 arrests, two of which on video show gangs of police roughing up single, unresisting men. Even though the demonstration was peaceful and had a lawful parade permit, police turned out in force. No police officers were reported hurt, except for their feelings. 

Police union goes ad hominem with attack on First Amendment  

The day after the rally, Patrick Lynch, president of the New York police union (Patrolmen’s Benevolent Association) went on the offensive, as he often does. He ignore the vast substance of the Rise Up October group and chose instead to make an ad hominem personal attack on Hollywood director Tarantino and his right to free speech. Lynch’s press release in its entirety:

“It’s no surprise that someone who makes a living glorifying crime and violence is a cop-hater, too. The police officers that Quentin Tarantino calls ‘murderers’ aren’t living in one of his depraved big screen fantasies — they’re risking and sometimes sacrificing their lives to protect communities from real crime and mayhem. New Yorkers need to send a message to this purveyor of degeneracy that he has no business coming to our city to peddle his slanderous ‘Cop Fiction.’ It’s time for a boycott of Quentin Tarantino’s films.”

Actually the police officers that Tarantino calls “murderers” are in fact murderers, which is why Tarantino called them murderers – because, although they are but a small percentage of the total police cohort, they have murdered people, mostly without significant consequence to themselves. On October 30, Lynch sent another press release featuring Tarantino’s father saying, “Cops are not murderers, they are heroes,” which is the police union party line. In reality, it should go without saying, most cops are neither murderers nor heroes. Like the first press release, this one also ignored the complaints of police brutality, but it omitted the proposed boycott, too.  

Whistling much the same tune, Rupert Murdoch’s tabloid, the New York Post, covered the protest with open hostility. The paper made the editorial choice to run a picture of a demonstrator giving a cop the finger. And its story suggested that years of police violence were somehow beyond objection because a police officer was recently killed in the line of duty, even though there was no connection between the recent murder and the years of police abuse:

“Just four days after the on-duty murder of a hero NYPD street cop, a rally in Washington Square Park against ‘police terror’ devolved Saturday into a raucous, law-enforcement gripe-fest.”  

Los Angeles police claim victimhood, too, and backs boycott

Craig Lally, president of the LA police union, the Los Angeles Police Protective League, jumped on the boycott Tarantino bandwagon on October 27 in a somewhat more nuanced press release [in its entirety]:

“We fully support constructive dialogue about how police interact with citizens. But there is no place for inflammatory rhetoric that makes police officers even bigger targets than we already are. Film director Quentin Tarantino took irresponsibility to a new and completely unacceptable level this past weekend by referring to police as murderers during an anti-police march in New York. He made this statement just four days after a New York police officer was gunned down in the line of duty. New York police and union leaders immediately called out Tarantino for his unconscionable comments, with union head Patrick Lynch advocating a boycott of his films. We fully support this boycott of Quentin Tarantino films. Hateful rhetoric dehumanizes police and encourages attacks on us. And questioning everything we do threatens public safety by discouraging officers from putting themselves in positions where their legitimate actions could be falsely portrayed as thuggery.” 

While this statement begins with support for “constructive dialogue about how police interact with citizens,” that very formulation betrays an imagined dichotomy between “police” and “citizens.” Police need to think of themselves as our fellow citizens. Worse, Lally immediately moves into his own unconstructive dialogue, mischaracterizing what Tarantino said, launching another ad hominem attack on Tarantino, and completely evading the substance of the Rise Up October protest.

Worst of all, Lally reinforces the police-as-victim trope, which is a form of psychological denial. It’s not “inflammatory rhetoric that makes police officers even bigger targets,” its inflammatory behavior by police officers. Given the spate of police horrors since 1999, when NY police shot unarmed Amadou Diallo 41 times, it’s fair to wonder why police departments everywhere aren’t showing a whole lot more humility. Instead, the NY chief of police has given one of the four killers his gun back (after all four were found not guilty by a jury).

Amadou Diallo’s mother, Katiatoo Diallo, was a speaker in the Rise Up October protest. What she said was in stark and humane contrast to the whining victimhood of the police unions:   

“We are not bitter. I told the world then, the day when they stood up and told me that the four cops who shot my son had done nothing wrong, that it was the fault of my son, I said to you, I say to you now, I said it then: We need change. Amadou has died. It’s too late for him. But we have to prevent this from happening again. When you have tragedies like that, you need to learn what went wrong and correct it….

“Law enforcement community should know that we are not against them. We even feel for those who were shot just recently in Harlem. We are not against them. We are anti-police brutality. We are not anti-cop, because we know some of them are doing good job. But we need to root out those who are brutalizing our children for no reason.” 

What should a police union be doing, anyway?

The core issue with police unions, teacher unions, and all other public employee unions is how to manage the inherent tension between the good of union members and the good of the public that pays their salaries. Police unions, because their members are empowered to use lethal force, should be especially sensitive to the public perception of what is in the public good. That is almost never going to include killing innocent, unarmed civilians.

In December 2014, NY police union head Lynch actually blamed innocent, unarmed civilians for the ambush assassination of two police officers by a lone gunman. It was a breath-taking manipulation of reality and defiance of both logic and authority:

There is blood on many hands tonight — those that incited violence on the streets under the guise of protest, that tried to tear down what New York police officers did every day. That blood on the hands starts on the steps of City Hall, in the office of the mayor….”

These comments set the stage for a symbolic police mutiny, as officers turned their backs on New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio at a press conference dealing with the assassination ambush. This is a direct challenge to civil order, open defiance of the mayor’s lawful authority over the police. And it is a gesture of arrogance, not only against non-violent protests of police killing, but in support of an above-the-law right to continue to execute civilians more or less randomly. 

Who is more deserving of protection, police or public? 

The same day as the Rise Up October protest, The New York Times ran a front page story about FBI Director James B. Comey telling a Chicago Law School audience that increased scrutiny of police violence have led to an increase in violent crime, a theory for which he admitted he has no data. The data available does not support the claim. But Comey’s perception of “a chill wind that has blown through American law enforcement over the last year” is just a more sophisticated whine than the police unions use. For the head of the FBI to defend police officers from scrutiny for their actions, especially their violent or lethal actions, is little more than a defense of police criminality. As the Times reported:

“Mr. Comey said that he had been told by many police leaders that officers who would normally stop to question suspicious people are opting to stay in their patrol cars for fear of having their encounters become worldwide video sensations. That hesitancy has led to missed opportunities to apprehend suspects, he said, and has decreased the police presence on the streets of the country’s most violent cities.”

Wait a minute, that’s pure sophistry. If you have police officers afraid of becoming viral video villains, then you have police officers who are tacitly admitting that they are likely to behave illegally if not lethally. Police officers who act properly make boring videos that don’t go viral. 

The Times did not cover any of the Rise Up October activities. But it did re-publish the FBI chief story on October 30, with the additional comment: “It’s not clear why Mr. Comey decided to wade into this issue now.”

On October 18, the Times ran a story in the business section based on FBI statistics of police killings. The story notes that the available data strongly shows pervasive racial bias in many areas of American life. Police behavior is no exception:

“The data is unequivocal. Police killings are a race problem: African-Americans are being killed disproportionately and by a wide margin.”  

The same persistent pattern of racial bias in police traffic stops was found in North Carolina statistics, as reported by a long analysis in the Times October 25 – “The Disproportionate Risk of Driving While Black.”  

The evidence of racial bias in American life remains powerful and its effects are cruel and unusual. Perhaps the nation is less bigoted than it was in the past, but it remains a long way from being a place where all people are treated equally. And one of the grosser reasons for perpetual racial oppression is the willingness of powerful police unions to deny reality and blame the victims. Police unions need to reflect on the healing words of Kadiatou Diallo and put aside their bitterness. Police unions need to protect and serve the public, not the perpetrators of violence and death. 

How about: if you’re not careful enough to identify a toy gun in the hands of a child before you shoot to kill, then you’re not careful enough to be an armed police officer. That seems like a pretty low bar. 



William M. Boardman has over 40 years experience in theatre, radio, TV, print journalism, and non-fiction, including 20 years in the Vermont judiciary. He has received honors from Writers Guild of America, Corporation for Public Broadcasting, Vermont Life magazine, and an Emmy Award nomination from the Academy of Television Arts and Sciences.

Reader Supported News is the Publication of Origin for this work. Permission to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back to Reader Supported News.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 

Comments   

We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.

General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.

Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.

- The RSN Team

 
+67 # Ralph 2015-10-31 13:10
This is what a police state looks like.
 
 
+60 # Barbara K 2015-10-31 13:11
It is sad to see that the unions will keep these killers on the streets. I expect better from them all. It should be Victims first.

..
 
 
+5 # william cameron 2015-10-31 14:37
Not quite. In a police state not only are there no such demonstrations to begin with, there also are no police unions.
 
 
+23 # reiverpacific 2015-10-31 14:45
Quoting william cameron:
Not quite. In a police state not only are there no such demonstrations to begin with, there also are no police unions.

Not quite (2).
In Franco's Spain there were three different layers of uniformed police AND the secret Police.
In Suharto's Indonesia there was one uniformed division and a large secret force, both woking in concert with the army.
In Stroessner's Paraguay the uniforms were everywhere and "Spy vs Spy" in between + a very intimidating army presence.
 
 
+1 # lewagner 2015-11-01 22:31
Quoting Ralph:
This is what a police state looks like.

Not yet.
In a real police state, the police and military have ALL the power, whether they are right or wrong.
Citizens are left with no recourse, with only rocks, or whatever, to throw.
 
 
+34 # reiverpacific 2015-10-31 13:49
Wonder if they sing the National Anthem -y'know, the bit with "Land of the FREE and the home of the brave" in it?
And thy've got the heavy artillery to come down hard on we dissenters.
Another BIG step AWAY from democracy.
Maybe they're trying to emulate that champion of human rights, free speech and big ally, Saudi Arabia.
 
 
+55 # Jim Rocket 2015-10-31 14:13
It's sad to see that the police unions think that protecting their own bad apples, clearly a minority, is more important than protecting citizens and the very principles of democracy.
 
 
+28 # CL38 2015-10-31 16:24
not just sad, though, Jim. Criminal. Violation of our constitutional rights.
 
 
+24 # Texas Aggie 2015-10-31 22:42
Why do you think it's a minority? Accomplices are guilty, too, and every cop that stands quietly by, every cop that covers for another cop, every cop who protects a killer is an accomplice. How many cops have you heard of who called out the murderers in their ranks?
 
 
+2 # WBoardman 2015-11-01 11:09
Good point, Texas Aggie!

Perhapsto chage the culture the silent majority
needs to be let off the hook,
just as a practical matter?
 
 
+38 # curmudgeon 2015-10-31 14:25
It seems that 'Search and Destroy" is the new motto instead of "serve and Protect"
 
 
+3 # Adoregon 2015-10-31 14:40
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wkHk4AE4HY
 
 
-31 # arquebus 2015-10-31 14:41
Boardman's comment about "toy guns" is asinine. Perhaps he should go look at some of these "toys" From two feet away you can't tell a toy from the real thing thanks to modern plastic extrusion technology. I had a student who almost got his brains blown out by an off-duty cop who saw him pointing the gun at passing cars. He couldn't tell it was a toy until he had it in his hand. My oldest boy brought home a squirt gun made to look like an Uzi...and it did look alike until you were a couple of feet away.

The kid with the toy gun in Cincy would probably be alive today if the cops had used reasonable tactics. But that is different than saying they should have known it was a toy gun.
 
 
+30 # WBoardman 2015-10-31 19:36
The snark from arquebus is part of the problem:

(1) the implication is that police officers can't be
expected to learn to recognize toys before killing people
because that's too hard for them. Really?
and
(2) in a broader sense, the comment reflects the all too common
willingness to cut cops slack for not doing their jobs,
or just willfully hurting/killing people. Too much
tolerance hurts everyone.

The killing of Tamir Rice, 12, was unconscionable
from start to finish so far, the finish being exoneration
of officers who came on like Rambo killing an unarmed
kid in seconds, even though the initiating 911 call
said the boy probably had a toy.

They should have known it might be a toy and they
definitely should have figured out if it was a toy
before subjecting a 12 year old to summary execution.

Making excuses for behavior like this, justifying behavior
like this, excusing behavior like this is wildly irresponsible,
unjust, and does nothing to curb behavior like this.
 
 
+12 # bullslam 2015-11-01 02:39
Okay -- so we can't get a ban on guns for various reasons. But we can begin to talk about a ban on toys which look like guns. Fuck the toy manufacturers who balk at such an idea.
 
 
+29 # Vardoz 2015-10-31 15:16
This horrific state of affairs is a black mark on our nation and our government appears to be woefully inadequate to address these atrocities and the slow genocide that is taking place. First we impoverish black communities, abandon them without any resources and then we engage in mass incarceration and now literally murder men, women and children! Warren is one of the few people that has spoken out against it. I think black need to fight back and protest until they are taken seriously. I have emailed Obama with every story and somehow he lack the leadership to send out a strong enough message. Warren speaks https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tBu3X9GosRw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_r6dweJK5sw
 
 
+27 # Pancho 2015-10-31 15:51
Comey is worse than just a free speech opponent. Under his and Erik Holder's regime, it has been nearly impossible to get FOIA requests honored.

The DOJ has not complied with a single FOIA request I've made in the last seven years. Bush, Mukasey, etc. were way better.

I tried to get the death penalty letter which was sent by the U.S.A.G. in New Mexico to Holder released. They refused, on the grounds it was a "privacy" issue. They were trying to kill the guy (they lost the D.P. trial phase, and he got life), but they were concerned about his "privacy?"

Spare me.

Nixon signed the FOIA law, for god's sake. Obama is worse than G.W. Bush and Nixon with respect to allowing the public to have access to public information.
 
 
+20 # Pancho 2015-10-31 16:09
Let me clarify an issue here, that some otherwise progressive readers leaving feedback seem not to understand.

Unions exist to protect the rights of members, to collectively bargain, and to otherwise represent them.

There is no need for over the top rhetoric and rationalization s from dirtbags such as Comey or union leaders, but they have an obligation to protect their members, just as they would if WalMart allowed unions.

They are not tantamount to judges and juries. Their representation is not contingent on the innocence of clients.

If readers were justly or unjustly accused of murder, and hired a private or were furnished a public defense attorney, and that attorney refused to fully represent their interests, because it was a particularly horrible crime, or because of their color or religion, or the identity of the victim, they would understand that was not how justice should be served.

The same is true of a union. They are the defense attorneys for their members. It's one of the few labor rights remaining despite the depredations of the odious Gang of Five on the Supreme Court. A current case, Friedrichs v. California Teachers, may wipe much of that out, making dues completely voluntary. If it goes, it will help the U.S. rapidly devolve into the third world country. These are the bastards that gave us Citizens United, so don't put it past them. One "swing" voter, Kennedy, is a long time corporate stooge.
 
 
+15 # lfeuille 2015-10-31 19:47
The problem is that police unions not only get to bargain over wages and benefits, but they have been allowed to negotiate special treatment for their members who are charged with crimes. This goes beyond what any other union is able to do. It should not be allowed. Criminal cops should get no special treatment from the justice system.
 
 
+9 # Texas Aggie 2015-10-31 22:50
They get special treatment that no other union gets for more than criminal behavior. Once we were allowed to check cops routinely for the use of drugs including steroids. No longer. The unions now permit testing only if the cop is seen shooting up. Another person reporting a cop's steroid use doesn't qualify as "reasonable suspicion."
 
 
+12 # WBoardman 2015-10-31 19:47
Pancho seems to me essentially right about unions, they are organized for the benefit of their members.

But unions are NOT the same as lawyers, though close.
After Darren Brown shot Michael Brown in Ferguson, the
first call he made was to his union, to gat lawyered up. He
did not report to his superiors first or follow department
protocol, so the union colluded in violating policy that
it has had a part in shaping`. That's a big problem.

The union leader behavior I talk about in my piece has
little or nothing to do with the welfare of the membership at large. What these cops are doing is attacking the
messanger, shutting down fair discussion of a real problem.

Arguably, if this leads to greater public unrest, their behavior
could actually make the lives of the membership worse,
all for the sake of protecting the guilty behind
a solid blue wall of silence and outbursts of blue
vituperation.

Public safety is NOT well served this way.
 
 
+8 # eyarden 2015-10-31 16:26
It is necessary to go beyond the rhetorics of Mr Boardman, Mr.Tarantino, the police union leaders, and others who regard the police as independent agents. Governments -- local (town. city, parish, or county), state. and national -- higher the police who act only as their agents. When "Rise Up October" goes out there it is the people defending itself from government, and even more from government that continues to be threatened by whatever is foreign to its conception of what requires its protections -- women & children, shops and department stores, white people in general. We can see this here in Cambridge, Massachusetts, where armed policeman are a familiar sight in the public schools. There, in the schools, non-immigrant black children have to go home to be taught the lesson that safety does not necessarily come from the barrel of a policeman's gun, and how to be careful in the presence of the police. It is up to the government to develop a police force that protects the peace, and offers assistance to those who seek their assistance.
 
 
+8 # WBoardman 2015-10-31 19:52
eyarden is exactly right that the government that
controls the police is responsible for police misconduct,
but that government (especially if elected) only responds
to the demands of the electorate (except in cases of
actually good leadership).

As others here demonstrate, the public still cuts cops
too much slack for killing unarmed people.

eyarden, if you haven't already, you might do something
about de-militarizing Cambridge schools. ;-)))
 
 
+6 # djnova50 2015-10-31 16:30
In reply to Mr. Boardman's final paragraph: When my sons were young, sometimes they wanted guns. On occasion, we would look at toy guns. All of the toy guns we saw had bright orange or red ring at the end of the barrel. I never could quite tell if the color was orange or red; but, it was pretty bright. Of course, their favortie guns were the super soaker guns. But, what I'm wondering is whether or not manufacturers are still putting that distinctive ring around the end of the toy gun barrel?
 
 
-17 # dipierro4 2015-10-31 18:44
In that well-known case - I don't recall the victim's name, but I'm sure we all are referring to the same one -- the gun was not a toy, but a "replica."

I am among those who believes that police culture needs to be re-examined, and that there is something deeply wrong in American police culture. OTOH, I am not willing to condemn, out of hand, a cop who shoots when someone points a "replica" gun at him. The cop wants to go home in the evening. He should not have to risk taking a shot in order to determine whether the gun pointed at him is real, or loaded.

If the kid pointing guns turn out to be 12 years old, and the gun turns out to be a replica, yes, that is a tragedy. Is it a murder? Not if I am on the jury.
 
 
+15 # WBoardman 2015-10-31 21:06
good thing diperro4 isn't on a jury, given
his willingness to decide a case before hearing all the evidence.

The cops responding in the Tamir Rice case
recklessly drove onto the playground right up to the kid.
If he had had a real gun, the cops had just put themselves
within point blank range before drawing their weapons.
That's more than reckless, it's stupid.

How about a rule:
when approaching a playground
where no shots are being fired,
the cops should exercise caution and discretion,
especially when there's already reason to believe
the child has a toy.
 
 
+14 # Texas Aggie 2015-10-31 22:53
But since the kid wasn't pointing the toy at the cop, then it is murder.
 
 
+11 # WBoardman 2015-10-31 21:00
good question, djnova50

if you google
"toy gun markings required by law"
there's a lot of information making clear that
at least some toy gun markings ARE required by law.

But knowing the NRA, toy gun lobby, and so forth, one expects
that there are also loopholes.

And people and and do remove the markings.
The gun Tamir Rice had lacked the marking.

All this just enlarges the argument that cops should
at least be trained to try to figure out what they're doing
before they do it, especially in no-crisis cases like
Tamir Rice, where no one was shooting at anyone
until the cops executed a 12 year old.
 
 
+10 # futhark 2015-10-31 17:12
Prescribed treatment for cattle, not citizens:

"Don't try to understand 'em
Just rope, throw, and brand 'em..."

Rawhide
 
 
+14 # elkingo 2015-10-31 17:39
The cops know damn well what they're doing, (i.e. harboring the bad ones, the murderers) and are scared shit of serious opposition.
 
 
+12 # futhark 2015-10-31 17:41
It's easy to think of political power in terms of hierarchy. Most people understand the hierarchies of authority in a feudal society or military organization and transfer the concept to all forms of government. What's missing here is the principal concept of the American Revolution: that the People, the citizens as a collective, are at the apex of this hierarchy, and that all who hold office under the auspices of the Republic do so to secure the blessings of liberty, health, and prosperity to the citizens, ALL the citizens. They are public servants in every sense of the word. Abuse of their powers is insubordination and cannot be tolerated if this political experiment has any chance of success.
 
 
+10 # Texas Aggie 2015-10-31 23:00
When a person has an authoritarian philosophy of life, whether they are the sheep or the shepherd, they really aren't interested in democracy. They are actually focused on control of other people, so they don't really care whether the American experiment in government works or not. As a matter of fact, they would rather it failed because it interferes with their ability to control other people.
 
 
+3 # James Marcus 2015-10-31 22:17
Zeig Heil! ....again....
All are (armed) Morons, Goose Stepping to the tune of yet other Morons.
 
 
+2 # Babbzy3 2015-11-01 01:53
It's a bad time to be a police officer. You have some bad apples in a collective of hundreds of thousands of dedicated men and women. Morale is at an all time low. How can you take pride in what you do if the evening news is plastered with the actions of a few bad guys making the whole occupation look bad? Departments are unable to recruit the better talent, and people are retiring or leaving the profession by the droves. Anecdotal evidence says that many officers aren't willing to risk being featured on the nightly news on some cellphone video, so they aren't taking an aggressive stance on crime or criminals. Worse, many are second guessing their training, putting themselves in dangerous situations. There is no excuse for the murderous actions that have surfaced of late, and a police officer's main job is to get home to his or her family alive. All lives matter, even police officers!
 
 
+9 # bullslam 2015-11-01 03:52
Quoting Babbzy3:
Departments are unable to recruit the better talent, and people are retiring or leaving the profession by the droves.


There's the famous case in Connecticut where City Hall rejected a police department applicant; the reason offered was that his IQ test showed he was too intelligent and might be bored by run of the mill police duties such as directing traffic. But one must ask: why would anybody with half a brain, waste a promising and intelligent person on run of the mill jobs? I've run into some very stupid men who wore the police uniform. Their whole presentation cried out Dunning-Krueger . Dunning-Krueger is the study which confirmed the great Bertrand Russell's observation: The problem with the world is that the stupid are obnoxiously loud and proud. And conversely, the more skillful and intelligent, the more full of doubt.
 
 
+2 # Babbzy3 2015-11-01 13:17
My son is a police detective, with a Masters Degree in Counseling. He's smart, and he has street smarts, and he's good at what he does. In case you've been sleeping, most police departments are now requiring either a college degree or 4 years of military experience prior to being accepted into a police academy. Not that the degree makes one smart, but the belief that most cops are dunderheads doesn't necessarily ring true, if it ever did. What some inner city police must encounter on a daily basis, however, should curl even the straightest of hair. I think people need to walk around in their shoes before making assumptions.
 
 
+2 # WBoardman 2015-11-01 15:27
Babbzy3 makes good points,
and from the beginning I've accepted the premise that
the majority of cops are decent people doing the best they can.

That said, it's clear (I hope) that the best too often
is nowhere near good enough, yet those who fail
to perform reasonably suffer nothing close to the
consequences their victims suffer.

Instead of circling the wagons, defending the guilty, and
attacking messengers and victims alike,
why don't police unions (and other police leaders)
make suggestions like Babbzy3's and in the same spirit.
 
 
+4 # mmcmanus 2015-11-02 09:54
No one forces police to become police, they are not drafted--they become police voluntarily, fully aware of the risks and responsibilitie s they have. If they cannot live up to the oath they take--to protect the public, not murder it--then they should quit or be forced out.
 
 
0 # tanis 2015-11-07 10:15
And I thought that police attacked unions.....conf using. I guess that nature balances everything out especially human behavior. If we participate in wars in other lands, we have to have war at home at the same time. I see no difference between soldiers and police at this time, they all take orders, sometimes they don't understand the orders, so they create their own. We are bound to balance violence as well as diets, creating enemies if there aren't any. Sad.
 

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN