Law Enforcement

I've written on this matter in the past, however in light of recent events, I feel the desire to elaborate further on the topic. I believe the last entry I wrote on police was quite some time ago but I suspect two things: that my opinion may not have shifted greatly, and that the last entry may have been a bit more on the brief side (as many of my earlier entries tended to be). The latter is the reason that I would like to delve into my own thoughts a second time so as to have a more in depth record for the sake of clarity. Without further adieu, let's begin.

I've never understood there to be anything controversial about the notion of holding law enforcement officers to a higher ethical standard than the average civilian. They have after all, to the best of my understanding, sworn an oath to uphold the law, so why should their actions not be put under particular speculation? Evidently there are others who see things differently, and unfortunately I would largely chalk that up to the political nature the conversation has to it. I typically detest the politicization of most issues, but this is one that I especially wish would not be divided based upon whether one identifies as "liberal" or "conservative". Obviously this is because the law should hold no bias. Justice doesn't vote democrat or republican, at least in an ideal world.

However we don't live in an ideal world, and obviously this is not the case. Human beings are fallible, and law enforcement, being made up of the same such tragically fallible human beings is not free from error. It is for this reason, this explicit understanding of the ideally simple truth that police are people too, that I am of the opinion that law enforcement is an institution that needs examination and rewiring from time to time, if not large scale reform which I would say is the case now. One might even argue, and indeed at this point some are starting to, that the institution as a whole is becoming less relevant due to how bad some of it's flaws have deteriorated. Some have said we should "abolish" the police, and while I'm not necessarily of that mindset, I would say that by many measures we should significantly scale down the scope of the institution to a more manageable state.

But that's not all I would say should happen with law enforcement. There are many changes that I would like to see. Demilitarization for starters. Quite simply, I don't think the police should look like soldiers. I would argue that is a mark of a society in a state of disrepair. Ideally, the majority of societal issues would be solved via either community effort, legislative means, or a combination of the two. Although I'm not naive. I don't think we'll ever see the police being "abolished" in any major sense, but precincts not having tanks would be a nice start. I say that militarized police forces are a mark of a society in disrepair for a very significant reason: it states that there is a fundamental disconnect among classes. It communicates a profound level of mistrust between groups, a disarray of sorts that simply should not be, yet is and is erroneously "handled" by means of a militia. Not to mention a "militia" that is often renegade to a significant extent, which we'll get into now.

Earlier I stated the obvious fact that police are people. Going a bit further, I'll state the obvious fact that people hold biases. Unless you've been hiding away in some far flung corner of the world for your entire life, you likely are aware to some degree of the topic of racial bias among law enforcement officers. This is an enduring issue for the institution, and has existed since its inception (at least in the United States, I can't say the same for law enforcement throughout history with absolute certainty). Do I believe that all police are racist? No. But that's beside the point. I believe that a not insignificant number hold prejudice and this is more than enough to make the matter exceedingly problematic for the institution as a whole. Many like to offer up the defense, "it's just a few bad apples". These people are clearly trying to communicate that the whole of law enforcement should not be judged based on the actions of the corrupt few, which would be a fair point if not for the fact that it neglects the entire phrase concerning a few bad apples. The expression, in its entirety, is "a few bad apples spoil the batch" which is why it is particularly fitting in its application to law enforcement. If there is bias in any part of the system, it is an issue for the whole of the system. I would say that if there is one issue in law enforcement that might unravel the entire institution, racial discrimination may very well be that loose thread. One thing is certain, there is a prejudiced element in law enforcement. I still remember how the police somehow managed to muster the restraint to take Dylan Roof, a man who committed multiple murders, into custody alive. Yet George Floyd received no such due process and he supposedly forged a check. This is just one example in a long line of similar events which suggests a very unfortunate pattern. At this point, denial of that pattern and a denial of objective reality are looking more and more to be one and the same.

Given that notion, and the fact that certainly there must be officers who do not wish for this controversy to continue, one would assume there would be a large push by officers themselves to route the prejudiced elements from their ranks, yet the majority of the outcry seems to always come from the community. This is emblematic of the next issue that needs to be addressed; corruption and a culture that pushes out those who attempt to address it. Make no mistake, I'm not suggesting that any of these problems are easy to solve, but the first step is acknowledging that they exist so here we are. Yes, if one would to suggest that the institution of law enforcement is free from any form of corruption, I would say they are either ignorant or a liar. One hears the stories of "good cops" attempting to speak out being met with hostility far more often than one hears of them being met with exaltation, at least that's my understanding of the matter. I frequently read accounts of officers who are found to have mishandled matters, often in a criminal manner, not to have been removed from the force but simply relocated or put at a desk for a time. I've even heard of paid vacations. These types of responses to an abuse of ones position, and more heinously yet, the breaking of an oath before God, are no less reprehensible that the Catholic church protecting pedophiles in my mind.

There are many other issues that need to be addressed concerning law enforcement and I will concede that I may not cover all of them in this entry but the last issue I will attempt to cover doesn't deal as much with the officers themselves, but rather of the kind of response a certain faction of society has in times such as these. I'm referring of course to the whole "blue lives matter" culture, and right now I'm going to go over everything I see wrong with it. First and foremost, I see it as a denial of the very humanity of officers. I would say the whole culture of defending the actions of police, right or wrong, is a denial of the fact that they are capable of making mistakes just as anyone else is. This notion that officers are perfect models of justice is naivety in its purest form and this culture needs to cease if we truly wish to move forward. Expecting officers of the law to be held to a higher ethical standard is not disrespectful in my mind, and I would say the whole Blue Lives Matter "movement" is getting it mixed up. I'll concede that some anti police sentiments are in fact put in less than respectful terms, but I would also argue that if one takes into account everything I've gone over leading up to that concession, the disrespect becomes quite understandable. What is not disrespectful, in my mind, is a community that simply wishes for accountability from an institution that is supposedly sworn to protect them. I see no controversy in such a thing. Speaking of respect, that's another aspect of the whole blue lives matter movement that should be addressed, specifically it's absence. Not only does the movement create a culture of coddling officers, arguably praising mismanagement, it does so while perpetuating the same hostile culture towards minorities and those who wish to inquire about the institution just as much, if not more, than the institution itself.

Above all, I wish that everyone would do one thing: view police objectively. They are flawed, they make mistakes, they are capable of miscarrying justice just as much as anyone else. However the very thing that makes police different from civilians, as I have stated many times before, is the very reason they should be held to such a high degree of scrutiny. Cops swear an oath before God and their community that they will protect and serve said community. When one breaks an oath, I truly do believe that they concede a portion of their humanity and the matter is one of the utmost severity. However when one breaks the oath that law enforcement officers do, they don't just forego a portion of their own humanity, they often concede that of others, which is what makes such a thing even more despicable. Justice and the law are concepts of the most powerful sort of relevance yet they are also so fragile within the balance that we attempt to keep them. The balance of morality and the means by which we dictate and enforce it, I believe, comes in the form of a conversation to put it in the most simple terms, and this is a conversation that has been renewed in the light of recent events. It is a difficult conversation but like most difficult conversations, it is not an optional one.