Police shouldn’t act like invaders

April 23, 2012

By Steven Greenhut

SACRAMENTO — A Sacramento area family is mourning the death of their mentally disabled son, who was shot to death by a sheriff’s deputy after the family had called the sheriff’s department for help in restraining him. Newspaper accounts suggest the deputy ordered the young man — a severe germophobe — onto the ground, which sparked intense struggling. After a tussle, the deputy shot the man in front of his family.

As is typical, the sheriff defended the officer and said that he was well within his rights to use deadly force, which is no doubt true given that current law gives officers wide latitude to restrain and even kill people. Comb through newspapers across the country and one will find many incidents of officer-involved shootings and aggressive behavior by the authorities, who, as an aside, increasingly look like paramilitary rather than community officers. Police say society has become more dangerous, but crime rates are falling even during tough economic times. The number of officers killed on duty is at record lows.

In my view, the reason for the incidents is the nature of policing has changed. Following the 9/11 attacks, officers have convinced themselves that every member of the public is a potential threat. Every local police department is awash in grants from “Homeland Security” to buy the latest toys and weaponry. Attitudes have changed and the local police aren’t your friends any more.

Calling the cops

From a practical standpoint, these incidents remind us to think carefully before calling for police help. From a policy perspective, it’s time for a wide-ranging debate about use-of-force issues that’s not dominated by police unions and their political courtiers.

This is from the Los Angeles Daily News this week: “Abdul Arian, the 19-year-old Winnetka man killed in a hail of police bullets on April 11, was buried Tuesday at the Pierce Brothers Valhalla Memorial Park in North Hollywood. … [M]any attendees who knew Arian expressed anger about the way he died, following a car chase through the San Fernando Valley that ended on the 101 Freeway … .” Arian is pictured nearby.

I’ve written about such shootings at the hands of deputies and police officers. Sometimes they are justified, but often the killings leave me wondering whether those officers would have reacted as they did had it been their child driving the car or their mentally ill son squirming on the ground.

Many people have been outraged at the tragic killing of Trayvon Martin in Florida and liberal critics have blamed those “stand your ground” laws that allow the use of deadly force by ordinary citizens when they are under attack rather than forcing them to retreat before defending themselves.

Such laws might embolden people, but I wish these critics — who insist on putting a racial tilt on a matter that has far broader implications — would also look closely at government-sanctioned use of force. If “stand your ground” laws embolden armed citizens, what happens when armed officials are given the broadest legal latitude to kill and also are protected by their departments and their unions?

Police officers sometimes have to use deadly force. We all understand that. It’s an oftentimes tough job. But we keep seeing the fruits of America’s slide down that slippery slope toward a police state: 6-year-olds searched at airports, armed police patrolling the halls of junior high schools, drones deployed over U.S. skies to crack down on crime, SWAT teams arresting the sellers of unlicensed raw milk, armed agents shutting down peaceful medical marijuana clinics, code officers and other regulatory agents granted the powers and weaponry of peace officers, trigger-happy police who seem to reach for their weapons before trying other, less-deadly alternatives.

We’ve become a society of checkpoints and searches and increased surveillance wherever we go. We have federal officials who monitor bank accounts and gain added powers to snoop on us, broad anti-terrorism laws that allow the authorities to detain citizens indefinitely without due process. Many conservatives applaud these expansions of power because of their concern about terrorist threats and street crime. Liberals applaud them also, given how eager they are to use government to “improve” our society. The more laws and regulations one passes, the more authorities one needs to enforce them.

Where’s the criticism?

Whatever happened to civil libertarians, who must be in hiding somewhere? Why aren’t Christians — who are more than willing to flex their political muscle on gay marriage and other issues — talking about the impact of these policies on the least among us, or thinking seriously about those in jails and prisons?

We’re creating a brutal and inhumane society. This is from a recent Los Angeles Times article: “A Los Angeles County commission investigating jail abuse heard tearful testimony … from clergy and civilian monitors who worked in the lockups and said they witnessed deputies assaulting inmates and bullying witnesses to keep quiet. One jail monitor broke down as she recounted being intimidated by a deputy whom she said saw beat an unconscious inmate. A weeping jail chaplain described deputies calling him a rat after he reported another beating.”

When officials misbehave so egregiously, it undermines our society and our form of government in deep and disturbing ways.

Ultimately, it is up to we, the people, to push the pendulum back in a more sensible direction. Since 9/11, Americans have placed their security over their freedom, but I’m sensing an understanding of the problem among serious people from all political perspectives.

When Americans think about public employee issues these days, they think about the pension crisis.

But as serious a problem as that is, the biggest public-employee issue relates more directly to who we are as a people and what kind of society we want to live in. We need to demand that the authorities behave more like members of our community and less like an invading army.

No comments

Write a comment
  1. Peter G
    Peter G 23 April, 2012, 14:02

    The problem is partially stated without any solution. How do you design a force rule so that the civil servant that we hire to do police work can go home to their families at the end of their shift?

    Reply this comment
  2. Beelzebub
    Beelzebub 26 April, 2012, 10:05

    Cops today are incompetent trigger happy fascists. I remember cops in the olden days who were not equipped with 10% of the high tech restraint gadgets or training afforded to cops today. They were able to restrain combatants with brute force. They didn’t need tasers or rubber bullets much less lethal force with a 9mm. All those cops went home at the end of shift. NEVER did I ever hear of a fatal police shooting that occurred while trying to restrain an unruly subject. NEVER! Today if someone fights back they shoot him down like a rabid dog. They are cowards in the true sense of the word.

    IMO there are two things driving this recent phenomenon:

    (1) Many of the recent police hires are friends or relatives of cops on the force. No where else could someone pull down compensation in excess of $100k a year with a GED, HS diploma or even an AA degree. No where! So as a favor to the cop on the force – they are hiring misfits and incompetents who have no business being in police work. They are there ONLY for the money. And it’s much easier to shoot someone then to take him to the ground, cuff him and stick him in the back of the patrol unit. These boobs currently being hired are cowards because they are incompetent without the physicial assets to deal with a problem. That is problem #1.

    (2) Problem #2 is that the PD’s, DA’s and JustUs system always exonnerates cops – even in the most egregious bad shoots or cases of misconduct. They always walk away scot free with nothing to fear. So whenever they find themselves in a stressful situation the first thing they do is reach for that metal hog on their hip. And when they engage in blatant misconduct are are found liable for misconduct or violations of the law IN CIVIL COURT – it’s the TAXPAYERS who get punished. The cops isn’t fined or demoted. He is PROTECTED!!! The average taxpaying citizen is the one who gets screwed!!! So why wouldn’t they execute people on the street??? That same night they can sleep like babies KNOWING THAT THE CROOKED SYSTEM HAS THEIR BACKS!!!!

    There is some truth for you, my friends. Now see if you can digest it!!! 😉

    Reply this comment
  3. Cristóbal García
    Cristóbal García 27 April, 2012, 18:53

    It is time that we take this country back from the Gestapo. Use your constitutional rights to buy firearms and then use them to protect your fellow Americans. Enough is enough!

    Reply this comment
  4. Beelzebub
    Beelzebub 29 April, 2012, 23:10

    You go, girl! 😀

    Reply this comment

Write a Comment

Leave a Reply



Related Articles

CA better off than four years ago?

Sept. 7, 2012 By Joseph Perkins I really didn’t need to watch President Obama’s speech last night — although I

California to middle class: Drop dead

April 30, 2012 By Steven Greenhut SACRAMENTO — The new USC study pointing to a much-slower rate of population growth

Real Culprits in CA Housing Crash

Jan. 11, 2013 By Joseph Perkins As the California economy continues slowly to recover from the collapse of its once-thriving