Unless you’ve lived under a rock the last few years (how are you reading this?), you are fully aware of calls to ‘reform’ police departments. Reforms include decreasing funding for departments, reallocating funding for ‘diversity training’, all the way to eliminating the departments completely! The idea is: police are racist in their approach to law enforcement, handling of suspects, both during the arresting process and patrolling process. I think many ‘reforms’ are in order, but patrolmen are only a small part of that. Let’s dig.
First, why police at all? In a civil society, police serve three main functions: 1. Enforce the laws, 2. Apprehend suspected lawbreakers, and 3. Attempt to create a safer environment for people and property (crowd control, missing persons searches, etc.). If all citizens willfully obeyed the laws, the police would be a completely unnecessary organization. Alas, there are always those that either think laws do not apply to them, or the risk or severity of punishment for a particular activity is not a deterrent—hence, lawbreakers. Heck, sometimes the lawbreaking is done BY the police! But the intention of function of the police is to prevent such things. Let’s stipulate their need. If the police are removed, some other organization will need to perform their necessary functions. Granted, I come at this from a strictly ‘law and order’ viewpoint. If you do not break laws, your interaction with police is likely slim and none. Think the law is a bad law? Take it up with the law-makers, not the police. Until then, follow the law, and minimize your interaction.
Now we delve into the subjective part of policing: patrolling and arresting behavior. Where are police presences most needed? If you answered “where crimes are most likely committed”, go to the head of the class. But which crimes? Theft can happen anywhere, but most likely where assets exist: businesses, homes, etc. But crimes against people, for some reason, tend to occur in poorer neighborhoods. The problem is that, for many areas, poorer communities are populated by minorities. Is an increased police presence in a poor, predominately Black or Hispanic area racist, or just proper asset allocation? That may depend entirely upon whom you ask. The same is true for crime statistics as a whole, including arrests, sentencing, and incarceration rates: is it uneven application or does one population tend more towards lawbreaking than others? Another point here is handling of suspected lawbreakers. The entire ‘defund the police’ movement started with the filmed terrible police treatment of George Floyd. Even though the statistics simply do not bear out any semblance of police ‘hunting’ unarmed minorities, the Narrative has taken hold—to the tune of nationwide riots, looting, arson, and mayhem. Should the police have treated Floyd differently? Likely. Should the treatment of Floyd cause the reactions it did? I think not, but that’s just my opinion. Floyd was a career felon, with fatal levels of Fentanyl in his system. While police shouldn’t execute such an individual (the coroner says they didn’t in this case, either), my sympathy is in short supply—I don’t have enough to spare to such criminals. Can police training and methods be revised to prevent recurrence? I sure hope so.
Another point needs to be made here: ‘diversity’. Most police departments are made up of nearly every minority configuration possible. Many departments are majority minority. So to postulate that police are routinely racist is laughable. Even in the notorious Floyd case above, many of the other arresting officers were minorities. And in many large cities nationwide, the police department management, all the way to the Police Chief and Mayor, are minorities. We need to put that old ‘police/racist’ bromide to sleep, permanently.
Now for the ‘reforms’ I’d like to see in place. How about ‘citizen reform’? Citizens outnumber police officers by the millions, yet we always focus on those in uniform. Here’s an approach: follow the instructions of police officers. Period. You can argue later, in court, if the officer’s behavior or instructions were inappropriate or unlawful—many civil cases have been thusly won. But resisting arrest, physical resistance, intimidations, and general disrespect of police does no one any good, and can sometimes end in tragic fashion. If you reach for an officer’s weapon, you deserve the likely consequences. If you pull a weapon, you are the direct catalyst of what happens next. This isn’t even the time for faking like you’re pulling a piece—your fake may end your life. The police are trained, but they also have an obligation to themselves, their partners, and the public as a whole, to prevent armed attacks. Don’t be stupid dead. I do not know where this general disrespect and antagonism for police began. Maybe it is a reaction to years of poor police behavior? Maybe it breaks along ethnic lines? But I was taught at home, from a very early age, to respect authority, police specifically. Bad apples? Oh yeah, just like every other walk of life. But the majority of cops are bad? Please. The annual death toll by police would number in the hundreds of thousands, not in the hundreds. So, maybe if we were better people, we wouldn’t entice the bad apple cops to open fire? Just a thought.
An aside: Asset forfeiture
Asset forfeiture is the process where law enforcement can confiscate funds and assets of suspected felons, before indictments or trials. Often, these funds are given directly to the arresting police departments, to enhance their equipment and vehicles. Many times, it is just the presence of large amounts of cash that triggers such a seizure. This should end RIGHT NOW. You want to seize the assets of CONVICTED FELONS, I’m completely on board. If you need to collect evidence of the specific crime you have a signed warrant to execute, fine. But to penalize folks without due process, causing them financial harm, even if they are not even charged for a crime, much less convicted? No way. This is mafia shakedown territory, and it should be illegal, no matter who does it. And giving local police incentive to shake down anyone with resources? Speed traps on steroids. No thanks. This activity violates the 4th, 5th, and 14th Amendments to the US Constitution. This feeds into the negative police stereotypes like nothing else. And in this rare case, I am anti-cop.
