The George Floyd murder at the hands of the Minneapolis Police Department has quickly morphed into a nationwide outpouring of outrage, anger, and soul-searching.
Actually, I think the mass outpouring of emotion regarding racial injustice was caused by the proximate videotaped incidents of (a) the Floyd spectacle, (b) the videotaped Ahmaud Arbery shooting in Georgia, and (c) the videotaped attempt to “swat” a black man by a white woman in New York’s Central Park. Rarely have three related, nationally reported outrages occurred this close together…all of them videotaped…where there is little doubt that the events were racially motivated.
I can’t image a single American adult who, upon watching these three incidents on TV, doesn’t feel shame and disgust at the travesties. Even the most heartless among us knows, deep in their souls, that this white-on-black behavior is evil. Even though he wouldn’t admit it, I’m sure President Trump cringed when watching these videos. Some things are beyond the pale.
To be honest, had there not been a video record of these disparate events, most Americans would not have paid much attention to them. That’s the way it is: most people don’t pay attention to this kind of thing because it doesn’t affect them personally and they can’t relate to the injustice. When was the last time a White person died in a chokehold from a policeman?
With people of color, stuff like this is all too commonplace. They must deal with this reality every day in their neighborhoods. Parents must be terrified when their adult children walk down the street or drive a car. It’s bad enough that they must fear criminals, but they must also watch out for law enforcement predators.
How can this unjust situation be changed? Is it even possible?
At this moment in time, society’s revulsion at the past weeks’ events suggests that there may be momentum building toward meaningful change. American outrage in the 1960’s culminated in the Civil Rights Act. I know because I lived through those momentous times.
But that landmark legislation didn’t solve the problem of racial injustice and systematized police brutality. It should have, but it failed.
Why?
The Civil Rights Act is Federal law, while community law enforcement is local. “Law and Order” is administrated in neighborhoods and city business districts. It is tailored to the tastes of the citizens who vote for city councilmen, mayors, Sheriff’s, District Attorneys, and Judges.
These local elected officials are beholden first to the citizens who elect them, by the local ordinances (laws) in place, by controlling State laws, and, lastly, by Federal policy guidance. Local elected officials meet with the public every week, people know them, and they can be reached by a phone call. I know this all too well, as I served for three years as the senior administrative aide to a County Supervisor. Local government is where “the rubber meets the road”.
It is also non-partisan (i.e. no political party affiliation), so actual issues get addressed while political posturing is lessened.
Federal government, on the other hand, is remote. The officeholders are typically seasoned political party hacks whose public service idealism quickly fades once they get to Washington D.C. Federal officials all come from somewhere, but they are strangers in their own home towns (because they are never there) and they are virtually impossible to reach, because they are so insulated by staff. Accountability is low, and their priorities are kissing up to lobbyists and getting re-elected. Meaningful policy discussion of significant local issues like policing and equal treatment in the judicial system is a non-starter in Washington D.C. Heartfelt speeches (“thoughts and prayers”) are made, photo ops are occasioned, and nothing meaningful is accomplished.
In the end, the resolution of police brutality and unequal criminal justice system treatment falls on each local community: locals must deal with the mess that they created and have allowed to fester.
To resolve issues that divide communities, we need individuals who are willing to listen, do what is right, and correct mistakes when they are made. It’s that simple.
“Business as usual” got us to this place. Local officials have taken too much advice on “law and order” from partisan political gasbags and the law enforcement and criminal justice folks. They both work to promote fear, rather than community tranquility. Blaming the downtrodden for urban decay and crime, and allowing heavy-handed policing to make non-minority citizens feel more secure is standard procedure.
As a society, we have allowed the police to not just investigate crimes and arrest suspects, but to also impose “street justice” when a message is deemed necessary to be sent. And, so, we find instances of brutality occasioning misdemeanor offenses such as driving with a broken taillight, breaking curfew, jaywalking, and having the moxie to object to rude police language in front of loved ones. Sometimes these minor issues end with someone being shot, usually a minority.
Law enforcement officers are authorized to use deadly force in very limited and specific circumstances. The fact of the matter is that chokeholds, baton beatings, and discharge of firearms are used all too commonly against minority citizens but rarely against White folks. It is not that non-Caucasian people commit more crimes or are more violent but, rather, that the police feel enabled to act like this by their public masters.
Who is to fault? Well, we citizens elect the City Councils, and those electeds hire and fire Police Chiefs, who implement policy (supposedly) established by the City Councils. We citizens also elect the District Attorney, who prosecutes defendants, and we also elect the Judges in or jurisdiction.
If there is a culture of racial disparity in law enforcement and criminal justice outcomes within our City or County, then we voters are complicit in the problem. “You get what you vote for.”
Compounding the problem is the power of law enforcement unions. I have yet to hear of an instance where a police union came out against an officer or group of officers who have obviously misused their authority. On the contrary, the union usually makes the case that such officers be given the benefit of the doubt, even in egregious cases. Police Chiefs normally abhor taking sides against an officer and the union; it’s a no-win situation for them.
Some jurisdictions, in light of recent events, are adopting local policies which restrict their law enforcement officers from using chokeholds, tear gas, rubber bullets, and deadly force except in the most dangerous situations. That’s a start.
However, another thing that should be considered is the mandatory use of “body cams” by all law enforcement officers responding to a call. Many, if not most, jurisdictions have the equipment in their police cruisers and quite a few officers have them in the field. All too often we hear of an incident where an officer was equipped with a body cam but had it turned off. That is just too convenient, because the version of what happened often boils down to what the victim of police violence testifies versus the “word” of the officer and his partner. So, it’s two to one in favor of law enforcement right from the get-go.
The recent instances of police misconduct have caught the public’s outraged attention only because bystanders videotaped the encounters. Without that “eyewitness” testimony, there would be no evidence of police brutality.
So, I believe that every jurisdiction that employs law enforcement officers needs to (a) purchase body cams for all officers, and (b) make it mandatory that such a device is records every event when a police/citizen encounter occurs.
The “I forgot to turn on my body cam” excuse should not be tolerated by any Police Chief or their boss, the City Council. Police unions will gnash and wail, but this is the centerpiece of the jurisdiction’s accountability program. When the body cam is in use, it will be pretty clear who did what to whom and why.
If law enforcement officers are thus held to a higher standard of behavior, they will evolve. Less gratuitous violence will engender less reciprocal violence. If fear and apprehension over interactions with policemen can be lessened, minorities will be less jumpy, will run from police less often, and may be more willing to help law enforcement resolve crimes within their neighborhoods.
This will take time. Black Americans have been subjected to aggressive policing since the Civil War, so the mess that White America has created will take time to clean up. Attitudes don’t change overnight.
But, we need to try.
(UPDATE: Just as I was about to post this blog, there was news again this morning from Minnesota. It appears that the City Council of Minneapolis has decided to “defund” its Police Department. It remains to be seen how that defunding takes shape, but it appears that the intent is to remove some funding for cops on the beat and re-appropriate it to community programs that attempt to bring people together rather than to stigmatize them.
This is an interesting development. The City Council has been unhappy with its Police Department leadership for quite a while, it appears. The Police Chief has been resistant to change and that attitude has filtered down to the rank and file. The George Floyd murder was just the latest police brutality event. The officer who committed the crime has been reported 18 other times for misconduct and has never been charged with a crime or fired. This reflects upon the Police Chief and the District Attorney and the law enforcement/criminal justice culture that they have engendered in Minneapolis.
This “defunding” decision, which I’m sure was a last resort to get the attention of the Police Chief, his troops, and the Hennepin County D.A., will have repercussions all over the Nation. It shows that a jurisdiction which is serious about reversing the systemic racism in law enforcement/criminal justice can effect change if it uses its “nuclear option”: money.
For some reason, I’m visualizing Cher in Moonstruck when she slaps Nicolas Cage in the face and shouts, “Snap out of it!”. That’s the effect that the City Council intends with this bold move.
Police unions are going to hate this, as is Donald Trump and his band of MAGA flagwavers. The President campaigned on the trite “law and order” message, and personal style in business and in governing features aggressiveness, bullying, and gratuitously violent rhetoric and vindictiveness against perceived opponents.
Donald Trump has had his knee on democracy’s neck for three years now and he seems to enjoy it, like Officer Chauvin taking down George Floyd. Bullies like Trump and police unions want more, not less, power and will fight any attempt to hobble them, democracy be damned.
I can see this latest development giving paranoid, far-right, militaristic wackadoodles an excuse to flex their muscles. President Trump goaded some of them into showing up at last month’s “Re-Open the Economy” demonstrations in combat gear and toting long guns. The intent was to intimidate the Governor of Michigan. It worked, to some extent.
Guys who like to play with guns and boast about how “we have more bullets than the other side” are going to be very uncomfortable with the idea of “defunding”. They will probably (with help from President Trump) manipulate this racial injustice issue into a perceived threat against their Second Amendment rights (gun ownership) and go on the warpath.
“Law and Order” will become a big issue in the 2020 Presidential campaign, perhaps overshadowing Trump’s inept response to the Covid-19 pandemic and the economic recession.
It’s time for another “Hail Mary” pass!)
