An awesome editorial from Richard Carlson in the Strib:
Jamar Clark in Minneapolis. Philando Castile in Falcon Heights. And now Justine Damond — in Minneapolis, again.
For the record, I want it to be known that I object to being policed this way. As between the Minneapolis Police Department and the civilian authorities in my town, it is the civilians who must be in control, not the police. These days it appears to be the opposite. It is well past time for our mayor and our City Council to assert their authority. They can start by firing our ineffectual police chief. After that, the City Council should take charge of a complete overhaul of the department.
Since the department can’t seem to hire and train anything but Blue Warriors, the council, rather than the department, should set the rules for what qualifies a person to become and remain a Minneapolis police officer. If the council doesn’t feel it has the expertise to micromanage how cops are qualified and trained, it can hire experts from foreign jurisdictions who don’t think of the citizenry as the people of an occupied country. The council should break up the entire command structure of the department, and demote, fire or reassign everyone in management, because these are the people who have stubbornly failed or refused to reform the culture of our paramilitary Police Department despite scandal after scandal.
I make no exception for the innocent, if there are any, because despite their oath to uphold the law, they did not stop the others.
Finally, the council should make it known that it will no longer negotiate labor agreements with the police union (yes, my Carroll ancestors are no doubt rolling in their graves), because for years the union has done everything it could to defend unfit officers and to block reform. If these things lead to expensive litigation by retrograde elements in the department, feel free to increase my taxes to pay for it. It’s time to decide who runs this town — the citizens, or the schoolyard bullies in uniform.
I’d like to think that a thorough overhaul of the Minneapolis Police Department and its policies will not be happening just because this time the victim is a white woman who holds citizenship in a predominantly white first-world country and who was shot in an affluent white neighborhood, rather than a black or American Indian person shot in downtrodden north Minneapolis. I’d also like to think that the police and the city won’t try to solve their PR problem by simply throwing the Somali-American police officer who shot Damond under the nearest bus. But I’m not that naive.
There are more ways for this case to go wrong than I can count. Minneapolis, which prides itself on its liberalism, has in reality led the nation in hypocrisy on the issue of race. I am ashamed of my city, of its arrogant, hypocritical police force, and of its civic leaders who have shrunk from taking on the elephant in the room for fear that they will lose the political endorsements of the all-powerful police union. Included in those civic leaders are the judges and prosecutors of the Hennepin County District Court, who have tortured facts, law and logic to justify almost anything cops chose to do to the people that I spent 28 years bringing before them for justice.
I’ve had enough. Haven’t you?
YES.
cartomancer says
Well there’s one systemic problem right there. It shouldn’t be “police vs. civilian”, because the police ARE civilians. They’re not soldiers, they’re citizens in uniform. Or they should be. As soon as you start thinking in terms of us vs. them you start building this culture of disdain and violence.
LykeX says
This. Continuously, through loudspeakers, all across the globe.
ahcuah says
Here’s a story of a person on a Grand Jury in Austin, in the New York Times: A Trying Time on a Grand Jury. One of the ways the prosecutors game the system so that cops don’t get indicted is show-and-tells of how police work is done. They also get really uncomfortable with questions, and (maybe) stop presenting certain kinds of cases to that particular grand jury.
remyporter says
Unfortunately, the US has never really adopted the Peelian principles, and it’s a shame. It wouldn’t fix the problems we have with police in this country, but it’d be a good first step. Sadly, most of the principles are basically alien to policing culture in the US, and the “tough on crime types” want to make it yet more alien.
rietpluim says
cartomancer I’m sure you’re aware who is thinking in us and them.
ctech says
YES! I also loved your post on the plea for foreigners to not come to america because the police will shoot them. Something has got to give with either more training or vetting processes to get these scared, itchy-trigger finger cops out. I understand they want to go home to their families too and that they have a dangerous job but we are beyond the point of ridiculous of saying, “I feared for my life so I shot”.
If you can’t handle the stress and the danger of the job without overreacting then policeman is not your right career choice.
Marcus Ranum says
I assume you’ve all seen the video of the Baltimore cop planting evidence…
cadfile says
Don’t worry the black cop will be indicted and convicted of shooting the white woman and the civil authorities will go “Whew! We are getting better at rooting out bad police officers… move along… nothing to see here now…”
Snarki, child of Loki says
“because the police ARE civilians”
That’s why they get EXACTLY the same legal protection as civilians do, when they kill random innocent people, right? Because, if that were so, there would be a significant number of (ex) cops sitting on Death Row, with exactly the same false conviction rates as J. Random Citizen.
timgueguen says
cadfile@8 not only is the cop in this case black, he’s a Muslim as well. Everyone’s favourite Minnesota ex-politician, Michelle Bachmann, is claiming Officer Noor shot Justine Damond because he had a “cultural seizure” at the sight of a woman in pyjamas. You can be sure that she won’t be the last to play the Muslim angle, no matter what an investigation might reveal.
http://www.rawstory.com/2017/07/too-many-people-afraid-of-being-called-racists-michele-bachmann-says-muslim-cop-shot-woman-in-cultural-rage/
cartomancer says
rietpluim, #5
I am aware, yes. But the language here is somewhat pernicious. Even this strongly critical op-ed piece uses the language of police vs. civilians uncritically. I think that doing so concedes to the world that we accept such a state of affairs.
joel says
Even in this forum I see someone repeating the myth that policing is a really, really dangerous job. It isn’t. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, law enforcement is not even among the top 10 most dangerous occupations:
https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/cfoi.pdf
(Scroll down to Chart 3)
Logging, farming, commercial fishing, mining, and about a dozen construction trades are all more dangerous jobs than policing. Aviation. Delivery-truck driving. The list goes on.
Spread the word. If cops deserve deference for taking risks, then a whole lot of other people deserve it even more.
Crip Dyke, Right Reverend Feminist FuckToy of Death & Her Handmaiden says
Minneapolis, you’re in good (bad?) company: in the early naughties – or whenever it was that Juan Williams was the host of Talk of the Nation on NPR – public radio’s flagship talk/call-in show decided to record on location in Portland, for some reason. Williams got the mayor up on a stage with some other local politicians and entirely reimagined the job of fluffer. For Williams, a fluffer’s work was now to be performed in the audience’s full view.
After praise for random things that really didn’t deserve praise, save possibly by comparison with lunatic jurisdictions that were entirely ignoring evidence when constructing municipal policy, Williams asked the white mayor of the (then) whitest big city in the US, a city located in a state that still had 140+ year old language in its constitution banning land ownership by Black people (unenforceable, but at that point still unrepealed) what Portland was doing so right on issues of racism, why Portland didn’t see major riots of the type seen in Los Angeles after the Rodney King verdict, why Portland wasn’t the subject of acrimonious class-action lawsuits against racist treatment, and why, in our mayor’s opinion, other major cities didn’t simply copy Portland’s recipe for success.
Unfortunately, we did not hear the only possible honest reply:
To this day I wonder what Juan Williams would have done if he’d actually gotten an historically informed, historically accurate answer as to why a city with no Black mayoral candidates and the smallest percentage of Black citizens of any US metropolis might not have managed to even have a conversation about race sufficiently provocative to trigger a riot. What a wanker. I honestly think less of him than I do of Portland, a city where two white guys can open VooDoo Donuts and have it explode in popularity without provoking any public discussion of racism or colonialism at all.
You want to know why you aren’t seeing any sticky, slimy racism in Portland, Juan? Trust me: the magic of racist ignorance is in the hole.
grumpyoldfart says
As a matter of interest, Justine Damond is the 541st person shot dead by US police this year.
—–
Points from the article:
* City Council to assert their authority
* start by firing our ineffectual police chief
* a complete overhaul of the department.
* the council…should set the rules
* hire experts from foreign jurisdictions
* break up the entire command structure of the department
* demote, fire or reassign everyone in management
* no longer negotiate labor agreements with the police union
Let us know when any of that happens.
zoniedude says
Seems that all of the police who shoot people claim that they were frightened so they shot unarmed people to death. Why are so many police officers abject cowards?
LykeX says
Jesus Christ on a pogo stick, and we’re only halfway through.
flange says
Carlson is entirely right. His suggestions should be followed by all police departments in the US. The most important item (and least likely to happen) is purging and completely restructuring the entire force, including tiers of management. You can’t “train” out racism, or generations of systemic, engrained, nepotistic cop mentality.
The Vicar (via Freethoughtblogs) says
As long as “tough on crime” is a winning campaign strategy for any elected office, attempts to reform the police will fail. Trigger-happy cops are just one part of a larger structure which includes DAs and judges and legislators, and they will merely be replaced with other trigger-happy cops as long as the other positions in the hierarchy have an incentive to appear to be punishing crime more thoroughly.
EnlightenmentLiberal says
First, one of my favorite quotes:
– Terry Pratchett, Snuff
Now, are you prepared for the consequences of what you just said? You said that police shouldn’t be soldiers. They should be civilians. I don’t think you know what that entails. I do. Let me hit you with some of it.
Currently, all US states (AFAIK) have laws that criminalize resisting arrest where the arrestor is a cop, regardless of the legality of the arrest. You want to make cops not soldiers? You want to make everyone equal before the law again, including cops? One consequence that is not immediately obvious is that we would need to bring back the right and privilege to use force to resist wrongful arrest.
About 100 years ago, in 1900 to be precise, the United States Supreme Court heard a court case called “Bad Elk v United States”. In short, IIRC, Bad Elk was shooting his guns on his property, in violation of some local laws on the shooting of firearms in public or in city limits or something. The sheriff sent some his deputies to bring Bad Elk to him so he could chew him out, maybe put him in jail, or something. The deputies go to arrest Bad Elk, and Bad Elk points out that the arrest is unlawful. – Back in the day, it used to be unlawful to arrest someone for most non-felonies after the offense has concluded, an ideal that we should strive towards today – So, the deputies go in and threaten with guns, and Bad Elk draws and shoots and killed a deputy. Fast forward: The Supreme Court hears this legal argument, and they order the case to be re-tried with proper jury instructions. In short, SCOTUS didn’t find that the killing was reasonable and proper, but the court did find that it may be permissible to use deadly force to resist arrest when deadly force is used to coerce an unlawful arrest, subject to a standard self defense analysis, on the basis that because the arrest was unlawful, it was like an assault, battery, kidnapping, etc., and normally one is allowed to use force to resist that.
Are you prepared to go that far? How far are you prepared to go? How much extra arrest power do you want to give the police?
I am prepared to go quite far.
For a primer on some history that very few people know, start here:
http://www.constitution.org/lrev/roots/cops.htm
Some of the citations are lacking, and a few of the arguments and sources are highly dubious, but the generall content is mostly correct. I’ve verified it from other sources. I’ve found better sources, but they’re behind paywalls.
Then, here’s a list of things that I would try to get made into constitutional amendments. Half of them are about drasticaly limiting police power.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1EJRrzrZAuWv2tU4wz6GZLATBphmx72D__kV-5rdS2Ro/edit
PS:
Most people do. Most people in this thread would balk at some of the suggestions that I have in my google doc. They still want police to be something other than civilians.
EnlightenmentLiberal says
PPS:
Most people here are against personal gun ownership and carrying rights. It’s hard to hold that position, and also hold to any position except that police are military, because they’re allowed to have guns, and the rest of us aren’t. The net effect is that they want a police state. They cheer it on. The police state is already here. We live in a police state.
Just as another example, in about half the states, cops can demand to see your identification papers for basically no cause, and it’s criminal to refuse. “Stop and identify” statutes. We’re living the cliche you see in old WW2 films, where people in German accents go person by person, asking for “papers please”.