I feel the need to speak on behalf of my friends in law
enforcement concerning a couple of issues in the news recently. Both in Ferguson and in Cleveland there are tragedies
involving the police that should not have happened.
We need to educate our children that there is a time and a
place to verbally or physically protest police, and that there is a time and
place to respect the authority of a badge.
The time to physically resist is NOT when police are confronting you to
investigate an infraction. Any quick or
furtive movements while under police scrutiny is an invitation for that officer
to ensure their own safety by exerting more control upon the situation. In most cases this control is physical and it
can be escalated to the use of deadly force.
We know (and if you didn't, you do now) that if you attack a police officer in any way, you incite a reaction. This is by necessity, as the police officer is doing a job just like the rest of us but has to develop instinctive physical reactions to certain stimuli in order to survive. There is a saying that whatever happens, at the end of the day an officer needs to live to be able to go home to see their family.
I do not want to infer or opine in any way that there is not a problem in our society with police brutality, police protecting their own who may be guilty of crime, or the over militarization of our police forces. Those are each separate topics that require separate discussions. In many cases our society has carved out a different standard of laws and consequences for officers – this is not right nor should it be accepted.
That said, in these recent, specific cases there was a decision made by the non-law enforcement participant that changed futures and ended lives. Standard police regulations for use of force is the same as it is for regular people like you and I but significantly more detailed. We are entitled to use deadly force to protect ourselves and our loved ones from life threatening danger with the caveat that said danger be reasonably perceived, imminent, and that there is an element of innocence on our side. Police are held to that standard as well.
It then goes without saying that a 300 lb man attacking a police officer, or a child with a toy gun that has the orange tip removed who makes a threatening move to pull the "weapon", will both be perceived in the heat of the moment as having the power to inflict imminent bodily damage or even death on a responding officer. In today's society the capacity to kill is not limited to any specific age, race, sex or religion. These events must be evaluated on a case by case basis to examine if they qualify for deadly force.
You and I may not be able to teach our children common sense, but we can teach them the rules of engagement and the right that we have to defend ourselves. By extension, these lessons also teach the right that others have to defend themselves against us should we choose to violate them in any way.
We can try to spin these events to satisfy our own personal agenda. The news does it all the time, all in the name of selling papers. The truth is that we have a responsibility to inform ourselves and the next generation what it means to be accountable for our actions and the resulting consequences.
We know (and if you didn't, you do now) that if you attack a police officer in any way, you incite a reaction. This is by necessity, as the police officer is doing a job just like the rest of us but has to develop instinctive physical reactions to certain stimuli in order to survive. There is a saying that whatever happens, at the end of the day an officer needs to live to be able to go home to see their family.
I do not want to infer or opine in any way that there is not a problem in our society with police brutality, police protecting their own who may be guilty of crime, or the over militarization of our police forces. Those are each separate topics that require separate discussions. In many cases our society has carved out a different standard of laws and consequences for officers – this is not right nor should it be accepted.
That said, in these recent, specific cases there was a decision made by the non-law enforcement participant that changed futures and ended lives. Standard police regulations for use of force is the same as it is for regular people like you and I but significantly more detailed. We are entitled to use deadly force to protect ourselves and our loved ones from life threatening danger with the caveat that said danger be reasonably perceived, imminent, and that there is an element of innocence on our side. Police are held to that standard as well.
It then goes without saying that a 300 lb man attacking a police officer, or a child with a toy gun that has the orange tip removed who makes a threatening move to pull the "weapon", will both be perceived in the heat of the moment as having the power to inflict imminent bodily damage or even death on a responding officer. In today's society the capacity to kill is not limited to any specific age, race, sex or religion. These events must be evaluated on a case by case basis to examine if they qualify for deadly force.
You and I may not be able to teach our children common sense, but we can teach them the rules of engagement and the right that we have to defend ourselves. By extension, these lessons also teach the right that others have to defend themselves against us should we choose to violate them in any way.
We can try to spin these events to satisfy our own personal agenda. The news does it all the time, all in the name of selling papers. The truth is that we have a responsibility to inform ourselves and the next generation what it means to be accountable for our actions and the resulting consequences.
