What we all just witnessed for several nights in Ferguson, Missouri, may aptly illustrate the nadir of militarization and the apex of principled policing. In the midst of all the controversy that now surrounds the demonstrations themselves and the tactics of the local police, it is well to remember what occurred to set off the demonstrations (as told by Charles Chamberlain of Democracy for America using sources such as the NY Daily News, MSNBC, St. Louis Post-Dispatch and “BuzzFeed”).
On the night of August 9, 2014, a Ferguson, Missouri police
officer fatally shot an unarmed, 18-year-old Black man, Michael Brown, as he
walked to his grandmother’s residence with a friend, Dorian Johnson, who
experienced the entire incident from just a few feet away. Johnson spoke out immediately and detailed
the entire police attack. He described
the police officer’s malice from start to finish, citing the officer’s first
words to the teens: “get the f__k on the sidewalk.” After the first shots were fired by the
officer, the teens ran in fear. Then as
Michael stood in the street with hands in the air, the officer fired the fatal
bullets into his body. Michael’s last words
were: “I don’t have a gun, stop shooting.”
Here’s how a Daily Kos writer described what happened next:
Officer who kills the teenager requests assistance but
does not inform his commanders of what happened. Instead, they learn it on
the news like everyone else.- The scene is left in the hands of the officer’s own
colleagues who allow the officer to leave the scene of the crime. His
vehicle is also allowed to leave the scene – presumably breaking the
integrity of the chain of evidence.
- Victim is left
lying in the road for four hours – inflaming the community and presumably
destroying evidence.
- Witnesses say that the killing officer never bothered to
check for a pulse once his victim went down. None of the other officers
arriving on the scene checked for a pulse. Bystanders in the medical field
were not allowed to attempt CPR.
- Rumor has it that the cellphones of possible witnesses
were confiscated.
- The response to a community protesting police brutality is
the imposition of ‘martial law’ complete with authoritarianism, tear gas,
rubber bullets, flash grenades and sound grenades.
Since the killing, the local police kept the officer’s name
a secret until Friday, August 16th when it was announced at a press
conference. There have been no arrests
or unpaid suspensions, and no charges have been filed. The police have even refused to interview the
primary eye witness to the killing, and have not shared the incident reports
that must be completed by the police involved.
Instead, an effort has been mounted to protect the officer involved, not
only by keeping his identity secret, but by a concerted effort to concoct a
narrative of the incident which will make it harder for some people to
empathize with Michael Brown. In a video
that was released, Brown is shown allegedly robbing a store of some cigars and
shown intimidating a much smaller clerk when the clerk attempted to stop him at
the front door. Like countless incidents
in other places, the blaming of the victim follows closely on a scenario in
which dehumanizing racial stereotypes become unwarranted profiling that then
leads to death or injury. What is being
played-out does not bode well for a just outcome for Michael’s family or for
the Black community of Ferguson It is
instead quite representative of systemic police abuse and harassment of young
Black men that occurs in too many communities throughout this country. At that press conference on Friday, the Chief
of Police praised his officers for showing incredible restraint. After days of shocking behavior that caught
the attention of the world, police finally released the name of the shooter -
while concurrently launching a smear campaign against his victim. The Chief makes
a statement PRAISING the Shooter Cop while concurrently smearing the dead
teenaged victim. Chief of Police specifically says that he is
not interested in talking to the community he has been victimizing. Chief of Police made it clear that the
officer who shot Brown did NOT know Brown was a suspect in that cigar theft. Following the conference, this was modified
to say that the officer may have seen the cigars in his hand and surmised that
he was a suspect. And so it goes…
In light of the actual incident, let’s “take stock” of what
we have seen that passed for police “protection” and as “riot control:” - Local police dressed in camouflage and battle gear
(pictures side by side of a local police officer and a combat veteran from
Afghanistan illustrated the heavy gear that the local police favored)
- Battle equipment that wasn’t relevant or appropriate for
the situation, like huge tank type vehicles, semi-automatic guns and guns
that could shoot someone at 80 yards away.
- The helmets and gas masks and riot gear like the gas
canisters and rubber bullets.
- Reporters were kept from covering the event with some
illegally arrested just for doing their jobs
- Peaceful protestors were arrested; others were harmed;
others harassed
- Even a St. Louis alderman was unlawfully arrested
- Police were caught on international TV screaming “Bring
it! Bring it you f__king animals!”
- Protestors were told to leave in violation of their rights
- Negotiation had no place; only orders, riot control
tactics and militant actions such as the release of tear gas on the entire
crowd
Whatever happened to the idea that local police were
established to protect and defend the rights and lives of all citizens, not
with heavy hand but with restraint and good will? Then on Thursday, Governor Nixon of Missouri
named the State Police as the lead agency to replace the local and county
police at the protest site. The man
placed in charge, a Captain Ron Johnson, emerged as the epitome of another style
of law enforcement. It also helped that
he had grown up in Ferguson and that he happened to be an
African-American. He hugged and greeted
people in the crowd. He told the
marchers who he was, why he was there, and what he expected from them. He marched with them and he wore a uniform
that did not overwhelm anyone. He talked
with marchers; he brought an under-stated but real authority and dignity to the
situation and the march for two nights has been peaceful. Hopefully, his approach and demeanor have not
been undercut by the curfew ordered by his boss, Governor Nixon.
The emergence of
Captain Johnson, with solid values taught by family and community, propels us
back in history to the establishment of the first professional police force in
England. The story, in brief (from
lacp.org) is that Sir Robert Peel was a social reformist, born in Bury
Lancashire in 1788, who served as Prime Minister, Home Secretary, and in other
offices during his lifetime. During his time as Prime Minister, Peel passed
modern legislation addressing working class issues. He introduced The Mine Act
of 1842, prohibiting women and children from working underground in mines and
The Factory Act of 1844 limiting the number of hours worked by women and
children employed in factories. Serving as Home Secretary, Sir Robert Peel introduced a number of important reforms to British criminal law. His changes to the penal code system resulted in fewer crimes carrying a death penalty sentence and education for inmates. Remembered today as “The Founder of Modern Policing,” Peel created the “Metropolitan Police” based on nine principles that he developed for law enforcement (some say others had a large hand in this). These nine basic principles are often referred to as “The Peelian Principles.” Upon close examination of each of the Peelian principles, not only are direct connections to policing in today's world apparent, but often the nine principles are cited as the basic foundation for current law enforcement organizations and community policing throughout the world. There are some law enforcement agencies that currently quote the Peelian Principles on their community websites as their own principles. Following the disastrous imposition of a curfew by Governor Nixon, a few comments are inserted by me.
Principle 1 - “The basic mission for which the police exist is to prevent crime and disorder.” To protect and serve is the modern equivalent. The question then becomes: who is being protected in Ferguson – certainly not the law-abiding protestors. The second question to arise is whose interest is being served? Too often in these instances, it is the vested interests of officials, businesses, and police authorities that are served first and foremost. That is exactly what happened when a curfew was imposed. The interests and the good will of the protestors was cast aside or ignored.
Principle 2 - “The
ability of the police to perform their duties is dependent upon public approval
of police actions.” There was a moment
in this crisis when that might have happened, following upon the good actions
of some protestors who stood against looters, and when certain men in black
tried to assist with bringing some order to the protest. Had the officials
involved seized upon that moment and involved a representative group in deep
discussions of what steps were needed to bring peace and justice to the
forefront, I wager that the outcome would now be different.
Principle 3 - “Police
must secure the willing co-operation of the public in voluntary observance of
the law to be able to secure and maintain the respect of the public.” You can’t secure cooperation and voluntary
observance by issuing ultimatums and curfews and orders. It takes negotiation, respect for both sides,
and involvement of the very people who are protesting or who have
grievances. The failure of most
community policing is the reluctance to trust the people of a community, no
matter what its make-up, to come up with viable solutions and workable
outcomes. If officials had more input to
legislation from the people affected by that legislation, there would be more
effective legislation and more voluntary compliance with the law.
Principle 4 - “The
degree of co-operation of the public that can be secured diminishes
proportionately to the necessity of the use of physical force.” Nothing could be clearer or more profound
than this recognition that violence begets violence and resistance. Physical force is less a deterrent than it is
a provocation. The harassment of young
black men in our communities results in resentment, silence, no help, and
outbreaks of vitriol and revenge (looting is one form) when the occasion presents
itself. The stupid curfew in Ferguson is one form of violence, added on to tear
gas and rubber bullets and guns.
Principle 5 - “Police
seek and preserve public favor not by catering to the public opinion but by
constantly demonstrating absolute impartial service to the law.” Isn’t it strange that we need to be
reminded that good deeds are superior to rhetoric and empty words? But it isn’t just the need for good deeds, it’s
the need for impartial law enforcement and service to all persons regardless of
their status or standing, their race or religion or ethnicity or whatever. That equality before the law is so central to
our nation’s health that it is frightening how willing we are in many quarters
to deny its truth. Every time this principle
is in jeopardy, I like to ask myself: what if roles were reversed; what would
be the probable outcome? Apply it here:
what if a black officer shot and killed an 18 year-old white kid who had just
shop-lifted some cigars from a store, but who stood in a street without a
weapon, with hands in the air begging that officer not to shoot but that officer
shot him and the local police prevented by-standers from going to the young man’s
aid? I think I know the answer and it
doesn’t involve any niceties. In fact,
the outcomes might be so severe I hesitate to even mention some of them.
Principle 6 - “Police
use physical force to the extent necessary to secure observance of the law or
to restore order only when the exercise of persuasion, advice and warning is
found to be insufficient.” Once
again, we have some profoundly reasonable guidance. Persuasion, advice and warning may be
reasonable steps for securing observance of the law, but there is a more modern
method missing here, and that is the idea that the police and community members
should be finding ways to work together in respect and with dignity that allows
a community to offer its people, its ideas, it opinions, its good will before
incidents happen which set off a round of confrontation and violence. Have we got the will to train our police
forces in community development and enhancement, instead of in military
tactics? I think not at this
moment. We are off on a course of
militarization that conforms too closely to a right-wing view that certain
groups of people are not deserving of rights and protection. That view makes enemies of too many vagaries
and pushes our police to prepare for war-like responses to their demands for
respect, justice and equal opportunity.
The use of violent means of control and security as a first resort is an
admission of failure to seek peace and justice by more acceptable and positive
means.
Principle 7 - “Police,
at all times, should maintain a relationship with the public that gives reality
to the historic tradition that the police are the public and the public are the
police; the police being only members of the public who are paid to give
full-time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen in the
interests of community welfare and existence.” This is the most oft-quoted Peelian principle,
and no wonder. It reminds the police of
their roots and of the loyalty that must be given back to people of good
will. It also reminds the people that
separating the police into a category of non-humans or robotic terminators is
not our prerogative. The statement gives
dignity to the idea that community policing is a responsibility that falls to
all of us. Too bad we can’t all grow
that principle into an operating principle that builds our communities and
police forces into arenas of peace and justice rather than allowing them to
deteriorate into camps of ill-will. We
are all responsible for Ferguson and incidents like it. Let us resolve to change the prevailing
militarism into a common endeavor of principled protection and service.
Principle 8 - “Police
should always direct their action strictly towards their functions and never
appear to usurp the powers of the judiciary.”
Simply put: police cannot be
judge and jury. Guilt must be proven in
a court of law. Until that happens
police must direct their actions strictly toward their functions. But let us not forget that harsh judgments
about others, including the police, do not ultimately rest with protestors
either. Protestors should also stick
strictly to their issues, making them abundantly clear, while steering clear of
personalized attacks upon officials and others.
Sure the police chief of Ferguson and the Missouri Governor have made stupid
mistakes and comments, but using that harsh judgment against them does not
resolve the issue of the unwarranted killing of an innocent black teenager. In some sense, Dr. King’ words come to mind:
keep your eye on the prize!
Principle 9 - “The
test of police efficiency is the absence of crime and disorder, not the visible
evidence of police action in dealing with them.” Oh my goodness, the wisdom of the past is
sometimes devastating! Is it possible
that too many police forces are confusing the two? It seems that police action is sometimes what
they think matters, but the person on the street is more apt to praise and
appreciate the absence of criminal acts that might affect him or her. And here’s my thought: police cannot be
efficient without the approval and cooperation of the public. Come out of the patrol cars, get rid of the
heavy equipment, put aside the heavy riot gear, send semi-automatic guns back
to the military, and institute training that changes attitudes toward community
policing. It is time to get back to
being of the people, not against the people.
Though they are not
officially declared a code of ethics, these Principles are based on needed ethical
behavior on the part of law enforcement and the public. Accountability is a key
element for their success. Modern technology and the media have increased the
need for law enforcement and the community to adhere to them. I am sure that it would take a Herculean
effort to convince minority communities (especially Black communities) that law
enforcement in general is striving to adhere to these principles. Unlike the posting of the Hippocratic Oath in
many doctor’s offices, the Peelian Principles seem to be absent from most
police stations, whether as postings, placards, notes or in training, in
attitudes or in actual practice.
Instead of touting
the values and methods of a Ron Johnson, there is a compelling argument that we
have gone toward militarization of police forces; that they are no longer
“peace keepers”, but warriors against forces that represent destruction and
evil to them. Among these, of course,
are drug lords, junkies, welfare cheats, racial and religious minorities,
home-grown and foreign terrorists, and the ever-present thieves and
murderers. The attitude toward this
amorphous group of non-law-abiding creeps is that one must be at WAR against
them because they threaten the very existence of our society. In contrast, Ron
Johnson sees his community as hard-working families attempting to build a good
life for themselves and others.
Perception makes a great deal of difference in how one behaves.
From a review of a
relevant book on Amazon.com we draw some conclusions:
“Today’s armored-up
policemen are a far cry from the constables of early America. The past decade also has seen an alarming
degree of mission creep for U.S. SWAT teams.
For sheer absurdity, it is hard to beat the 2006 story about the Tibetan
monks who had overstayed their visas while visiting America on a peace mission.
In Iowa, the hapless holy men were apprehended by a SWAT team in full gear!
“The last days of
colonialism taught America’s revolutionaries that soldiers in the streets bring
conflict and tyranny. As a result, our country has generally worked to keep the
military out of law enforcement. But according to investigative reporter Radley
Balko, over the last several decades, America’s cops have increasingly come to
resemble ground troops. The consequences have been dire: the home is no longer
a place of sanctuary, the Fourth Amendment has been gutted, and police today
have been conditioned to see the citizens they serve as an other—an enemy.”
In “Rise
of the Warrior Cop,” Balko shows how politicians’ ill-considered
policies and relentless declarations of war against vague enemies like crime,
drugs, and terror have blurred the distinction between cop and soldier. His
fascinating, frightening narrative shows how over a generation, a creeping
battlefield mentality has isolated and alienated American police officers and
put them on a collision course with the values of a free society.”
Ferguson, MO has
illustrated the sad truth ready to burst forth in many communities of this
country. It is a wake-up call that is
being attended to around the world. Being
awake is a first step but not the answer.
The clarion call to all of us is to reject the politicians and their
supporters who promote superiority of militarism and the isolation of certain
ethnic, racial and religious groups by means that are all too familiar:
inadequate schools, lack of good job opportunities, the elimination of programs
and services that provide opportunity to advance. We must reject the fascist idea that there
are some people who are unworthy of being treated with dignity, respect and
grace. We cannot as a democratic society abide those who want to restrict and
restrain and prevent the exercise of the right to vote, or the right to protest
or the right to adequate health care. We
must not allow those who denigrate government itself to have control of
government for they will not use it well, certainly not to benefit all the
People without regard to status.
Ferguson is not an
isolated incident; it is the result of decades of abandonment of important and
crucial principles of a progressive democracy.
We must face this reality and reject the forces of Right-wing demagogues
whose Cause is not simply to win seats but to control police forces, government
and the lives of our citizens in order to mold the rest of the institutions of
this Republic into their image of Power and Control. It is time to defend and rejuvenate our
values and principles as reflected in Peel’s principles by voting these
militant radicals from office.
