Controversial encounters between law-enforcement and civilians - the omnibus thread #2

[mhendo]

@Martin_Hyde

I also think in a time of so many high profile incidents where cops behave incredibly badly, I’m hesitant to start Monday Morning Quarterbacking on stuff that really comes down to “maybe he could have done something different, but he acted legally, he was acting to protect the life of another person.” I think policing in general is improved by looking at any situation and trying to improve the response to it, and I think there are lessons to be learned here, and maybe police in America do need to receive some more high level training on strategies and techniques in knife situations like this. But this to me is just not at all similar to the vast majority of “controversial police shootings” in the last 7-8 years in which the cop clearly was in the wrong.

I agree with this, and with the points you made about this particular incident. On the one hand, I think that we have to hold police to a much higher standard regarding their training, their incident responses, and their use of force. On the other hand, we need to realize that they do, in fact, sometimes end up in situations where firing their weapon might be the most logical and reasonable alternative among a number of choices, and that it’s sometimes the case that a less-than-ideal choice is also maybe the right choice. I think it’s at least arguable that this was the case in this particular instance.

When I started the first volume of this thread, way back in 2014, I said in the OP:

I think it would behoove people on all sides of this debate to try to evaluate the evidence fairly, in each individual case and in the broader arena of social policy. Try not to assume, in every incident, that the cop was a redneck just looking for an excuse to mow down a civilian, and try not to assume, in every incident, that the discharge of a police weapon is, by itself, sufficient evidence that the civilian bleeding on the ground had it coming.

I don’t think there’s anything wrong with debating the borderline cases like this one, and I also think it’s fair to hold the police to a high standard of judgment and competence, but in split-second cases like this, when there’s little time to think, and where a third party’s life is in imminent danger, I think it’s reasonable to cut the cop some slack.

@Martin_Hyde

I think that and the general high tensions around policing mean a lot of people are no longer willing to give police any benefit of the doubt.

If that’s true, and I think it probably is, I think that part of the reason is not just that police so often make bad decisions in the field. For me, my growing cynicism about policing, and my reduced willingness to give them the benefit of the doubt, has just as much to do with how law enforcement–individual cops, police departments, and police unions–respond to bad outcomes, and to criticism of police. So often, the blue wall closes and there’s no willingness at all to concede that someone fucked up.

This is especially true of police unions, and of the most vocal police officers. Some departments, to their credit, have started to take a more reasonable approach, often pressured by city councils, state legislatures, and the public. But a big part of any police reform effort is going to have to be convincing many cops in the rank and file, and their police unions, that it is in their interest, and part of their public responsibility, to get their incompetent, racist, or just plain violent colleagues off the force.