An extended family member posted some audio footage of the recent shooting of two cops in Compton, along with the following statement: "This female officer had been shot in the jaw and still managed to make this call and then tend to the injuries of her partner under the most extraordinary amount of duress imaginable. I’m bowled over by the sheer courage. To anyone who has even the slightest thought that this was somehow deserved or secretly cheers this heinous act, may I inform you that you’re a heartless subhuman. #ThinBlueLine "
This family member and I have very different personal and political ideologies/values/beliefs, and it's not the first time we've had disagreements about BLM/police. Another family member was also involved in the discussion (as well as a few brief comments here and there from others, but the main discourse was between the three of us). This exchange is not perfect by any means, but it's honest, it's thoughtful, and it demonstrates the fine line between expressing conviction and degenerating to personal attacks or insults. I feel like there's some value in documenting this exchange for later reference as it's an example of things that nearly everyone is encountering to some extent or another: reconciling a person that you love with values that you don't, reconciling your relationships with your values, engaging in oppositional discourse and dealing with feelings of being misunderstood, alone, frustrated and defensive.
The exchange was primarily between Myself (M), the Family Member (FM), and Another Family Member (AFM) as follows:
AFM: Maybe we shouldn’t be in the business of dehumanizing anyone. Everyone should be treated with humanity. Cops who dehumanize constituents should be axed. People who harm others should be reprimanded and given appropriate treatment or punishment to match the crime. I feel badly that this person was the target of violence, which shouldn’t have to be part of any job. Hope she is okay.
M: This is tragic and senseless, and it shouldn't have happened. But I feel like this is used as some "Blue Lives Matter" incentive, when--and I'm not sure how people still don't get this--there is literally no such thing as "blue life". Becoming a police officer is a choice, a decision, a uniform that you can put on and take off every day. It is in no way the same as an immutable trait of your personhood. And the shooting of these 2 cops can both be tragic and senseless and also in no way change the very real harm that many police inflict on many different people, nor does it have anything to do with the pervasive racism that exists in law enforcement and the criminal justice system. 2 black guys can shoot 2 cops, and everyone can agree it's violent and bad and sad, and that still doesn't invalidate police violence or racism.
FM: You can’t compare the unprovoked, inhumane, brutal act perpetrated here with the “harm caused by police” stemming from complications and chaos that go down when a criminal is being arrested or police are securing a crime scene. The stakes are insanely high (for all involved) when a perpetrator refuses to cooperate and gives every indication they have no intention of complying. There is such a thing as a blue life (obviously not referring to skin color); it’s a commitment to a career that very often puts them in harm’s way. Men and women, all races, who swear to protect and serve, plus their loved ones who pray they’ll always come home. They bear witness to the ugliest parts of society - mangled bodies in car wrecks, gruesome murders or suicides, all kinds of criminality, abused women, children, and animals, people strung out on narcotics or so inebriated they’ve vomited, urinated or defecated themselves, people’s utter inhumanity to each other. This is part of what they see on a regular basis. You can’t possibly think they can take these images and experiences out of their mind like they can take off their uniform. It’s imprinted on their brains. I can’t understand why you and [AFM] can’t seem to empathize with that. Cops don’t willfully go out looking to shoot someone, though it seems as though you would believe just that. They get summoned to a scene with multiple moving parts and must methodically bring order to chaos. That requires that everyone on the scene cooperate. Too often, they encounter rebelliousness or obliviousness. Things get ugly. Facing their own potential death, any human is going to take whatever steps necessary to preserve their own life. Of course it’s true that sometimes cops make costly mistakes or incorrect judgments. That is disturbing, and there is definitely room for improvement. Tell me, though, where in this scenario did the officers sitting in that car do anything to contribute to this happening? Nothing. This BLM movement is laser-focused on shutting cops down, and that’s really it. The name is actually farcical. With whatever funds they’ve amassed they’ve done nothing to help black lives, in any way, shape or form. I follow several black youtubers/bloggers, and they think this movement is bullshit. It’s a bunch of confused, angry, radical, vicious insurrectionists hell-bent on destruction. And cops are their primary target. Big points were scored with this “airing out”; alas, they would’ve been bigger had these officers perished. Wish it weren’t true, but there will probably be many more attempts to rack up those points. And I’m sick about it.
AFM: I’m conservative in the sense that when it comes to my personal freedoms, I don’t want a lot of government intervention. The police are a heavily armed branch of local, state and federal governments. Heck mercenaries are even a thing, so if you are rich enough you can just buy your own police, but I digress. This country lives and breaths on weapons manufacture and sales. Our imperial branch has grown bloated and grotesque, the world is crawling with U.S army bases. If we didn’t meddle so much we wouldn’t have to be so scared and defensive, arming more and more. Civilian policing should not look like this, big shot heroes keeping order. We should train in conflict resolution and more extensively train those that do “need” to be armed. Order is not more important than human life, says this human. Racism is welcome in no sector of society, and unfortunately, many police forces are embedded with at least a few racists. It’s undeniable and acceded by any reasonable person, regardless of political ideology. Obviously not all cops are racist or bad people but the institution as a whole- like many INCLUDING education- was made for white people and disproportionately harms people of color. From sentencing to the private prison system and the loophole in the 13th amendment. I have gotten to know a few people that are cops who I sincerely like as people, but it’s undeniable that there is a problem with racism and pent up aggression in this profession. The whole points thing... I don’t feel joy when a cop or any human dies. The language of “subhuman” and the other myriad colorful adjectives attributed to opposing voices is the language of fascism. When we accept that it is excusable to destroy or disregard another human being for a state sponsored cause, we become a supporter of cultish groupthink and further violence- potentially genocide which is historically precedented many times over . I don’t automatically view cops as “the good guys,” and I think this is half of the disagreement. Same idea with the flag- some people feel it represents the troops and others feel it represents just the country while others still see something else in it. We all make so many assumptions about each other’s views and it does us no use. Unfortunately for me, too many people I love are spelling their views out and I’m afraid I was happier living in ignorance. Regardless, I hope this helps shed light on some of the nuance as to why these stories don’t tug at my heart strings in the same way. I’m bitter from all I’ve learned about state sponsored violence and the onion like layers of corruption. We’ve lived different lives and I always enjoy a good discourse. Be well.
FM: I’m liberal in the sense that I think everyone should have the same rights and that everyone should be free to pursue their own happiness.
M: There's a lot going on here in various comments, addressed to different people, so bear with me if my response seems scatter-shot. Also, sorry this is so long:
1. You are right that I can't compare the act against the 2 police here to the harm caused by police--they are completely different types of crime. Attacking 2 people purely because of who they are is a hateful and vicious act--this goes for 2 civilians killing cops, or, sometimes, 2 cops killing civilians. Not all police killings have a basis in "the line of duty". If part of your message here is that "police are people", then surely that means that police carry around their own internal prejudices, biases, fears and motivations. While there are certainly situations that arise in policing that can lead to violence or death as an unintended consequence or unavoidable byproduct of "law enforcement", there are also certainly situations of violence or death that are based more in those human prejudices or fears rather than necessity in executing duty.
2. This is less a second topic and more an addendum to the above point, but another reason why it's hard to compare an individual act of violence to systemic, pervasive violence is that the former is easily identifiable, both in acts and those responsible for them. I believe that the latter it's harder to identify, harder to see because it's spread out and there isn't a video of every single instance of bad policing, prejudiced policing, unnecessarily cruel and violent policing, available to view in bulk and quick succession... I think that there are far more instances of harms caused by police than harms caused to police. I think there are far more videos that glorify and sanction police use of force than criticize it--i mean, COPS was a whole TV show of footage about just that! Shows like Law & Order, etc. are fiction, but they reinforce the message over and over that police and the justice system are inherently good, whomever they suspect committed a crime usually did, anyone on trial is probably guilty, the system works and justice is served, etc. This is messaging that people consume through the media everyday, for generations. There is less real world footage of the harmful actions of police, and because of the "heroic" nature of the job and our conditioning to accept it as such, The general populace is less likely to believe such real world footage when confronted with it, or even if it is believed an attempt is immediately made to justify an officer's actions and to find a way to blame the victim (not being compliant enough, not being polite, digging into background information about the person that had nothing to do with the incident and using that to disparage the person's character, etc.) This kind of leads onto my third point:
3. Why are police the only ones that get their job attached to their "life", as opposed to other professions? Why are there "blue lives", but not "red lives" for firefighters or EMS or Doctors or Nurses, why are teachers, social workers, mental health, homeless services... It's not just police that deal with incredibly stressful, incredibly dangerous situations and people. When someone calls emergency dispatch, it is sometimes firefighters or EMS personnel that show up prior to police. In the event of a school shooting, or even just school violence in general, or instances of familial or sexual abuse, substance abuse, mental health issues... It is frequently teachers, counselors and nurses that are the first people that have to deal with these situation. Doctors and nurses see unbelievable carnage, and have to work under intense pressure, around the clock. Social workers and homelessness services providers deal with people of all stripes, of all backgrounds, with varying levels of risk and trauma and needs. Many of these people are trained in de-escalation, conflict management and effective communication techniques, because they, too, having credibly stressful and dangerous jobs, but they do not have the benefit of being armed or have qualified immunity from prosecution if they use force while on the job. This leads to...
4. This isn't to say that police don't encounter a unique and specific level of risk and potential violence in their jobs, but rather to point out that many, many other people in other professions experience similar risks, interact with the same subsets of the population, and can do so more effectively without the use of force. Police are not trained to de-escalate situations first and respond second, but the other way around. Yes, there are times when acting quickly and making fast decisions is the safer call, but far too often police approach people with an "us versus them" mentality, and you're a lot more likely to be seen as "us" to police if you're affluent and white and a lot more likely to be seen as a "them" if you are poor and black/brown, regardless of the actual possible "crime". This is why numerous white perpetrators of mass shootings/white supremacists are taken into police custody alive, and are not brutally beaten to do so. Some examples are Nicholas Arnold Schock, Kyle Rittenhouse, Peter Manfredonia, Gregory and Travis McMichael, Anthony Trifiletti, Dylan Roof, Timothy McVeigh, James Homes, Scott Michael Greene--these are all white criminals who either murdered people and were heavily armed or threatened extreme violence and were heavily armed, all of whom were taken into police custody without injury. Meanwhile, there are a myriad of black people who have been killed by police "in the line of duty" who had committed either no crime, or a misdemeanor (nonviolent) offense, who were UNARMED and in some cases already in restraints--some examples are George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, Alton Sterling, Terence Crutcher, John Crawford, Tamir Rice, Rekia Boyd, Keston Charles, Alfred Olango and Elijah McClain. Every one of these people, some of them as young as 12 years old, some having committed literally NO CRIME at all (let alone mass murder or openly firing on police, as some of the criminals I mentioned above actually did, who were taken safely into custody without injury) were killed by police. There is a great disparity in the application of the law and the use of force, and so much of it comes down to human prejudices that both the institution of policing has and individual police officers have. And to be sure, the institution reinforces and bolsters those prejudices. The reason why police officers can take an armed grown man who just killed a bunch of churchgoers safely into custody, alive and unharmed, is the same reason why they shoot a 12-year-old with a BB gun or a man already in handcuffs--They try to give the white guy the benefit of the doubt, they identify with him, even if he is literally and obviously dangerous they don't view him as suspiciously, skeptically, guardedly as they do a black guy. They see the black guy as a potential threat, even if there is no visible threat--they are guarded, ready to act and to protect themselves first and foremost--which sounds like it makes sense, but then... Why wasn't even one of those white criminals shot and instead taken into custody without injury? If Police would be justified in responding to violence with violence, and yet they didn't need to use violence to take numerous mass shooters into custody... it's almost like they don't need to use violence. It's almost like deescalation and negotiation and reaching a point of safe surrender are possible. But that takes work, restraint, judgment, empathy and consideration--and police don't seem to have a lot of that when it comes to policing minority groups.
5. I know I said that last one was my last one, but I wanted to add on a response to "I stand alone defending my principles against many of my family... Not feeling the tolerance, especially when it's three or four or more against me and no one ever concedes in the slightest" I can definitely empathize with that. I had a conversation with a group of people recently in which Dan disagreed with something a friend of mine said, and most of the other people in the conversation were on my friend's side (for the most part, myself included), but at several points in the conversation I did try to stop things and remind everyone / acknowledge that there's a certain amount of inherent and necessary defensiveness when you are the only person defending your point of view. I may have disagreed with some of what Dan was saying, and with some of what my friend was saying, but at least the friend had the benefit of other people affirming and sharing that opinion. Other than me occasionally jumping in, Dan didn't have that. All of that's to say, I know that it's difficult to feel like everybody is on one side and you're on a different side, and while I strongly disagree with some of the foundations upon which your principles are based, I don't necessarily disagree with your principles in and of themselves. I would like to live in a world where I feel like police are actually trustworthy, where I feel like they can be counted on to do the job equitably and fairly, where race and class don't play a huge part in their responsiveness to crime or the way they treat people, where training is thorough and comprehensive and takes years to complete before someone gives you a gun and the authority to use it, where the institution holds individuals accountable instead of protecting them when they falter or commit crime. Those are all things I wish to be true, but they are things that I do not see as the current truth. I think that some people have good experiences with police, and some people have bad experiences, and some people have both--and I think a lot of that has to do with a person's specific demographics, but it absolutely shouldn't. I think that in order to change that, the worst parts of the institution need to be viewed soberly and unflinchingly, I believe there needs to be serious restructuring, independent oversight, redistribution of both funds and responsibilities to more social services and health / mental health care, etc. All of these changes would benefit both the country at large AND the job of policing, because as things stand now, individual citizens have little recourse or redress when it comes to injustice suffered at the hands of law enforcement, and it is more difficult for police officers to hold one another accountable because the system says that they are supposed to support each other.
FM: [TO M] There’s so much here, it’s ridiculous. You could’ve left out the whole part about other professions having stress. I’m completely aware of that, but this discussion was about police, BLM, and how the two are at odds. You make all these claims about how people are treated when they’re taken into custody, and you are certain that the treatment is dictated by the skin color. I suppose it could seem that way if that’s where your bias lies. I see it as there are hundreds of variables involved in each scenario. You’re comparing apples and oranges, as each conflict consists of different perpetrators, different cops, different circumstances. You’re also professing to know the function of other people’s minds, and when it comes to police, you assign them a negative (read: racist) motive. Could law enforcement use more training? Yes. I responded to some other comment of yours not too long ago, not sure if you read it. In it, I talked about a work program for police where out of 5 days’ work, 4 were on the street, and the 5th day would be devoted to training (de-escalation techniques, social work skills, anger management, etc.). That way, proper behaviors are reinforced on a regular basis. A new idea I’ve had is everyone, perhaps of high school/college age, should be required to do a ride-along for a week in an inner city area (maybe even a virtual reality-type program would be best) just for people to have some idea of what police deal with and how people can learn to be more conscientious citizens. I watched someone do an actual ride-along on youtube, and he found it a very eye-opening experience. I just don’t get how all of you guys just think that cops should do this, or should do that, or “behave.” And I never really hear you say people should obey laws and respect authority. Don’t you think that’s an important part of the equation? How about instead of telling young black children to fear police, fostering a positive relationship with them and letting the children know that, ultimately, they’re there to help, while also instilling the importance of obedience. It’s very heartwarming to see a child go up to a police officer with admiration and respect, as that’s how it should be.
Thanks for commiserating with my feelings of isolation and persecution. I appreciate it and feel it’s the only time I haven’t felt dehumanized amongst this barrage of disagreement. I wish I had more influential skill in getting people to see my side. When I read it, I think I sound very reasonable. I remember reading something you wrote that you thought “agree to disagree” was a cop-out and you’d rather someone defend their position. I think I took that to heart, so I hope you can appreciate that, if nothing else. 
FM: [TO AFM] I feel bad that in my hyper-defensive mode I’ve made you feel bad. I feel cornered and lonely and some of the things I’ve seen you say have stung me. I know you didn’t mean to hurt me personally, but I take just about everything personally. I’m terrified I’m losing people I know and love because we are just not going to see eye to eye. Stupid me, when you left our place that night in [LOCATION REDACTED] after our serious rap session, I was certain that you thought we were a collection of fools. So to hear you say it made you feel closer to us, makes me hang my head for thinking wrongly. I love you, I mean it. Let’s cool off and start over somewhere down the road.
No comments:
Post a Comment