Posted on 02/22/2013 3:37:46 PM PST by neverdem
Police typically say that their top mission is to protect “public safety.” That’s the lingo. But the recently concluded manhunt for former Los Angeles Police Department officer Christopher Dorner, accused of murdering four people after releasing a manifesto decrying his 2008 firing from the force, suggests that concern about the public’s actual safety sometimes is fairly low on the list of police priorities.
Last weekend, police opened fire on a 71-year-old newspaper carrier and her 47-year-old daughter who had the misfortune of driving a pick-up truck police thought might be Dorner’s. The Los Angeles police detectives who opened fire on them, putting two bullets in the older woman’s back, didn’t do much double checking. The carriers' truck was a different make and color from Dorner’s.
As the women’s attorney told the Los Angeles Times: “The problem with the situation is it looked like the police had the goal of administering street justice and in so doing, didn't take the time to notice that these two older, small Latina women don't look like a large black man.” This could be written off as a sad fluke, except that 25 minutes later different officers opened fire on a different truck—once again getting key details wrong. Can’t officers at least check the license plate, and issue a warning, before opening fire?
“Nobody trains police officers to look for one of their own,” said Maria Haberfeld, a police-training professor at John Jay College in New York, according to the Web site News One. “I wouldn’t want to be in their shoes and I don’t think anybody else would.” We all understand the situation. But saying that we wouldn’t want to be “in their shoes” is no excuse for such dangerous behavior. The police wouldn’t excuse a member of the public for misusing a firearm, regardless of how stressed out that person felt.
News One also published the photograph of a gray Ford truck in the Los Angeles area with a hand-made “Don’t Shoot, Not Dorner, Thank You” poster on the back window. T-shirts and bumper stickers have popped up to similar effect. Those are funny in a dark way, but police ought to recognize how poorly this reflects on them and their strategies. It’s sad when people are more worried about the police than they are about a murderer on the loose.
“Simply put, the police culture in our country has changed,” argued former San Jose Police Chief Joe McNamara, a Hoover Institution scholar, in a Wall Street Journal article in 2006. “An emphasis on ‘officer safety’ and paramilitary training pervades today’s policing, in contrast to the older culture, which held that cops didn’t shoot until they were about to be shot or stabbed.”
Murders are sadly routine in the Los Angeles area. The massive police presence was the result of the killer targeting their own, thus leading to the reasonable conclusion that police pulled out the stops not because the public was in danger but because they were in danger. I don’t blame police for their efforts, but I also understand why residents in, say, South Los Angeles, wondered why killings in their community don’t rate the same attention.
With crime rates at 40-year lows, this is an opportune time for a debate about such police-priority issues free from excess emotionalism.
Media reports have focused on the rantings within Dorner’s manifesto. But a lot of it is about bureaucratic indifference—about police officials who, in his mind, didn't care about the communities they are sworn to protect. Nothing justifies such violence and I'm sickened by people who are celebrating Dorner, but even the LAPD is re-opening the case of Dorner’s firing. Perhaps the department will try to glean some broader lessons from this tragedy.
Currently, a case before the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals is evaluating the lengths to which police are required to go to protect innocent bystanders. The case involves Sacramento police who were trailing a suspect who had run from his car and then hid in a tree in a family’s backyard. A police helicopter spotted him. So an officer released a police dog into the yard even though people were having a gathering in the backyard.
Police dogs are trained to bite and hold suspects, but they can’t distinguish between law-abiding citizens relaxing with friends and police suspects. So Bandit attacked the first person it saw. Instead of instituting reform and settling with the family, Sacramento PD has been arguing that “officer safety” would be endangered by requiring a reasonable warning before releasing a vicious dog on private property.
It’s frightening to think that police can use deadly force without taking even the most modest steps to protect innocent bystanders. It’s even more frightening to hear people defend this approach. Yes, officer safety is important. But so is the public’s safety. It's time to grapple with the proper balance.
Dude, you’re giving them an excuse. They don’t think people are out to get ‘em... They’re filthy scum-sucking punks on power trips. That’s all.
Interesting but not surprising as the MSM has definitely been a Dorner supporter,criminal apologist and anti LE.
Thanks for posting. I wasn't aware the shooting incident with the two women victims occurred in the dark at 4:30 AM.
And screaming while it happens.
The cops couldn’t make out who was in the truck so they shot it up. That’s OK? Damn.
I’ve had them pounding on my bedroom door in the wee hours, and on the front door late at night, I’ve had two warrantless searches on my property, one with my explicit permission, one not so much. Half the fix-it tickets and half the moving violations I’ve gotten in over 40 years of driving were at the hands of SJPD.
I still like them.
Especially after having lived in LA and dealt with LAPD.
So they back-shoot skinny old Hispanic ladies instead of seeing a fat young black man. Okay.......
No truer words spoken. This is a fact. The cop culture has gone from police patrolling to military occupation. The blue line vs. all comers. Right down to shooting fido before there is any chance for fido to jump the fence.
We are rapidly spawning a police state on the local and federal level. Our freedom is in imminent danger.
That's another thing about the media coverage on this incident. The photo they broadcast across the world was that of the shot-up pickup hours later after daybreak. Seems they let most readers assume it occurred in full light.
Seeing as we are not fully Orwellian yet, let's call the MSM the Agency of Lies while we still may. Maybe that way we may help prevent later generations from being forced to call it the Ministry of Truth.
Lights off are probable cause?
An arm out the window is a deadly threat?
Give me a break.
I just happened to be reading “Sudden Prey” (1996) (Lucas Davenport, book 8) last week and it has the EXACT scene in the book.
It was very interesting to read and gave a real insight as to what happened.
thus, they think almost all of us are the underlings, and they are the macho powerful men looking out for numero uno first and foremost....
women and children be damned...
Seems there are many who prefer not to see the facts or have the facts presented.
I have to say I found the panic and cowardice of the LAPD to be shameful.
Chivalry didn’t die, it was murdered.
Well I have, and it seems the police said they were suspicious of the women's vehicle because it was starting and stopping along the street. None of them seemed to notice that every time it stopped, a newspaper came flying out the window of the pickup. Also, many paper delivery people turn their headlights off so as not to disturb the neighbours. I guess the rule is, if you're not sure ...shoot!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.