That constraint is even more important in the civil sphere. The powers granted to the police must never be abused and their duty to protect the public must stand paramount. I have seen too much evidence that some of our law enforcement officers have forgotten this, especially in SWAT type organizations who may lack proper leadership.
I congratulate you for your service. You have put your thumb on the problem, and your post gave me something to think over.
The question remains, how did it get so bad? Perhaps the new breed of police are taking war metaphors to heart, and taking them literally. The trouble is, a police force that literally believes they're fighting a "War on _______" drift into acting like they're an occupying army if they stop identifying with ordinary citizenry.
Have you noticed the less shocking cases of police overagressiveness get triggered when the police officer in question feels disrepected? It's uncomfortably close to how the gang-bangers act, even if the two are quite dissimilar in other respects.
Maybe the trouble comes with letting combat veterans into the police force. A soldier saying that wise-acre or peckerwooding civilians are "spoiled and undisciplined" works well because soldiers are sworn to protect all civilians from foreign aggression. Pegging disrespectful civilians in that way saves the ears, and doesn't change the underlying fidelity of the soldiers.
The trouble is, police officers have to divide civilians into two groups: law-abiding and criminal. The demarcation line is not at all obvious, except when the police officer catches a perp red-handed. Naturally, for officer safety as well as common sense, police are inclined to peg the dubious cases as criminal types.
A soldier doesn't have to divide civilians up; all of them are entitled to protection from the foreign foe. When "spoiled and undisciplied" mutates into "spoiled-ass civilians," though, police are tempted to throw undeferential citizens into the suspected-criminal group - and thus peg them as the enemy.
I could be wrong. In the olden days, a cop who believed "I am the law" was an accident waiting to happen. He was tempted to interpret criticism or disrespect of him, even as a person, as evidence of criminality. The same temptation went with criticism of his job performance, unless the complainer called him too soft on crime. That attitude had nothing to to with veterans entering the police force, and it long predates combat veterans going in to police work.
Good soldiers and good police officers are cut from the same cloth. Men and women who volunteer for a higher calling. Unfortunately, the bad ones also come from that same piece of cloth. The difference is leadership. Good leaders make good soldiers and good cops. Bad leaders turn good troops into bad ones. In this particular case, the Sheriff of Pima County, and the Chief of Police of Tucson are both prime suspects. They have both been on the news of late, and they are both very suspect.
It’s not working. We need to have a militia the way Israel does. Everyone goes in at 18 and when they come out, they bring their weapons with them and then do a month a year until they are old. That way, there are no “special” people with higher citizenships than the average Joe. Everywhere a cop goes, he sees allies instead of sheep.