Should police forces
have term limits?
I’ve never had a single bad experience with a police officer. This is because I’m a short, extremely non-threatening white man who will walk an extra five minutes to get to the crosswalk in order to avoid jaywalking. And I’ve seen with my own eyes people who were CLEARLY in the wrong claim police harassment when confronted about their illegal behaviour (and–when I worked at a cheque-cashing store–had essentially the same accusation of ill-treatment unfairly hurled at me), so a part of me empathizes with them as they work what is one of the most thankless jobs in public life.
But the other part of me is overwhelmed by the evidence of their abuse of authority and tales of corruption and needless violence. Even though I have never been their victim, I cannot deny that so many others have and that something has to be done about this.
The past few days in Ferguson, Missouri, have served as a clear illustration of all the issues that have to be examined and corrected as we progress and move forward. The first is that a police force should understand that they are a part of the community they serve in and not its gatekeepers. Every time they commit an act of violence against that community, they are literally hurting themselves in the process–destroying the bond of trust they MUST have in order to enforce the law effectively. Without that trust, they lose their authority and without that authority they feel compelled to brutally overreact in order to reclaim it, causing the kind of absurd rage that allows an officer to shoot an unarmed man for walking in the middle of the street.
The second is that a police force must be transparent. Any action that smacks of secrecy and/or ass-saving cannot be tolerated. If ALL of the eyewitness testimony contradicts the story provided by the officer, then that must be taken into account. All attempts to ignore or dismiss this other side of story must be called out and questioned.
The third is that we must recognize that a police force is not an army. We already have armies. And because they are not an army, they do not need to be equipped like one. There is an old saying that when all you have is a hammer, every problem becomes a nail. Well, when every police force has a SWAT team, every problem requires riot gear and tear gas. Take that equipment away and better, more peaceful solutions will have to be found. Police officers aren’t soldiers, because soldiers are meant for war and no police force should ever be at war with the people they serve.
And finally we have to question what kind of people we are allowing to become police officers. One of the more shocking things the Internet has taught us about the job is that in many cases people with above-average intelligence are actually rejected when they apply–a bizarre choice justified by the fact that the inherent tedium of the job causes many smart people to quit once they realize their job satisfaction is never going to improve.
Which is a huge problem, because if there is any job where we want the kind of intelligent person who isn’t going to escalate a situation to the point of causing the death of an innocent, unarmed individual, this would probably be the one. Instead of looking for urban soldiers, we need to find smart, empathetic people who haven’t been turned angry and cynical by decades of mutual disrespect within the community they serve.
But we know this isn’t going to happen if we expect anyone to work in this capacity for their whole working life. So why not make it the kind of position where people are only expected to serve for a few years? What if it was the kind of job where the best and brightest in every community could apply, be trained, serve their term and then be given a full-ride scholarship to a local university? Is a young, smart, idealistic police force with a bright future really such a terrible idea? Maybe it is–I’m just spit-balling–but clearly the status quo needs to be changed.
Do you think this could work? Or do you have your own idea for improving the way law enforcement works in the community? Don’t keep it to yourself–we clearly need all the ideas we can get.
how about privatization of the police force? private organizations like ie Google, Monsanto, Microsoft etc takes over law enforcement. They will be more effective and faster in adapting the ever changing crime scene, non mentioning lots of new technologies will end up in the street along cops, like robots, drones etc….
Yes, just like our highly effective privatized prison system?
No.
I take huge issue with your final thought. My police officer husband is a literal Rocket Scientist who was bored with the “tedium” of that career and went on to become a police officer instead, where he could help people and where each and every day is completely different from the one before. He works on a force of thoughtful, talented, college-educated men and women who not only enjoy what they do, but take pride it in too. So, while we never want to generalize about citizens of a community, we also shouldn’t generalize about the people who serve to… Read more »
Then perhaps he’s working for a police force who is doing it right. That said, can you honestly look at the actions of the officers in Ferguson and conclude “What a reasonable and hard-working group of potential rocket scientists?”
Of course not. I just wanted to point out that we shouldn’t take this awful situation and assume police departments across the nation are ill-equipped with unintelligent people bored by what they do. I also worry that if we take away their riot gear because they’re ‘not soldiers,’ what happens when another mass shooting or localized terrorist attack happens? Your first responders should be prepared with tear gas and shields, correct? If they’re not, then many would be asking, ‘Well, why don’t they have the equipment needed to handle this situation?’ Again, not saying it was used effectively in Missouri…just… Read more »
All of the cops I’ve dealt with clearly were not on the high end of the IQ range. Even the people in my family who went on to become cops had no business in that line of work. Maybe we need to find a way to weed out the weak.
I have no problem if such equipment is possessed by a force, so long as it is all kept under lock and key by at least one rational adult who can see the difference between the events you describe and peaceful protests. The problem, like I said, is that too often these days the police are using such tactics not because they are the correct way to handle such situations but because the fact that they have a tank has allowed them to become confused and think of themselves as a military unit.