Safe communities for all can be achieved, but not on the back of the Fourth Amendment.
—
I snapped a picture at the #PhillyisBaltimore march and rally in April that sums up the sentiments of many who live in neighborhoods that are over-policed. It a was a young black man standing next to a black Philadelphia police officer, and the young man was holding a sign that read “Police Make Me Feel Paranoid, Not Protected.”
Amidst a national conversation about safety, catalyzed by the expiration of provisions in the Patriot Act that the allowed the National Security Agency to keep logs of all phone calls made by Americans, the protester’s sign inspires an inquiry: What does it mean to feel safe and does government’s definition of safe communities differ from the majority of Americans’?
Starting with the latter first, the government’s interpretation of “safe communities” for the most part means less illegal guns and drugs on the streets, which requires visible and invisible police presence to enable prevention, via search and seizure, and mitigation, via arrests shortly after criminal activity, thereby ridding communities – even if momentarily – of a criminal element.
Regardless, though, of whether prevention or mitigation is enacted, the realization of safe communities, as proven by government’s action, can only be achieved by adding more boots on the ground, and in certain cases, eyes in the sky.
But I, and those who think like me, see safe communities as the result of consistent and measurable investments in public education, the (creative) economy, employment, entrepreneurship and civic engagement – police play a part, but they’re not the anchors, the anchor is socialization.
A safe community, in my opinion, is not a place where police are able to prevent a teenager, who wants to rob a stranger, from buying an illegal gun. A safe community is a place where a teenager has no interest in engaging in criminal activity – because they’re occupied with either building an enterprise; graduating from school or university; mentoring their peers and steering them away from trouble; engaging in recreational activities or studying for their next phase in life – and that hypothetical stranger is known to the teen by name.
A safe community is not a place where cameras and surveillance networks are installed to monitor the movements of citizens in an effort to prevent the growth of terrorist cells or gang activity.
A safe community is a place where citizens’ movements can be monitored by the increase in high school graduation rates; the growth of small businesses; the uptick in political participation, and the visible appreciation of one’s culture, religion, gender, identity and choice of lifestyle.
The Philadelphia Police Commissioner last week told me police and citizens want the same thing: “safe communities.” But it’s how we define “safe communities” that really speaks to our commonalities.
To Commissioner Ramsey, an appointment of Mayor Michael A. Nutter, a safe community is where residents don’t feel scared to walk down the street because criminals are rooted out and jailed; whereas, I, and those in my network, define it as a place where criminal activity is a non-factor, because the citizenry is informed, educated and too engaged in productivity and positivity to divert onto a dangerous road.
Safe communities for all can be achieved, but not on the back of the Fourth Amendment, and only after we the people come to a consensus of what the terms means. Until then, safety, and safe communities, will be a buzzword that foreshadows government over-reach.
*Tune into 900amWURD or 900amWURD.com every Friday evening during the 6 o’clock hour to hear me relive #TheWeekThatWas*
Thanks for reading. Until next time, I’m Flood the Drummer® & I’m Drumming for JUSTICE!™