An anecdote

One of the stations I listen to in the morning is 105.7 out of Baltimore. It used to be a rock station, then it turned in to a talk radio station (one that carried Penn Jillette's broadcast) and now it's a sports radio talk station. One show that has remained on the station in the last couple of years, though it's been moved around a lot, is Ed Norris' show. I like listening to Ed because a lot of the time he voices what I would voice if I had the medium. There are some exceptions, especially related to his religious views...but that's a topic for another post.

This morning, on the Ed Norris show, Ed told a story from his time on the NYPD. His primary profession was police work and he ended that work as commissioner of the Baltimore police department. According to his story, while he was working for the NYPD, there were some tourists coming through the station where he was working. From the details I garnered from the story, I was unsure whether or not he was just in the vicinity or actually giving a tour. He relates the story of 2 Canadians that were touring the facility, a father and son. Ed worked in a precinct where there happened to be a lot of police officers who were killed on the job. On the walls of the precinct there were plaques commemorating the service of these dead officers. Ed pointed out these plaques to the Canadian tourists and explained what they were. The child then innocently asked why there were so many dead policemen. His father replied that (and I must paraphrase here I'm afraid) the reason may be that because American police officers carried guns and often pointed them at people and that the potential criminals felt that they must respond in-kind. This, he surmised, may have lead to the many deaths.

This was a short segment on the show today but it really stuck with me. Ed's response (again paraphrased) was that he simply refrained from pointing out how stupid the Canadian's sentiment was to avoid embarrassing the father in front of the son.

more after the break

I find this view, while perhaps not entirely incorrect, to be short sighted. It seemed clear to me that Ed hadn't considered the Canadian's view at all! Every time a police officer pulls his gun or taser from its holster they're committing assault. To be clear, assault is an attempt or a threat of physical violence. Every time a police officer uses those tools it's battery. Battery is defined (in this context) as an offensive touching or use of force on a person without the person's consent. For any citizen, these actions are criminal.

With the current stories of abuses by the police including no knock raids, unreasonable search and seizure (in the case of DUI checkpoints and drug sniffing dogs coming around the car during a standard traffic stop...again perhaps topics for another post), unprovoked shootings, and Taser abuse, police should be aware that their actions have implications with regard to the reactions of the public that they are nominally hired to protect.

I don't want our police to go unarmed. Crime statistics from countries that have gone that route don't bear out that it helps. What I would like though is for our police forces to have to think about, in every situation, the perceptions and the consequences of their action and to realize that they are responsible come what may.