Comments: Chaos in the Capitol posted 05-28-06

Recent comments received from a reader:

Average Joe,

In your posting on 05-28-06 you asked if the actions of the police was "Necessary precaution, or overkill?". I suggest that it was both.

Sir Robert Peel, widely regarded as the father of modern policing, said:

"The police are the public and the public are the police; the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence."

And that is exactly what modern policing was intended to be, and should be. However, over time the role of policing has been perverted and re-shaped. Much of the general public today see the police as the Enforcement Arm of the Government and the Protectors of Society. Most people do not view police as being a part of the public, but rather something outside the realm of the general public, in place to keep them safe and others in-line.

Police work has moved into a period where the police, rather than being a part of the public, instead must respond to the public needs and expectations. Most people view the police as an entirely different set of people, set in place to meet their needs and expectations for safety. This is why the same person will complain about reckless driving AND complain that he received a speeding ticket.

Further, the public has placed expectations on the police that they (police) will respond in certain ways during certain situations. If they respond too strongly, they are criticized. If they respond too weakly, they are criticized. There are even situations, such as Columbine, where the police were criticized for being both too weak (the immediate police response), and too strong (the later police response).

So, in the case about which you wrote on 05-28-06, I suggest that the response was indeed "overkill". The reality of the situation certainly did not call for such a strong response. However, at the same time it was a "necessary precaution", because the response was probably what was expected of the police by the public, given the totality of the situation (location, statement of the witness, etc.). Robert Peel also said, "No minister ever stood, or could stand, against public opinion." So the police must do what the public wants from them, whether it is right or not.

Remember, that "hammer mistaken for gun fire" was mistaken by the witness, not by the police. It was the police who figured out what the lady likely heard, and that it was not likely to have been gun fire.

After having read about, studied, and worked in law enforcement for over 20 years now, I am not very optimistic about the appropriateness of the direction in which we (both police and public) are headed. But, it is the direction that is mandated by the public. Therefore, it is the road that we must travel.

Average Joe's Average Brother

Okay, so the reader was my brother, who has a pretty extensive background in law enforcement, but that doesn't make the comments any less interesting.

Joe