So this appears to be downright wicked.

Over the years I've come to the conclusion that if a cop is responsible for the death of a civilian the bar should be extremely high for them to prove they deserve to keep their job. One might respond that if a cop accidentally kills a kid, they don't deserve to lose their job on top of it. They deserve a chance to redeem themselves. But I think they do need to be let go. There was some failing in the officer that led to the situation. We cannot risk that failure re-occurring if it could mean the life of a citizen or innocent. I also think it would set the bar higher. We give cops considerable authority and leeway. The consequences for failure should be commensurately higher and they should know it. They should know the weight of their responsibility.

This is born out of a feeling that something has gone awry in how we select cops. A cop should be motivated by a desire to protect their city, to help people, to preserve justice. I think a lot of cops are motivated by that. But I also think far too large a number of cops are drawn to the authority it entails and get off on that. The aura that Hollywood has given cops or the idea of being a modern-day gunslinger. We need every means to remove that type, even if the filter gets some good examples too.

Of course that won't happen. They'll resist such changes and preserve the Blue Wall; they'll scare people into believing any reform is a threat to law and order.

Anti-Social Media


Similar Posts