By David French
Monday, September 26, 2016
Last week the Washington
Post reported, with more than a little incredulity, that police shootings
are on a pace to match or possibly exceed last year’s total. In other words,
“even as demonstrations and anger have erupted in cities across the country in
recent years, pushing this issue firmly into the national consciousness,” the police
keep pulling the trigger. Why?
The answer is in the Post’s
own data. Last year it conducted a massive study of all fatal police shootings
in the United States, and it found that — surprise, surprise — in the
overwhelming majority of cases, the “police were under attack or defending
someone who was.” There was no wave of racist executions, no evidence of cops
systematically out of control. Instead, there was evidence of hundreds of snap
decisions, almost all made in moments of maximum stress — including moments
when men and women in uniform thought their own lives were in danger.
Indeed, there is no reason for cops in 2016 to respond
any differently to perceived threats than they did in 2015. Should they not
intervene to protect lives or seek to save their own?
Yet Black Lives Matters stubbornly clings to the notion
that police shootings are the result of racism — and that, nonsensically,
police shootings should track the proportionate share of the total population,
not the proportionate share of the criminal
underclass. To quote the New York Times’
Charles Blow, the problem is not so much “rogue officers” but a “rogue
society.” And what’s the solution? Some propose thought control.
Here’s Sherrilyn Ifill, president and director-counsel of
the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund: “That’s why we must immediately
take steps to demand that local police participate in a national regime of
mandatory training — including proper supervision and assessment of bias among
police officers and, where necessary, discipline and removal of officers from
patrol who demonstrate strong and unmanageable indicators of bias.”
But when a black officer is facing a black suspect with a
gun, as reportedly happened in Charlotte, all the training in the world won’t
guarantee a peaceful resolution, in large part because all the training in the
world won’t allow a police officer to peer into the mind of a man who might
shoot him in less than one second — the time it takes to raise a gun and fire.
The number of truly unjustified killings nationwide is
extraordinarily small. As the Post
noted, white officers kill unarmed black men in less than 4 percent of police
shootings, and when we examine those incidents, we find that the number of
truly contentious shootings drops even lower. In other words, the vast majority
of police shootings are unquestionably justified. A much smaller number
represent good-faith mistakes. A tiny number represent criminal acts.
Given the millions of police–citizen interactions, the
risk of a fatal interaction is extraordinarily small. Comply with police
demands — drop a gun, for example, or submit to arrest — and the chances of
dying are close to zero. But if we adjust the balance of power between cop and
criminal, granting the criminal greater freedom of action, then the costs can
be staggering.
This morning, the FBI
released data showing that the murder rate jumped almost 11 percent from
2014 to 2015. While the rate is still far from that of the bad old days of the
early 1990s, an increase of that size represents more than 1,500 lives, many of
them concentrated in cities where the police have been most under fire.
Activists often stupidly talk as if their suggested
reforms would be cost-free, as if a city or a county could adjust a key part of
a successful crime-fighting effort — police behavior — without affecting crime
rates or the overall safety of the general public. This is foolish. Restrict
police rules of engagement and you will grant the far more dangerous person,
the criminal, greater latitude. If you maintain rules of engagement and yet try
to change things like “unconscious bias,” you’ll intimidate officers into
mouthing politically correct platitudes without doing anything at all to alter
the split-second calculus that occurs when a man rushes at a cop in the dark,
or when a threatening suspect won’t put down his gun or knife.
Rarely in modern history has so consequential a movement
— Black Lives Matter — rested on a more preposterous series of lies. It is not
“open season” on black men. There is not an epidemic of unjustified police
shootings. And if activists want police actions against black men to shrink
closer to their proportionate share of the population, the solution isn’t to
ignore actual crime but to decrease criminality.
None of this means there aren’t corrupt cops or even
corrupt departments. None of this means that the rule of law shouldn’t apply to
police officers just as it does to the population. But the hard, cold realities
of crime do mean that unless we want citizens to bear increasing risks and
costs from criminal behavior, then we will have to empower police officers to
use their best judgment in times of ultimate distress. And when they do, some
small number of men and women will die. That’s sad, but it’s not as sad as the
much greater toll imposed when criminals, not cops, rule American streets.
No comments:
Post a Comment