Cop pepper-spraying protesters is symbol for arrogant police culture

By David McElroy · November 21, 2011

You’ve probably seen this picture or seen video of the same scene. Campus police at the University of California at Davis blasted pepper spray at peaceful student protesters Friday. Many people are outraged. Many are calling for the firing of the officers. I’d like to step back and take a broader perspective with three points.

First, this incident proves again that photography matters. In many places, police arrest people for taking pictures of them doing their jobs. In some places, it’s even specifically against the law. The attempts of police, politicians and prosecutors in some places to stop photography of them are wrong, whether it’s through arrests or intimidation.

If the pictures and video from the UC-Davis incident didn’t exist, this would be a non-story. We wouldn’t be talking about the issue. It would be almost as though it didn’t happen. This is why it’s important to strongly press the case that photography is not a crime. (You’ll find plenty of stories at that site of police and other public officials attempting to stop photography that they don’t like.)

Second, these sorts of incidents — and far worse — go on almost every day, but we don’t know about them because there is such a strong “support the police” culture in this country. The people who are experiencing oppression, threats and intimidation from police are mostly those who are powerless to do anything about it. They tend to be poor, black, brown or undereducated. They tend to be people who either don’t know their rights or know they won’t be believed if they complain.

In this case, a bunch of middle-class white college kids were targeted — with plenty of evidence. If we wouldn’t be talking about this incident without photos and video, imagine how much worse it would be if you were a poor urban black male and it’s your word against a police officer’s. You wouldn’t stand a chance and you’d know that. Is it any wonder so many of them are scared of police?

Third, this isn’t a problem of “a few bad eggs.” This is the modern police culture. This is the way they’re trained. There have always been some people attracted to law enforcement because they have the kind of attitude that lends itself to believing, “I have a gun and a badge, so you will obey me,” but the culture makes it very clear that a large proportion of police believe they’re above the law — and that they should be allowed to do pretty much anything they believe is right. Many of them believe that people’s rights are irrelevant, and they’re willing to lie to make it appear they’re following the law. These people are just as evil as the criminals they supposedly oppose.

Since the incident Friday, many are calling for the firing of police Lt. John Pike, the officer in the photo above. You can sign a petition here or see a Facebook group about it here. And the university has suspended a couple of the officers while the case is being investigated, although police were still defending what they did.

I certainly don’t have a problem with firing the officers who did it, because it can at least send a message to the others on the job. Maybe. If it’s like most such incidents, the officers would be rehired by other departments immediately. The police culture protects its own — because they don’t believe they’re doing anything wrong.

And that’s the key. Firing a few officers here or there isn’t going to change things. It’s a systemic problem. Police have to learn that they’re not above the law. They have to learn that they’re going to be consistently punished if they lie or abuse people’s rights. They have to know that complaints against them are going to be taken seriously, not ignored by people more concerned with the appearance of “procedure” than with justice.

The police culture has to change. I don’t know how to do that, because I think the lousy attitudes ultimately come from the public. The vast majority of the public seems to vaguely believe that police should be supported in almost all situations. Especially in you’re in a Republican district, the safest thing you can say is that you support police and want to spend even more money on law enforcement — for higher salaries and new toys for them to “play” with.

I’m not in a lot of danger from police, because I’m a white middle-class guy, but even I get nervous with them these days. A friend of mine made the same point to me over the weekend. Until most people demand accountability and courtesy from some of the thugs who we’re giving guns and badges to, this behavior isn’t going to stop. It won’t affect those of us in our nice, safe, comfortable suburbs, but don’t be surprised when crime gets even worse as more people in minority communities turn against police.

I’m glad to see the outrage against what these thugs did Friday to some white middle-class students. I’d just like to see the same level of outrage when the victims are poor blacks or Hispanics.

Share on Social Networks

If you have problems with high blood pressure, I’d like to encourage you to consider making serious changes to your diet. There might be some people who don’t have any choice but to start taking prescription medications for high blood pressure, but I’d like to tell you that I have completely eliminated my issue by eliminating all sugar and almost all carbohydrates. (A couple of months ago, my blood pressure hit 185/144, which was dangerously high — considered stage 3 hypertension.) By completely changing my eating habits, I’m down 22 pounds and my blood pressure is now in the “ideal” range — without taking any medication. In addition, I sleep better and I have more energy. Getting away from the sugar-laden mess that we generally refer to as “highly processed food” has been a life-changer for me. Now my challenge is to avoid slipping back into old habits — by eating in the dangerous ways that almost everyone in our society has come to see as normal.

When I first heard about this, I thought it must be satire. When I discovered it was real, I was appalled, but I still thought it must be a one-time thing from some nutty activist. But it turns out it’s the latest bit of pandering to a bunch of far-left activists who believe that a man can become a woman if he decides to claim he’s a woman. As everybody knows, men have prostate glands. Women do not. Period. End of story. Men can get prostate cancer. Women cannot. But political activists are so eager to pretend that a man claiming to be a “trans woman” is really a woman that they are insisting that “women” be included in public health messages about the issue. This is nothing but political virtue-signaling. If you’re a man, you know which parts you have. You know that you ought to be screened. Nobody is made any safer by dragging far-left gender ideology into simple medical reality.

Every time someone tries to tighten requirements around the use of absentee ballots, I hear screams from Democrats and others on the political left that such efforts are nothing but “suppression of black voters.” These protests have never made sense to me, especially because it’s never been a secret that absentee ballot fraud goes on all the time in certain areas. (Everybody knew it when I worked in politics.) The people who engage in such fraud are rarely caught — often because the local political establishment approves of the crime — but a Democrat who won a primary election in Clay County, Alabama, last year has pleaded guilty to this sort of cheating. Terry Andrew Heflin was running for a place on the Clay County Commission. He was caught ordering seven absentee ballots in the names of various voters and sending them to his post office box — after which he used the ballots to vote absentee for himself seven time. Did he have other people cast additional fraudulent ballots? We’ll never know. But in a primary in which he was able to win with only 141 votes, it wouldn’t take many fraudulent votes to change the election. The next time you hear “civil rights activists” claim that it’s just “voter suppression” to hurt blacks which is at the root of efforts to stop this fraud, remember Terry Heflin. If you care about fair and honest elections, ballot security and voter identity should matter to you.

A state legislator in Maine has been stripped of the ability to speak in the state Legislature — and her votes are not being counted on legislative issues — all because she made a truthful social media post. Rep. Laurel Libby (R-Auburn, Maine) opposes allowing boys to compete against girls’ teams in school athletics and she’s become known for making an issue of it. On Feb. 17, she posted on Facebook about a recent example that she found outrageous. She posted side-by-side photos of a boy named John who competed last year in a state track event and won fifth place against other boys two years ago — and a photo of the same boy (now called Katie) who won first place in the same event this year against girls. Whether you find this outrageous or not, Libby is clearly being honest and truthful about the objective facts of an issue of public importance. But the state Legislature censured her. Democrats decreed that she could not speak in the House and that her votes would not count on legislation — until she apologized for the outrage of telling the truth. She refused and her constituents have been unrepresented in the state House since then. The people who promote this ideology are out of touch with reality and won’t rest until they force the rest of us to join them in this delusion. But even if you agree with “trans” ideology, you should be appalled at this heavy-handed attack on political speech.

The late Steve Jobs was at the center of our culture’s transition from analog to digital. He co-founded Apple Computer. He led the team that revolutionized personal computing with the first Macintosh. As CEO of Apple, he led the development of the iPhone and later the iPad. You would think the children of such a man would be surrounded by technology. But Jobs and his wife Laureen didn’t let their children use iPads. Their home had few screens of any kind. Even though Jobs spent most of his time developing and selling Macs and iPhones and iPads, he was home with his wife and children for dinner when he was in town. The family ate together at a simple wooden table in their kitchen — and there were no digital devices or focus on popular culture. Instead, he’s said to have guided his family toward deep discussions of art, philosophy and education — with no iPads to be found. If the man who guided the development of such products chose a different path for his own children, does that suggest that his digital experience taught him that children need human connection, not screens? And does it suggest the possibility that we might be better off if we made the same choice for our families?

Related Posts