Barry Levinson
I agree wholeheartedly with Mr. Ring’s comments below about police brutality as demonstrated by the brutal beating death of Kelly Thomas. In that case it was the police who instigated the suspect’s reasonable reaction to flee based on a physical threat of violence against him.
However, I do not agree with Mr. Ring’s assessment of the increased militarization of the police as basically necessary in the face of greater criminal threats and fire power.
Former NYC Police Chief Bernard Kerik made a very scary statement in my opinion on the Megyn Kelly show a few days ago. He said any citizen that does not comply with a police command to be handcuffed for arrest no matter what the alleged crime should get the same physical response from the police. So if you are jay walking, selling individual cigarettes or some other minor infraction, the police should respond to that person the same way when they are trying to arrest a serial murderer for instance.
I could not believe the total lack of common sense by the former police commissioner to state that a single approach by the police is proper no matter the set of circumstances. This attitude by the police which seems to be getting more prevalent smacks of a police state where the citizens are the potential enemy of the police, rather than the people they have been sworn to serve and protect. This is the real danger in my opinion to the increased militarization of police departments. It is not simply the increased fire power, military style uniforms and equipment that they now possess but more importantly the growing police mindset that they are in a war zone with every person in the community a potential enemy. This attitude more than anything else has resulted in too many unnecessary deaths at the hands of law enforcement. Couple this with the lack of will by prosecutors and grand juries to hold those police officers responsible for their actions and we have the sad situation we are too often witnessing today.
#1 by Anonymous on December 15, 2014 - 10:56 am
I think what the NYC police chief meant was that when a person resists arrest, for whatever infraction he/she is suspected of, the cops have every right to use whatever force is needed to slap on the cuffs. It’s not the infraction as much as the suspect’s response to the cops. If cops are arresting someone suspected of murder, and that person complies with commands and allows himself to be handcuffed, the situation will be resolved peacefully. If the cops are trying to arrest someone of illegally selling cigarettes, and that person resists, force will likely and justifiably be used.
And there is this:
http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/eric-garner-chokehold-grand-jury-police/2014/12/04/id/611058/