1st April 2015, 4:21 PM
These are thoughts I've been having. I don't really doubt myself too much, but I always have to consider that I might be dead wrong, especially when I am saying something like "you have to be willing to take direct and immediate risk to your own life in a job like your's". I better be damned sure I've got a solid moral argument before I say something like that.
In some countries (and, in fact, in our's several decades ago) it was common for a police officer to walk their beat without even having a gun on them. They'd need to go back for it, so immediate self defense literally wasn't an option. I WANT to say "we should return to this", but I am VERY nervous about suggesting something like that, very concerned that this may be the wrong solution. I can say one thing. I have no idea why the police in my town are all wearing black. What ever happened to blue police uniforms? They seem a lot more threatening in black. An argument could be made that it makes them harder to see at night, but... well I'm not sure those are the right priorities for peace officers.
Your suggestion of having police do a few more "on foot" beats to get better acquainted with the neighborhoods they are sworn to protect? A good one, but times have changes quite a bit, and it's a bit harder, logistically, to do such a thing. Downtown areas and big cities? This is probably easier, actually. An area like Tulsa? People are so far apart here now, over such a large area, that neighbors who've lived by each other for years don't even know each other. Apartments are "weird" and a sign you're living in poverty. Everyone is "supposed" to live in a house they own, didn't you know that? The sheer number of police one would need to hire to actually allow for on-foot patrols to cover every neighborhood (or heck, even one neighborhood depending on the size of your suburb-based town), well, it just isn't feasible.
I'm not really sure what a good solution is, but it does seem like having police not see the citizens as "them" but rather "us" is absolutely vital.
In some countries (and, in fact, in our's several decades ago) it was common for a police officer to walk their beat without even having a gun on them. They'd need to go back for it, so immediate self defense literally wasn't an option. I WANT to say "we should return to this", but I am VERY nervous about suggesting something like that, very concerned that this may be the wrong solution. I can say one thing. I have no idea why the police in my town are all wearing black. What ever happened to blue police uniforms? They seem a lot more threatening in black. An argument could be made that it makes them harder to see at night, but... well I'm not sure those are the right priorities for peace officers.
Your suggestion of having police do a few more "on foot" beats to get better acquainted with the neighborhoods they are sworn to protect? A good one, but times have changes quite a bit, and it's a bit harder, logistically, to do such a thing. Downtown areas and big cities? This is probably easier, actually. An area like Tulsa? People are so far apart here now, over such a large area, that neighbors who've lived by each other for years don't even know each other. Apartments are "weird" and a sign you're living in poverty. Everyone is "supposed" to live in a house they own, didn't you know that? The sheer number of police one would need to hire to actually allow for on-foot patrols to cover every neighborhood (or heck, even one neighborhood depending on the size of your suburb-based town), well, it just isn't feasible.
I'm not really sure what a good solution is, but it does seem like having police not see the citizens as "them" but rather "us" is absolutely vital.
"On two occasions, I have been asked [by members of Parliament], 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." ~ Charles Babbage (1791-1871)