Public Perception of Police

[DarkPanther]

Perception of Police

This is something I thought about making a topic for, for some time. I think with all the recent debates in the media about the power given to the police and how they use it, it is a topic worth considering. How much power is too much power for the police to have? When should the line be drawn between the realm of the police, and the realm of a military force?

Today in America we're flooded with images of police brutality. This is in part due to the fact that the purpose of media is to garner the attention of the population, and violence sells so to speak. However, such cases have been brought to our attention that cannot be ignored. The debate between who was right and wrong in any given situation is not really what matters. It is the force that was used in each situation, and the reaction of the general population to what occurred.

Often times today, I think it is easy to say that the officer involved in any situation was in the wrong. We see the police as the bad guys, when their job is supposed to be to offer us protection. It is easy to say upon hearing any news story that the police were who were in the wrong. Of course they would be, because they hold the authority in any given situation.

But I find that this opinion has become too generalized, to the point we are shocked when we hear stories of officers performing good deeds. In my opinion, there is a far greater number of good officers than bad. It's just easier to look over the good ones, as their stories are less jaw-dropping.

As the decedent of several generations of officers, I may be biased obviously. But I think that the old adage my grandfather used to use whenever hearing such stories of police violence is still true. 'Everyone hates the police until they need them.' That seems true in America today. There is a public opinion that appears to be anti-Police; due to all of the instances showcasing those officers who have stepped out of line.

In my opinion, this media image of the police is not so dissimilar from linking non-violent muslims to those radicals that go out and perform acts of massive destruction. The media portrays all members of the religion as like-minded, when there are far more 'good' muslims than radicals.

So, I am interested in hearing the opinion of others. Do you think that the police in your country have too much power? It does seem ridiculous to see civilian police officers issued governmental surplus to use. But then in extremely dangerous situations, such as school shootings or other massive acts of violence the public wonders why the police were not better equipped to deal with a situation. Is it a damned if they do, damned if they don't situation? Or something more?

[Lux]

I come from America so my perception of the police comes from an American point-of-view. I can’t speak for other countries.

I believe the negative perception of police conduct is justified because it comes from a place where individuals don't feel safe with the police. They feel as if the police are protecting their own instead of the interest of the people.
---

With the cases of Michael Brown, Eric Garner, and Rodney King, which sparked the L.A. riots, it shows a number of examples where there have been unnecessary killings by police men against people of color. A disproportionate number of black men and woman, teenagers, and children who have been subjected to excessive police brutality. I feel like I don’t have to cite sources for this one because you’ve heard of one death or act of misconduct that caused protests in the streets because it was the metaphorical straw that broke the camel’s back, but I will do it anyways. Police brutality against black men dates far back as 1999 in the L.A. Times Article here but it goes deeper than that.


Taken from: NYPD Discarge Report 2011

Black individuals are disproportionately shot upon by the police even if they aren't shown to be 'problematic.' The next url are a variety case studies which deny socioeconomic background.

[x]

To my perception of people’s behavior, people are not willing to risk that much unless there’s a deep-seated issues that’s feeding the metaphorical flame. I understand that the court of public opinion isn’t the justice system, but to what extent can an individual oppose something that doesn’t have some kernel of truth. They have legitimate concerns that aren’t being met.

Denying race, these officers often do not get convicted or sentenced for their crimes. In the cases that they do get charged, proper procedure wasn’t met for many of these cases. For example, whether you believe that Darren Wilson was guilty or not, there were enough instances of misconduct that through the entire situation, which made the situation unclear. This goes for many cases, which I will pull up sources if requested. Along with that, it plants seeds of distrust within the public. It tells people that the police aren’t the upstanding citizens we believe them to be. I will concede that they are human, but they also commit actions that are actively against what they stand for as a professional.

[x]
[x]

The individual actions of good officers cannot justify the corrupted institution. It is to my understanding that the media enjoys showing negative images instead of good, but there’s a conversation that needs to be kept open. It shows how our justice system needs to be reworked because these protest don’t come from a negligible area.

On the case of school shooting, children shouldn't even be able to get a gun in the first place is my point of view and the police can usually only manage the aftermath.

I'm tired so I'll clarify any points I made in the morning. ._.

[Cintry]

This is really a hard one to consider.

Many people think that it is just a race issue, but I think Lux showed that it may be a large part, but not all. One thing that I have noticed that is not represented in many of crimes and instances of police brutality is the instigation of contact. The officer states for the perpetrator to stop doing whatever it is they are doing, the perp continues and one thing leads to the next. Is it correct the way the officer handles the situation? No. To give the officers credit though, many were provoked.

Like Lux, I can only give my opinion and view from an American standpoint.

My entire life I have known cops. Grew up with them. They are very stern people and they have to be because they get to deal with propaganda and issues such as those we have going on now. Personally, I think your last statement sums it up. Damned if they do, damned if they don't. Right now in our society, there is no way to win. No way for a cop to do what is right because if they get to rough, they get in trouble. Not rough enough and more people are hurt or die. It's a massive struggle that is costing more and more lives.

Very thought provoking my dear!
~C

[MothballMilkshake]

I live in Australia, where we don't have the same freedom of guns as America, and police here are a *lot* more reserved about using guns, possibly because there's no 'he could shoot me first' mentality.
It's undeniable that there is huge issues when it comes to police brutality against people of colour in America, but I also think paranoia about everyone having a gun has to contribute somehow.

Something relevant, though not to the topic of police brutality - in America, domestic violence statistics show that 1 in 4 women will suffer it in her lifetime. That jumps to 1 in 2 if she's married to a cop - the number is even higher if she's married to a military man.

http://thefreethoughtproject.com/cops-b ... romotions/

[Becky]

I live in the United Kingdom and police officers here are not permitted to carry a firearm if they're on routine patrolling despite the fact that law enforcement do have a couple thousand registered weapons (in case of major emergencies, I'm assuming).

There was a big case involving the police and a civilian that was shot to death by the police, and because the victim was a person of colour it was viewed as a race issue. This sparked the London Riots which spread to other areas of the country. There was a lot of protesting and looting and it was sort of scary, to be honest.

It may be because I'm a person living in a country where next to no one has a weapon (about 3 people in every 100 people have a registered weapon or something, don't quote me on this) but the thought of walking around in a place that allowed weapons to be carried terrifies me.
The opinion that the majority of the people in my country seem to have is that the police are corrupt and tend not to do anything in times of emergency. Maybe this is true, but I don't know-- I haven't had much personal experience around the police.
The media used to show them as being 'heroes', people that would do anything to avenge a victim, but in the past couple years this perception has changed and they are shown to be brutal and corrupt which makes the public perception make sense as this would be their source of information in order to form an opinion.

[Sinh]

I'm from Germany, which is also much more restrictive on firearms than the USA and there's at least no fear of the police shooting people here, even though they are armed.
Statistics and opinions I got from actual policemen spoilered for length...

Spoiler

Here's some statistics for you. Sorry they're German, but since it's only captions, you should have no trouble getting them translated if interested. Or just ask me about the particular parts you're interested in and I'll do it for you.
This is a police source by the way. Just for the record.
[x]
In the last five years, between zero and one people per year were shot by the police. Compared to US statistics, even considering the three to four times larger population, that isn't so much. But I agree with the others that the guarantee that regular civilians don't walk around heavily armed is probably a huge relaxing factor there.

The police are trying their best to establish a friendly image. As a kid, I got a tour through the local police station, got to pet their dogs and talk to them. That's what they do, welcome kids in, explain their work, answer questions. It's great publicity. (There are also brochures of course and educational visits to schools)

It was there that I got to ask one of them about, well, shooting people (kids will be kids) and it turned out these guys are certainly not eager to use their weapons.
Every time any person is shot by anyone (police or not) in this country, the matter will go to court, no matter what. Only if the shot was fired in direct defense of someone's life can the one who shot get out of that. I say can, because it will still be discussed whether there was some non-deadly measure that the shooter would have had to know could have done the trick. Policemen are specifically trained to stop people without killing after all. If e.g. someone were armed with a knife, clearly starting an attack and not moving erratically, a policeman who shot him in the head rather than the leg would still be in big trouble. If anything, police killings are judged more strictly than others.
Even then, there are all the usual mental problems attatched to having ended a life - I don't need to tell you that - and those may easily render someone unable to continue doing the job.

I don't know if the legal aspect is any different in the USA (please tell me?) but I think it's why people here are not afraid of the police in that way. The few cases of killing that there are are judged as harshly as can be, so that no one could get the idea that the police, as a group, was out of control and out to get them.

And that is how it should be in my opinion: The police hold a monopoly on using a certain kind of force to enforce the law, which is fine and probably neccessary, but they are of course themselves subject to the same laws as anyone else and there should never be the slightest doubt to the fact that they are not judges and the law requires them to use as little force as possible. Their special status is never to be used to harm someone - if harm is brought to someone, it can only be to the extend that is absolutely neccessary to enforce the law or protect their own lives.


That said, police brutality is still an issue in this country - in particular when it comes to big demonstrations. Sources in this field are all German, so I'll pull them up, if you want me to?

There are no shootings at demonstrations and it is seen to that the demonstrating people don't bring weapons of any kind - not even legally owned ones or broomsticks - and apparently wearing protective clothing that might shield you from the policemen's batons counts as a weapon, too.
The policemen present on the other hand wear protective clothing and helmets that make it hard to see their faces, often carry huge transparent plastic shields and always batons. The demonstrating people sometimes refer to them as "robocops" because of their full protective suits. Photo below:
[x]
Of course that is officially to ensure that they can dissolve any outbreaks of violence among the demonstrating people, which makes sense, too, but you can probably see why it makes the demonstrating people feel extremely uneasy. I think it's the enforcing of lack of personal protection that may just be going a little too far.

Again and again there are reports of unjustified police violence in such situations (none deadly of course, just people being beat up for no apparent reason), but these are usually some person's word against the word of a few policemen. Even in situations where the act itself can be proven (for example because one of the attendants caught it on video) it always proves impossible to identify the particular policeman, since their faces are hidden and none of them will speak up against their colleagues.
There have been calls for some means of identification for years, but they're never heard.

There doesn't seem to be much perception of this issue outside of those parts of the population that attend demonstrations though. Sometimes, when something happens that more than the usual people are interested in, it may gain some press attention, but people unaffected go back to their usual disinterest quickly.
It certainly doesn't seem to negatively influence the general perception of the police under normal circumstances, which is a good thing.


I think most people with negative opinions of the poliece are actually more annoyed at the restrictions than anything. They're caught driving too fast (probably the only kind of personal experience with the police they have), don't feel they're in the wrong and thus start viewing the police as a bunch of killjoys who are out to spoil their fun. Nothing serious at all and certainly not enough to make all of society anti police. I feel the general perception is pretty neutral here, though there may well be regional differences within Germany that I'm not aware of.