Forum Post: There needs to be a downside to police brutality.
Posted 13 years ago on Oct. 12, 2011, 7:29 a.m. EST by borderhacker
(6)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
Recently on Quora, Justin Freeman, who labeled himself a "former patrol officer", answered a question about high-speed car chases by police. This part of his answer caught my attention: "Vehicle pursuits got cancelled by a commander almost instantly. There is so much liability at play in a pursuit situation that many departments are getting very conservative in their response to situations like this."
The key word there is "liability." In other words, the cop and/or agency ending up in a civil courtroom on the wrong end of a lawsuit. I started thinking about the Boston situation in that context and realized something: cops respond brutally to protests because there's no downside for them in doing so.
There needs to be a downside. It must be non-violent and something that will not alienate supporters in the community, but it needs to be potent enough to stop the police violence. And I don't think the threat of prosecution or a lawsuit is going to do it.
Ideas?
Engage in "top of the morning to you sir" conversation, many didn't dig the madly swinging N.Y.P.D. officer, ask them about how they feel about what they see, hear, etc. Thank them if they are kind, don't speak to those out of touch, but don't treat them as if they are, they have grievances of their own, their conversation, is your conversation. Many do not deserve the label of others and resent it. Communication: Rush/ song/ "limelight"
First off, I'd like to say I hope we can avoid further conflicts with police. We will end up looking like, and being portrayed as, a bunch of rowdies, even though it is not true. Also, we shouldn't alienate policemen. They are part of the 99%. They know it at heart, but they are in a conflicted situation. I think lawsuits could be a threat, though I'd like to aim them at the police commissioners and captains, not at the cop in the street. The Boston case is complicated because we were asked to move off only a certain part of the Rose Kennedy Greenway that had recently been upgraded. We appear kind of unreasonable. Nevertheless, I think going after first aid workers like they did in Boston is egregious and could be the basis for a suit against the police commissioner who was on site and ordered the forcible removal.
I agree the first aid workers should be off limits. Even in wartime the medics are non-combatants.
Yeah. Peaceful resistance as advocated by Gandhi. Basically, be respectful to the police and treat them with kindness. Do not argue. Do not yell at them. If they act badly or in a provoking manner, quietly stare them down. A crowd of people quietly staring at you can be far more disquieting than a crowd loudly shouting at you.
Remember that cops are part of the 99%. If you are doing things the right way, there is no need for police brutality. Arrests might get you in the news, but it is looked on unfavorably by the majority of Americans.
For example, in Boston, they handed out leaflets warning the protesters to stay off one parcel of land that recently had $150,000 in shrubbery plantings. Rather than accepting that, protesters treated them with disrespect and instigated actions which led to the arrests.
Most Americans have no problems with police. Many are friends, neighbors or relatives. When you engage in incidents with them, it lowers the respect the movement receives among the greater population. We need more than rebels signed up to this. We need to be adults and not children.
Well said. And I agree about peaceful resistance. It is the more noble thing to do. If we do get knocked on the head, let's not look like the instigators.