 |
| The irony of police barricading The Torch of Friendship in riot gear |
“There were good people on both sides.” This same scenario plays out repeatedly on the streets across America. A few bad apples on the police force or among the demonstrators cause an escalation of the violence. There were the Watts riots of 1965 in Los Angeles, California that started with a simple traffic stop for reckless (drunk) driving. Six days later, 34 people were dead, there was $40 million in property damage, and it took 14,000 members of the California Army National Guard to bring order to LA.
Next, we have the so-called Rodney King riots of 1992, also in LA. The California Highway Patrol tried to stop Mr. King and two passengers. He fled and a high-speed chase ensued. When he was finally stopped, his two passengers were arrested and placed in the patrol car. Mr. King then exited the car and police tasered him, beat him with batons, and kicked him until he was motionless. It would have normally all ended there, except for the fact that the whole thing was caught on video. The police were brought up on charges of excessive force and acquitted. After six days of rioting, 63 people had been killed, 2,383 were injured, 12,000 were arrested, and property damage was over $1 billion. Rodney King was a criminal who was driving drunk and on parole. He was wrong. The police who beat him senseless were wrong.
Both of the previous incidents had the common denominator of many previous years of racial suppression and resentment that boiled over after “a few bad apples” wearing police uniforms made a tense situation extraordinarily worse. The initial police stops were justified, but how they were handled later placed the police in the wrong.
This brings us to my home town of Miami. In May of 1980, Arthur McDuffie was driving his motorcycle with a suspended license and outstanding traffic citations. He resisted the officer who tried to pull him over. A high-speed chase ensued before Mr. McDuffie was eventually stopped and then beaten to death by the police. Eight police officers were charged with a variety of offenses by Janet Reno. An all-white jury let them off. Riots broke out in Miami. In the end, 18 people were killed, 350 were injured, 600 were arrested, and property damage exceeded $100 million.
Miami had its second time at bat with the FTAA riots of 2003. This instance had nothing to do with racial tensions, but it had everything to do with the excessive use of force by the police. This was a peaceful protest, at least initially, by a hodgepodge of varied interests. There were recycled hippies, animal rights activists, environmentalists, and middle-aged union members. The Free Trade Area of the Americas was to have been a free-trade zone for all of the Americas and the Caribbean, except Cuba. By 2005, all such efforts were abandoned so I guess the protests accomplished something.
 |
| Second generation hippies |
 |
| View from the elevator lobby of my office building |
This disturbance in 2003 was one for which I had a ringside seat. The staging area was just outside my office known as the Stephen P. Clark building. On the police side of things was City of Miami police chief, John Timoney who was most to blame. As you will see from the pictures, these protestors were almost all peaceful. They included young adults in cow costumes and dolphin suits who were supporting animal rights. You also had middle-aged AFL-CIO and United Steelworkers union members marching against this agreement. This was a peaceful protest that a militant police chief exacerbated to the detriment of all involved.
 |
| City of Miami police chief talks to a reporter |
This police action later became known as the “Miami Model” as it represented an extremely violent police response to nonviolent demonstrators exercising their right to free speech. The AFL-CIO even had a parade permit. Timoney used excessive force and “non-lethal” weapons to harass and arrest the demonstrators. It fully represented his approach to criminalize and repress legal expressions of dissent. Timoney used armored vehicles on the ground and helicopters in the sky. Police marched in lines wearing full riot gear and wielded batons, tear gas, pepper spray, and beanbag rifles to control the crowds. The crowds were peaceful, the police got out of control. Lawsuits by the ACLU were brought and won in challenges to these tactics. The Miami Model used pre-emptive arrests and heavily armed sometimes-unidentifiable law enforcement. There were large federal grants to purchase materials for security. Some of these new materials were given to police unfamiliar with the proper use of that equipment. Many police were not “locals” and did not know the area. Does any of this description sound familiar and relevant in 2020 America?
 |
| A menacing save the dolphins protestor |
 |
| Out of control Union Workers |
 |
| Unmarked police with "less-than-lethal" weapon |
 |
| Armored Personnel Carrier FHP |
As a result of this pandemic, we have been getting our groceries delivered from Whole Foods. They specialize in organic versions of fruits and vegetables. I recently sliced into a beautiful organic apple and I was met with a ping-pong ball sized brown void where the center of the apple should have been. So speaking of those “few bad apples,” everything is fine until you are on the receiving end of that rotten one. If 98% of the police force is made up of “good apples,” then 2% may be assumed to the ones causing all of the trouble. That’s 1.9% too many. You will never get them all but getting rid of that 1.9% is a worthwhile goal.
It is a delicate balancing act to be sure. We can all agree that police protection is necessary but most would also agree that the type and manner in which police tactics used need to be limited. In the military, it is called rules of engagement. This balancing act also needs to be supported with training, screening, and psychological profiling of the types of individuals we allow to police us. I can certainly understand someone getting “amped up” in response to a high-speed chase but that adrenaline peak needs to be tempered with training and specialized de-escalation techniques. We also need to identify those within the police ranks and potential new recruits whose psychological makeup brings with it an explosive mindset with a short fuse.
The solutions are not as simple as another entrance test or continued sensitivity training. Like most serious issues, the solutions are not simplistic. Civilian oversight, regular reviews of police policies and tactics, de-escalation training, and the reassignment of 911 calls to specialized units to deal with things like domestic violence, are all viable points for consideration. Defunding our police is not a proper response. Reallocating resources as needed is a possibility. While we can’t control the twisted criminal mind, the addled brain of a drug addict, the fury of the individual with a deviant personality disorder, or the out of control politics of the few, we can control how we deal with these miscreants in a manner fitting the situation where everyone’s safety is paramount. All police responses should be in direct proportion to the threat level of the incident.
This brings us to the final chapter discussing the use of police to enforce our laws. That chapter would be titled Responsibility. Who should be responsible for enforcing the laws within our cities, counties, parishes, and states? When is it appropriate for the federal government to step in to enforce local laws? My answer to this question, almost never. Federal forces should be used only at the behest of the governor of the state. Federal law enforcement should be used to enforce federal law violations.
President Kennedy sent a federalized National Guard to enforce federal laws for school integration in Birmingham, Alabama. This was a justified use of federal forces. President Trump’s use of anonymous federal forces and military tactics in Washington, DC, and in Portland, Oregon, was a glaring misuse of presidential powers as are his continued threats to repeat these abuses in other cities at his discretion.
All law enforcement officials should be easily identifiable by uniform or by the presentation of proper credentials when requested. The only deviation from this would be for justifiable undercover operations where secrecy is paramount. We should never see unmarked secret police or military units patrolling our streets.
Follow this link to see all of the FTAA riot pictures in Miami from 2003.
No comments:
Post a Comment