Anti Police: If You Are Anti Police Brutality Does That Mean You Are Anti Police?




First of all let's get the color thing out of the way. There are 3 colors involved in this debate: Black, White and Blue. Black is complaining about Blue so why is White upset about that?

Police should be objective, regardless of their personal beliefs or affiliation once a man puts on that blue uniform he is no longer representing himself but is representing the idea of liberty and justice for all. So if Police no longer represent objective and blind justice as the enforcement arm of the law then the contract between the people and the government is broken. In order for a lawful society to exist a majority if not all the people must trust that everyone is equal under the law once the perception of fairness is broken that is the end of a civil society.

So when black people complain about police brutality white people shouldn't be upset at black people for voicing their complaints, unless they agree with police brutality? I am sure that there are no white people that agree with police brutality but I am also sure that there are some white people that are ok with police brutality as long as it's not against white people.  What those poor misinformed white people don't realize is that this is a slippery slope, sure it will start out against only blacks but power attracts more power and so if left unchecked police will be brutalizing everyone including whites. This is the beginning of the authoritarian state so many white republicans are against but don't realize they are being manipulated to support.

An example of what I am talking about happened back in the 1960's-1980's where many white people were against the black panthers utilizing their legal right to bear arms to defend themselves against police brutality. I must also say that many white people of that day also supported the Black Panther movement a far contrast to the attitude many misinformed whites hold today of the Black Panthers (#BlackPanthersPBS). The government manipulated white America's fear of armed black Americans to push through extremely stringent gun legislation that has basically handicapped the 2nd amendment rights in most of America. The government having  successfully disarmed the entire non-criminal urban population where most of the racial diversity is in America, now turn their attention to the rural white American population who find themselves in an uphill battle to hang on t their 2nd amendment right to bear arms. However, they would not find themselves losing the war to hold on to their own right to bear arms had they resisted the government's efforts to take away the 2nd amendment rights of other Americans. Now it's too late legal precedent is in place and momentum has been built to disarm all americans of their 2nd amendment rights and bringing us even closer to the authoritarian state so many white republicans fear is upon us.

So to get back to the original question; No, being anti police brutality does not mean you are anti police. Because the truth is nobody is Anti police, except criminals and nobody is pro police brutality. This is a false narrative designed to manipulate the racial divide in society by playing with words and drawing us all to illogical extremes that don't exist.

So the idea that Cops plan to BOYCOTT Beyonce concert after her Super Bowl "anti police" show is ridiculous. There is no anti police sentiment in America there is only "anti police brutality". How convenient of "them" to drop the "brutality" part to create a counter argument. Cops shouldn't be boycotting anything police are not one of the people, they are officers of the court.  If they want to protest or boycott they need to do that in their personal capacity out of uniform but once they put on that uniform their obligation is to their oath of office which is to protect and serve all people's rights including Beyonce's 1st amendment right to speak out against police brutality.

What are the police arguing exactly, for their right to kill unarmed black men without consequence?
Are they saying we should be ok with them not doing their job well? There are plenty of armed criminal gangs many of them filled the armed black men committed to a life of crime. However, the police is never anywhere near where actual crimes are being committed, after all they are not stupid, they want to make it home to see their family after their shift is over.  But when they see an unarmed black man or teenager walking the streets alone they want to shoot him to death then lie and cover it up. This is what we are talking about. No one is arguing against the police shooting black criminals. But in derelict to their duty and cowardice police officers choose to leave armed black criminals and gang members unchallenged and instead decide to focus on shooting, stopping, frisking and beating unarmed civilians and then get upset when we say they are wrong.

But the blame must go to the city legislators, mayors and police captains who preside over a organization that is failing the people that it should be serving. I don't believe in the "few bad apples" myth that people like to use. People love to say that the majority of police officers are good and do their jobs well. I disagree, the facts have show a pattern that cannot be explained away with these excuses. The police force is designed to be disciplined they run on strict codes of conduct, chain of command and oaths. The Police force would not work if offices just did whatever they wanted and no police captain would command a regiment of police officers that did not adhere to his orders. The police force is basically a domestic army officers must follow orders and execute the programing that they are trained to do. If units of police are responding and shooting unarmed black men walking lawfully on the public streets, while simultaneously staying away from locations known for criminal and gang activity then that is deliberate. Officers are only doing what they are trained to do. This is why police commissioners and mayors across this country in response to the outrage of concerned citizens always say the answer is retraining.

So the question becomes what kind of training have they been receiving all these many years? The answer is simple: Jim Crow.

According to Dr. David Pilgrim, Professor of Sociology Ferris State University. Jim Crow was the name of the racial caste system which operated primarily, but not exclusively in southern and border states, between 1877 and the mid-1960s. Under Jim Crow, African Americans were relegated to bottom of the racial hierarchy. and included the widespread use of lynchings as a public deterrent
The justice system was all-white: police, prosecutors, judges, juries, and prison officials police brutality was used as an intimidation tool to keep blacks, in this case the newly freed people, "in their places" to keep blacks out of certain housing developments, schools, discourage race mixing and diversity.

It would seem that the training these mayors and police commissioners are referring to is the remnants of Jim Crow. To the visible eye it is clear that even today the justice system is mostly white: police, prosecutors, judges, juries, and prison officials are almost all white even in communities like Fergerson, Missouri where the black population are in the majority.

So in conclusion, there has not yet been any anti police sentiment in America to speak of only anti police brutality but if police continue to politicize themselves, choose sides and neglect their duty and oath then they will succeed in creating the anti police sentiment that the media is perpetuating on their behalf. Police must be blue not black or white.

Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.
-Martin Luther King, Jr.


A.D. Largie is a Author of primarily children's picture books. 




0 comments:

Post a Comment