Who Shot Ya?: on police shootings
Recently, the news has been saturated with reports of police shootings of citizens. The fact is, the exact number of police killings per year is unknown—the numbers reported by the Bureau of Justice are notoriously unreliable. Some experts estimate that the 400 or so people killed by police—that’s the number reported by the Bureau of Justice—is actually over twice that many. Part of the reason the number reported by the Bureau of Justice is so unreliable is because police departments are decentralized with regard to a national agency. Put another way, there is no official accounting of all the police departments in the United States; no one knows how many police departments exist in the U.S. The Bureau of Justice relies on police departments to voluntarily self-report shootings, and arrives at “4 to 400.” Because shootings generally make the local or national news, the media provides another method to track the actual statistics—and perhaps a more reliable number, as it does not rely on the perils and pitfalls of asking agencies to “voluntarily self-report” bad behavior—thus, the 900 or so police involved deaths of citizens.
The Point: We should demand better tracking of police shootings. “Voluntary reporting” should be “mandatory reporting.”
Whatever the number is, it doesn’t seem to matter much when you consider any case where an unarmed citizen is shot by police. I suppose at some level, these shooting are tied to notions of “officer safety”—i.e. the officer feels threatened, and responds with deadly force (e.g. shooting the citizen.) Being a cop is a dangerous, stressful job, no doubt about it. Cops need guns. The problem is, however, cops also have numerous less-than-lethal options to subdue an unarmed citizen who the officer believes is dangerous (pepper spray and Tasers, to name a few.) Any less-than-lethal option is a better, more appropriate response to an unarmed suspect, PERIOD.
The Point: We should demand that officers receive better and more intensive training on less-than-lethal options. Additionally, the “officer safety” justification should not be carte blanche to act in an otherwise inappropriate manner.
I am glad to say that I have personally only seen two cases where officers in Denton County shot at a suspect, and—to be fair—both of those shootings were entirely justified: the suspect either drew a weapon on officers, or was shooting at officers first. But, what is unsettling is the number of cases where no shots are fired, but where police draw their weapons on an unarmed suspect to subdue him. These instances are unsettling, perhaps, because they so easily could become the shooting of an unarmed suspect. I grew up in a rural area, and was always taught that you never take your gun out unless you intend to shoot it, and certainly never aim it at anything unless you plan to kill it. I am sure this sounds overly simplistic to some who know more about guns than I do, but it cannot be debated that this is a sound policy.
The Point: We should demand that police department Policies and Procedures Manuals only permit officers to remove their weapons where deadly force is justifiable. There is no reason why an unarmed kid walking out of his house, with hands visible, should have a gun pointed at him by a cop.
Police departments have sound “Use of Deadly Force” policies, none of which—to my knowledge—include the shooting of an unarmed suspect who is not threatening the officer, himself, or someone else with deadly force. And, if many of the police shootings in the news are examined, they do not appear to comport with the “Use of Deadly Force” policies adopted by police departments. But, then again, I have discovered that many officers are entirely unaware of what their department’s Policies and Procedures Manual actual say.
I would be unfair to not mention that the vast majority of police who shoot citizens face no criminal prosecution for their conduct. For example, in Los Angeles County, between 2010 and 2014, approximately 375 people were shot by police officers. Of the 375, about 25% were unarmed. 148 people were shot by officers for “moving their hands”, and of those 148, 47 turned out to be unarmed. The most important statistic, however, is this: NONE of the officers involved in ANY of these shootings were prosecuted. This is likely due to the notion of the “Blue Line” or perhaps juries reluctant to convict cops.
The Point: We should demand accountability. You shoot an unarmed person and have no justification for your conduct, you get indicted. There is no reason that police should be treated any differently than the people criminal defense lawyers represent.
Quentin Tarantino made headlines a month or so ago for calling the shooting of unarmed citizens without cause by police “murder.” People lost their minds over his comments. This makes no sense. Under what other circumstances do we pretend that fatally shooting someone without cause is not murder?
“I am not against police, I am just afraid of them,” Alfred Hitchcock famously once said. I understand that being a police officer is a dangerous job. I also understand cops need to carry weapons. My point is that anytime anyone—even police—shoot an unarmed person, we need to check that out. Because that’s murder, and we generally want murders to be investigated. And if there is a legitimate reason why it was necessary for the officer to employ deadly force, then so be it. But if there isn’t, then we need accountability.