“As I say at every new-hire orientation session ‘you do not give up one single constitutional right when you pin on your badge’” (The Guardian, June, 2013). Sgt. Rich O’Neill, President Seattle Police Officers Guild.”
Note: The following article represents my own views. In exercising my First Amendment rights, I do not speak for anyone other than myself.
Seattle media, again without context, has broadcastyetanotherreport of theeffects of the DOJ Consent Decree imposition of newpolicies on Seattle’s policeofficers. In thiscase, it has to do with policeuse-of-forcereporting.
It is important to remind everyone thattheconsentdecreeis based upon a fraud committed against the good men and women of the Seattle Police Department. Thelocalmediavirtuallyignoringthisfraud is a testament to theanti-police bias of localmedia.
Thatthe City of Seattle is wasting millions of its citizens’ dollars on a federalfictionaidedandabetted by Seattle’s media, politicians, administrators, crisis entrepreneurs, andthepastandcurrentpolicechiefs, is a scandal. However, it is a scandal that I’m sure will continue to go onignored.
“As I say at every new-hire orientation session ‘you do not give up one single constitutional right when you pin on your badge’” (The Guardian, June, 2013). Sgt. Rich O’Neill, President Seattle Police Officers Guild.”
Note: The following article represents my own views. In exercising my First Amendment rights, I do not speak for anyone other than myself.
Back in September, I read a newspaperarticleandcame across a notionexpressed by Mayor Mike McGinn that might provide a window to his (now-defeated) politicalsoul. Whenresponding to comments about howthepolice are dealing with thecrimeproblem in Downtown Seattle, reporter Lynn Thompson wrotethat McGinn, “citedthe City Council’s effortearly in his administration to enact an aggressive panhandling ordinance, andsaidthathehadrejectedthesuggestionthenthatpoliceneeded to ‘hand out moretickets to peoplewho are poor’” (Seattle Times, September 29th).Such a lack of respect forandunderstanding of lawenforcement’s role is astounding, especiallycoming from themayor of a major American city. Is our mayoractuallycharacterizingpoliceefforts to battle streetcrime as harassing “poor” people?
Leaveit to Seattle’s liberalpoliticians to makethe simple appeardifficult. Apparently, the city administration has somedifficulty in determiningwhetherpoliceofficers are law enforcers orsocialworkers. Cops knowthey are theformerwhilepoliticiansevidentlybelieve cops should be thelatter. Thus, Seattle’s Downtown crimeproblem is no surprise—to the city’s policeofficers.
Whenpoliceofficershavemore to fear from their own city attorney than theydo from thecriminalstheyface, something is desperatelywrong. Seattle Police Guild President Rich O’Neill pointed out that cops havemore of a chance of havingchargesfiled against them than Downtown derelictsdo.
Society has both policeofficersandsocialworkersfor a reason. Reasondictatessocialworkersdo not chasecriminalsand cops do not providesocialservices. According to Thompson’s Seattle Timesarticle, City Attorney Pete Holmes, as well as Mayor Mike McGinn, believeofferingsocialservices to offenders in lieu of takingproperpoliceaction is within a policeofficer’s jobdescription. Thatthemayorbelievesthat cops keeping Downtown safeandcivilforthegood taxpaying citizensamounts to harassing poorpeople, should troublethiscommunity. McGinn and Holmes seem to believethatthese Downtownambassadors of incivility behave as theydobecausethey are poor, rather than thetruththatthey are poorbecause of their uncivilbehavior.
Of course, there is a placeforsocialservices. For over twenty years, I’veworked a beat with several mental health patients and facilities. However, last I checked, thepoliceofficer’s role in society is lawenforcement, not socialwork. Ifthecourtswant to redirect an amenable offender toward drug counseling or angermanagement, or give them a bag of Doritos, or providesomeother prosecution avoidance or deferralservices, that is one thing, but to askthe cops first to process their lawenforcement actions through a socialservices filter is not fair to the policeofficersor to Seattle’s goodcitizens.
Forexample, regardingthepolicechiefpresenting twenty-eight chronic offender cases to City Attorney Holmes, Thompson writes: “Holmes returnedthebinder, sayingthepolicehad not documented that alternative approaches to criminalcharges — including social-service outreach — hadbeenattemptedandhadeitherfailedorbeenrefused.” Yes… my headjustrotated a full 360° on my shoulders. They are attempting to redefine lawenforcement, andthisnew “socialjustice” definitionseems to be makinglittlesense.
If an officercomes across someone whorequestsinformation about availableservices, of coursethey should provideit if they have it. To expect an officerwho is attempting to enforcethelaw to run his or her own mini diversionprogram is, to putitmildly, questionable. Thisapproach can significantly compromiseofficersafety.
Officersneed to enforce the law and investigatecrime with officersafetyuppermost in mind. Can city leaders be askingofficers to treat a violator as iftheywereNordstrom’scustomers? This is a perversion of the cop-suspect “relationship,” which can compromiseofficersafetyandpublicsafety.
That Seattle toleratesuncivilbehavior from delinquentsandcriminals on thestreets, in theparks, under the freeways—under theviaduct, is not news to cops. In fact, thisfact would likely surpriseveryfew Seattleites, either. Howeverthesamecityplaces its policeofficers under a microscopeand has a history of violating an officer’s First Amendmentrights including abusing the internal investigative processwhen an officerdares to speak out, off duty, in opposition to theverypoliciesresponsibleforwhat Thompson’s articletitleillustrates: “Downtown streetoffensesgoing unpunished”.
Nothing in the Seattle Timespiece would come as a surprise to anyrankandfile cop. Thepoliticians in Seattle havespentyearspromotingsocialjusticeandother progressive-liberal, politicalagendasandpolicies, with themostrecentadministrationraisingpoliticalindoctrination to an artform. They may try to pushtheblame for the ills of the Seattle Police Department onto thegoodmenandwomen in blue who serve this city, butthetruth is: The cops knowthey are cops, andtheyknowhow to be cops. Thesimpleproblem is, Seattle’s leadership (now with the help of the DOJ) will not letthe cops be cops.