Street Smart

Last week I saw a news item and video that showed a police officer being attacked and kicked while on the ground wrestling with a person he was trying to arrest. No one intervened to help the officer. I’ve also seen recent videos (plural!) of police officers in New York getting buckets of water thrown on them as they were trying to do their jobs. These are just two recent examples of behavior that demonstrates a disturbing and dangerous lack of respect for law enforcement.

Now we are again seeing that police officers across the nation are backing away from what we call proactive or self-initiated crime suppression activities. Why? How did it get to this point? Simply put, police officers don’t feel like they are supported by their superiors or the communities they serve. This type of behavior by police officers even has a name. It’s called the “Ferguson effect” (look it up) after a controversial police shooting in Ferguson, Missouri. I saw the same thing happen in Los Angeles after the infamous Rodney King incident. I lay the blame for the “Ferguson effect” directly at the feet of city government, police administrators and the media because of their failure to effectively respond to critical events or public scrutiny.

I’ll try to explain with some information from my own experience that won’t be found in a news article or broadcast. The following true scenario applies across the board to law enforcement nationwide. I mention it only because I’m familiar with the circumstances.

Two weeks ago, the Metropolitan Division (Metro) of the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD)was ordered to stop making investigative traffic stops of suspected gang members in South Los Angeles (I worked Metro for 11 proud years). The reason? Some community activists and parents complained that Metro officers were improperly documenting some of the young people they stopped as gang members. This started when a mother discovered that her son had been improperly listed as a gang member in department records. Now, I believe it was certainly possible that mistakes in documentation did happen, but let’s look at the LAPD knee-jerk response and examine why mistakes in documentation might occur.

Imagine this abbreviated but factual scenario: Metro officers in South Los Angeles observe four young men in gang attire driving in a known gang area and initiate an investigative stop. Each of the four individuals speaks with the officers using common gang jargon, have tattoos, live in the area, admit to having nicknames, but deny being gang members (keep in mind that the officers know that gang members are not adverse to lying). The officers complete the associated contact card and list the local gang as probable affiliation. Is that investigative stop and documentation improper? Apparently it is now, but let’s dig a little deeper and identify where LAPD dropped the ball on their officers. LAPD Command staff failed to address a reality officers have to deal with on a daily basis. That reality is the fact that gang members and the “gangsta” lifestyle are now glamorized in music, on television and social media. Being a gangster is somehow cool and many young people have appropriated the dress and behavior.

It wasn’t always like that. Gang attire used to be very distinctive and exclusive to the “real” gang members. In fact, we (law enforcement in L.A.) often had trouble immediately identifying Asian gangsters because they very wisely didn’t dress like gang members! When I first started my career, we had a saying regarding gang members and their attire that was, at the time, completely accurate; “If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and hangs around with other ducks…it’s a duck!” At the time, nobody except a gang member wanted to look like one! We now see suburban white kids embracing the gangsta culture and dress.

In the described incident, everything points to a bigger societal problem that LAPD Command didn’t want or was afraid to address. They were afraid that stating the truth about what is called “cultural appropriation” would be offensive to certain segments of the public. It happens all the time. What they failed to recognize is that it is the public who will ultimately suffer. I was taught that if we (law enforcement) do the right thing, we may need to explain our actions, but we won’t have to apologize for them. In the above scenario, the involved officers were being proactive and trying to address potentially violent gang activity. In my opinion, that’s a laudable effort. Now, because LAPD Command officers were afraid to offer a completely reasonable explanation, gang members will feel emboldened to act any way they choose. Good people will be hurt by this policy change… not the gang members.

It’s been my experience that the public appreciates and can deal with the truth. In this case, LAPD managers could have addressed citizen concerns while still supporting their officers by honestly stating the facts I’ve pointed out here. A template for a statement: “Here’s what happened and why…[followed by the explanation]. We’ve identified weaknesses in our documentation practices that will be addressed and corrected. We support our officers and their efforts to curb gang violence in Los Angeles.” Stop apologizing for your officers trying to do the right thing. Done!

A good friend of mine used to facetiously say, “There are no mistakes on a blank sheet of paper.” He was demeaning police officers not being proactive in their crime suppression efforts and what he said, although accurate, was disturbing. While I completely disagree with a “work slow down” because of the Ferguson effect, I understand how these things happen. I believe that if city leaders, police administrators and the media would stop “kowtowing” to special interest groups and support law enforcement, they would be amazed at the results in terms of public safety.

Blaine Blackstone is a retired Los Angeles Police Sergeant who enjoys the simpler life in Thompson Falls. He can be reached by email at [email protected].