Special Ed's Memo

So this came out in the Tribune the other day:

• The Chicago Police Department, pressured by a U.S. Justice Department investigation and public outrage over police misconduct, has unveiled proposed policy changes aimed at cutting down on the kinds of controversial uses of force that have plagued the city.
  
  The draft policies released Friday would further limit when officers can shoot fleeing people, restrict the number of times officers can Taser arrestees and compel officers to use the lightest force possible in any situation. The draft rules would expand on guidelines now in effect, some of which are comparatively vague.

And the Sun Times had this:

• The Chicago Police Department for the first time will seek the public’s input on proposed changes to how officers use force — proposals that already are worrying some cops, such as restrictions on when to draw a weapon.
  
  “We’re going to use less-lethal alternatives as much as we can,” police Supt. Eddie Johnson said at a news conference Friday.

All on a Friday afternoon....of a holiday weekend. Is this Department completely predictable or what?

Then you had Special Ed's "memo" outlining what was to come:

• Let me be very clear, I understand the concerns you may have regarding use of force encounters. I have worked the very same streets as you. I understand the challenges and the scrutiny under which we operate. These policies were drafted to clarify response options that can be used while making split second decisions and contain information, most of which should already be familiar to you.

Really Ed? When was the last time you actually worked these streets? Three years ago? Five years ago? Ten years ago? Let's face reality here - you haven't worked these streets. It's changed Ed. We know what we did decades ago and we're pretty sure we know what you did decades ago, and it ain't happening now. So you haven't worked diddly-squat Ed. You're a politician now.

What worries us is that last sentence:

• These policies were drafted to clarify response options that can be used while making split second decisions....

So you're going to take a relatively simple Order....and complicate it? You admit that these are "split second decisions" but your brain trust is going to add more information. Golly, won't that result in more hesitation? More second guessing? More coppers getting hurt and (God forbid) possibly killed?

Some other highlights from Special Ed:

• Sanctity of life – In all aspects of their conduct, Department members will act with the foremost regard for human life and safety of all persons involved. This includes the requirement that officers comport themselves in a manner that conveys the gravity of any use of force, offering medical aid to those injured in use of force incidents, and intervening and reporting on a subject’s behalf when observing force being used in violation of Department policy.

Sanctity of life? What, the "preservation of life" policy was too godless? "Comport themselves"? So no high-fives and touchdown dances? Already there. Summoning medical help? We do that. "...intervening...on a subject's behalf when observing force being used in violation of Department policy." So....officers have to tackle another officer using what they determine to be inappropriate force? Or shooting other coppers now? What two-bit lawyer wrote this crap?

• Ethical behavior - The Department remains committed to prohibiting and preventing the use of unwarranted or excessive physical force and expects its members to demonstrate the highest degree of ethical behavior and professional conduct at all times. Officers will engage the public with professionalism and respect the dignity of every person in carrying out their law enforcement duties, while ensuring that gender, race, ethnicity, or any other protected characteristic does not influence any decision on the use of force.

More about that pesky "ethics" from a guy who covered up a cheating scandal involving his betrothed and the wives/girlfriends/side pieces of how many bosses? And has anyone asked that copper in 015 if "race" played any role in her decision to take a beating rather than shooting the felon beating her unconscious?

• Use of Force – While the legal standard remains that an officer's use of force must be objectively reasonable, necessary, and proportional to the threat faced by the officer, the new Department policy is more demanding than the law requires. Department members will now be expected to use the least amount of force necessary based on the totality of the circumstances and will only resort to physical force when no reasonably effective alternative appears to exist

So forget existing law and court decisions. You will be fired for a policy violation committed in a "split second" decision that you have almost no control over - the actions of another person. You know what a "reasonably effective alternative" would seem to be? Roll slow and/or retreat from confrontation. Brilliant.

• Deadly Force – The use of deadly force (which now also includes striking a subject's head with an impact weapon or into a hard, fixed object) is only authorized to prevent an immediate threat of death or great bodily harm posed to officers or another person. The draft policy generally prohibits officers from firing into crowds, into buildings or through doors and windows, and at or into a moving vehicle, except in extraordinary circumstances. Additionally, officers may only draw and display their firearms when there is reasonable belief that such action is necessary for the officer’s safety or the safety of others.

You mean like if an officer is being strangled (threat of death or GBH), head stunning is authorized? We know of an officer who'd like to hear that one again. As for the firing into crowds, unseen targets, etc, no shit there Ed. As for the "draw and display," it seems someone has forgotten the "act, react" scenarios. Tactically, you act far faster than an opponent can react. Having your weapon handy cuts down on the reaction time and enables officers to more easily save their life, their partner's life and an innocent bystander's life.

Then it goes into "de-escalation," the new buzz-word that is going to get officers maimed and killed. It's a pile of crap and pretty much an order to avoid contact with the public, an end to proactive police work, slow roll to jobs, and retreat in the face of resistance. Dumb dumb dumb.