Tag: police

Pitching Conservatives on Ditching the Police State

During Mao’s Cultural Revolution of the 1960s, the Red Guards were a radical student-formed paramilitary organization. Inspired by the push to recreate a new communist China and destroy the “Four Olds”, the Red Guards targeted anyone deemed sympathetic to intellectual or bourgeois ideas. Red Guard tactics quickly devolved into property damage, violence, and torture. Thousands were murdered. The Red Guards were both condoned and condemned by the central government, but they were unable to be controlled. The movement in some cases spiraled into a civil insurrection that was eventually defeated by the army in 1968. Lawlessness, destruction of private property, disregard for human life–clearly, conservatives and I agree that the terror campaign of the Red Guards was a moral abomination. But I have a question for conservatives:

Were the Red Guards bad because of their ideology, or because of their violence?

Well, what if we kept the ideology, but got rid of the violence? Apparently, the “Party for Socialism and Liberation” is an American political party that advocates communism. Their positions (perhaps unsurprisingly) are rather odious, but as far as I can tell, they are not actively going around the country murdering small business owners for owning capital. This is clearly morally superior to the Red Guards.

What about the reverse? What if there were paramilitary organizations in the United States operating outside the law, but they happened to not be communists? What would their moral standing be? They wouldn’t target people holding onto traditional values, like the Red Guards did, but that would not make citizens feel better that hundreds of people were being murdered.

American police forces are Red Guards without communism.

Too harsh? Let’s take a look into this phenomenon where we’ll find outrageous situation after situation. In 2011, cops killed a former marine with no criminal record, Jose Guerena, while his wife and children were hiding in a closet from the unidentified intruders. Guerena, while armed, never removed his safety from the gun. Naturally, he was hit over 20 times by police. No evidence was found in his home of any illegal activity. The warrant was served suspecting that Guerena was selling marijuana. At the time medical cannabis was legal in Arizona, but someone selling it without a license? Better have a no-knock raid. Police settled out of court for civil damages, and a County Deputy is quoted saying ” the officers performed that day in accordance with their training and nationally recognized standards”.

In 2013, three off-duty police officers working as security guards in a Frederick County, Maryland movie theater were asked to remove a patron who was attempting to see a second showing of a movie without paying. The customer, Ethan Saylor, was 26 years old and had Down Syndrome. The officers refused the help of his aide, arrested Saylor, and in the process, fractured his larynx, resulting in his death from asphyxiation. A grand jury found no wrongdoing, and I could find no citation indicating the officers had lost their job. The family settled for $1.9 million (the judge did decline to extend qualified immunity for the officers).

In 2015, police destroyed a Colorado man’s home in pursuit of a shoplifter armed with a handgun. When I say destroyed, I mean “… the tactical team bombarded the building with high-caliber rifles, chemical agents, flash-bang grenades, remote-controlled robots, armored vehicles, and breaching rams”. The house was condemned afterwards leaving Leo Lech homeless. The city compensated him with $5000. He took the city to court and an appeals court ruled in 2019 that he was entitled to no compensation, as the police were acting within their police power, not taking items as part of an investigation.

I could go on and on: a homeless person beaten to death by officers, Massachusetts state police using military helicopters to spot single marijuana plants, a retired unarmed Sunday School Teacher shot four times in her car (cop lied on his report, was convicted of manslaughter, served two years), but there was one final story that stayed with me.

In May 2014, one night just past 2 AM, police in full SWAT gear served a no-knock warrant in a small Georgia town. A roommate of an informant they had never used before had apparently bought methamphetamine at the house earlier in the day. Ignoring the minivan parked in front with the car seat in it and the kid sized play pool, police assumed no children were present in the house despite no actual surveillance having been conducted. Their target, it turned out, wasn’t present and when he was apprehended later in the morning, he was not armed. Nonetheless, they easily obtained a no-knock warrant on the flimsiest of information. Police broke into the house and threw a flashbang grenade inside where no less than four children under the age of ten were sleeping. It landed in the playpen of the youngest, a 19 month old baby, and exploded. The police found no contraband or illegal items, but the infant was put into a medically induced coma. A grand jury declined to indict the deputy who obtained that warrant (naturally), and the county paid out a multi-million dollar out of court settlement.

American police have been a threat to freedom for a long time and in many forms. Violent no-knock raids on unsuspecting families, drug enforcement that both fails to stop drug use while also stacking up bodies, executions of unarmed and nonthreatening citizens because they don’t obey police orders, burning infants, the stories sound unbelievable. They are clearly an out of control, unaccountable paramilitary force.

Let’s talk about the recent protests, the catalyst for this post. Left leaning protesters have focused on police abuses’ connection to racism. I stated earlier that American police are Red Guards without the communism. Leftists are extending that argument; instead of Red Guards murdering people for the Cultural Revolution, protesters point out that American police are murdering people due to systemic racism. John Oliver details this argument here. Libertarian critiques of the police state have tended to categorize the ideology of the police in terms of authoritarianism, or opposition to personal liberty; hence the focus on the enforcement of drug laws that infringe on individual autonomy.

Naturally, libertarians emphasize a narrative where police abuses can be counteracted by libertarian ideology while progressives emphasize an alternative narrative that can be solved by social justice. If you are a conservative, you are likely to be suspicious of these critiques as they seem self-serving. Nonetheless, both critiques have a solid basis: Black Americans are killed at a disproportionate rate, and many unnecessary deaths clearly occur when serving drug warrants on citizens who have done nothing violent. Moreover, compared to the Red Guards, American police are not nearly as ideologically cohesive, yet they remain a powerful and unaccountable force as we’ve seen. This creates a dangerous situation where many ideologies and interest groups have an incentive to influence the police for their own ends.

But let’s recall what we stated earlier. Are unaccountable paramilitary groups bad because of their ideology or their violence? I argue, it’s their violence.

And we’ve seen from the previous examples, American police are remarkably violent. But those were just anecdotes. Here is part of a table of countries, and highlighted in blue is the rate of police killings per 10 million people. The United States at 46.6 is surrounded by renowned criminal justice systems like Iraq and the Democratic Republic of the Congo and trails standout nations like Iran.

Wikipedia link

This is bad.

We don’t actually know the amount of people killed by the police in the U.S. because the government doesn’t require police departments to track that data. The data linked in the Wikipedia article is from the Fatal Encounters database, which suggests about 1800 people killed every year by American police. The Washington Post database focuses only on police shootings and indicates around 1000 people are shot to death by the police each year.

To drive the point home, let’s first consider developed countries. The United States is by far the worst developed country in terms of police killings per capita, but the distant second place is Canada (which is so far up on the table, I couldn’t include it on the screengrab). Canadian police kill around 10 people per 10 million population compared to America’s 46.6–nearly a five fold decrease. In fact, American police are significantly outperformed by those of Pakistan, a country where military coups are commonplace, and which only had its first peaceful transition between elected governments in 2013.

The Washington Post database suggests about 25% of those killed by police are Black, which is disproportionately high for their percentage of the U.S. population. But for the sake of argument, let’s pretend that we could wave a magic wand and prevent all Black killings by the American police. Even if we did that, our rate of police killings would remain 350% of the next highest developed country. And to be clear, Canada is the second worst developed country we have data on, most others are much better.

I want to reiterate that last point: American police killings are not 350% of Canada’s total police killings, but 250% higher deaths per capita even if there were no more Black victims of police violence.

In fact, even if this hypothetical scenario of drastically reduced police killings, the rate of American police violence would remain much worse than a country like Egypt’s. In 2018, Human Rights Watch wrote of the Egyptian election:

Since President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi secured a second term in a largely unfree and unfair presidential election in March, his security forces have escalated a campaign of intimidation, violence, and arrests against political opponents, civil society activists, and many others who have simply voiced mild criticism of the government.

This is the country that has a significantly less deadly police force than us. This is disgraceful.

So if you’re a conservative, and you feel left-wing (or libertarian!) activists have a differing ideology than you, you’re probably right. But I think you may have much more in common on this issue that you might initially believe. The question we must agree on isn’t “which ideology should an unaccountable paramilitary force within our borders have?”, the question is “do we want unaccountable paramilitary organizations murdering hundreds of citizens a year?”

If think you might have some common ground with reformists, here are some simple ways to make the police more accountable:

Against Hillary: Government Power and Criminal Justice

This is the fifth and final post in my series opposing Hillary Clinton’s candidacy. See the introduction in Part 1 here. Read my opposition to Trump here. Read why you should mathematically vote for a third party here.

Government Power and Criminal Justice

I could go on critiquing many more topics where progressives and libertarians disagree. I’m not sure that would help, so I’ll conclude with this broad section on government power. The fundamental problem we should all have with Hillary Clinton is that she trusts the government to fix every problem we face. But the government has no competition, is slow to change, is slow to respond, and wields a massive police state. Moreover, she also seems to believe government officials should always be trusted to act in the public interest. This seems to govern her position on her mishandling classified information, on her foreign interventions and wars, on healthcare, on government spending, on our right to know that our government is spying on us, and even on the right for people to publish books and movies critical of candidates near elections.

Let’s go back to some points I made in my Against Trump post. As noted by Conor Friedersdorf, the powers of the president apparently include ordering the execution of American citizens with drone strikes (something it seems Hillary Clinton implicitly approved of), detaining Americans suspected of terrorism indefinitely, and spying on millions of Americans with unconstitutional general warrants. Quoting me from the Trump piece:

The enormous amount of statutes on the books means it’s almost certain average people break laws every single day, and so these law enforcement agencies can always find probable cause to arrest you. Then they can stack up charges to force a plea deal, all at the discretion of prosecutors.  As it stands right now, there’s a strong case that the criminal justice system is biased, slow, and unfair, and that it deprives individuals of their rights. But now imagine Trump in charge of the DEA, FBI, intelligence services, and the military.

I later compare Trump to Nixon. My intention was to show that bad presidents have existed and they did terrible damage. Of course, Nixon and Trump in reality have little in common; Nixon was an unlikeable, calculating, politically successful military interventionist who also expanded the size and scope of the regulatory state and federal government while using his power to cover up his aggressive use of the state to fight his political rivals. In other words, he was literally Hillary Clinton in 2016. Imagine putting Richard Nixon in charge of the government today where he would have access to unprecendented surveillance, secret courts, and undeclared wars. This is what we face in a Clinton presidency.

One of the biggest issues in 2016 has been the way police interact with citizens, especially people of color. The trust Hillary Clinton has in the state is simply incompatible with the reality of police abuses. Libertarians, on the other hand, have been talking about police abuse for quite some time. Some of those ideas have been adopted by Clinton including an opposition to mandatory minimums, a prioritization of violent crime over drug crimes, and better police accountability. But Clinton’s positions are mixed at best: harsher sentences in the 90s that helped create the massive prison population we see today weren’t just introduced for drug possession, but also firearm possession. Clinton hasn’t discussed liberalization of firearm ownership, and in fact has called for the suspension of 2nd amendment rights for people placed on the unaccountable and discriminatory terrorist watch list. Her support for the Patriot Act and NSA spying doesn’t really imply a worldview that wants to reduce the police powers of the state. Indeed, her stances in all sorts of areas from undeclared wars to videogames reflect a fundamental belief in civilian deference to state power. Yet as countless examples have shown, including Eric Garner, Sandra Bland, Tamir Rice, and more, deferring to a powerful police state allows harm to come to innocents.

The more power the state has, the more likely there will be confrontations between actors of the state and citizens, and confrontations where there is a power imbalance leads to abuses. Even if we could end racism today, we would not be solving the problem; police that still abuse their power, just against people of all races equally are still immoral. Whether it’s the justice system broadly, government surveillance, regulatory powers, or foreign interventions Hillary Clinton does not offer a fundamental change from simply trusting in the state to fix the problem. Our military has been involved in trillion dollar middle eastern wars over the past 16 years. The justice system is so broken that prosecutors can force 95% of defendants to accept plea bargains. We are outraged at the power the police are wielding without oversight. Yet we are making the problem worse by putting a reincarnation of Richard Nixon into the White House, after she has already brazenly broken the law and gotten away with it. This is simply the wrong answer.

Comment on Reddit.

Picture Credit: Public Domain Image, from National Archives and Records Administration.