Serving the University of Toledo community since 1919.

Abayateye: The death sentence on the street

Philemon Abayateye, IC Columnist

image_pdfimage_print

I felt terrified seeing the blue, flashing police lights in my rearview mirror as I was pulled over last Saturday night. I was pulled over after the victory over Iowa State for driving without my lights on. It’s ironic how much fear we have of the same institution that should make us safe.

We expect the police to protect lives and property but today, “killer cops” have become judges on the street. They decide who deserves to live or die by dispensing “the death sentence on the street,” as a University of Toledo’s law professor, Jelani Exum, described it. Killer cops know that by simply saying, “I was afraid for my life,” they have almost certainly secured their freedom from the crime of killing unarmed civilians. This is sad — and it’s why we fear the police for even random traffic stops. We’re not sure if the officer is a “killer cop” or one that knows that all Americans have rights under the Constitution. It’s natural to be concerned these days.

For all kinds of police brutality, including deaths, Canada recorded 127 incidences between 1932 and 2015; the UK had 70 cases from 1920-2015, while Germany recorded 19 cases since 1967. According to The Economist in August 2014, “it is hardly surprising that cops resort to the weapons more frequently” in America. Forget about the publicized deaths of Michael Brown, Eric Garner, Freddie Gray, Walter Scott or 12-year old Tamir Rice, and focus on the 814 unarmed civilians who became unfortunate victims of these “killer cops,” according to Killed By Police 2015. These killings have become common among the American public and seriously diminished public trust in American law enforcement.

I don’t downplay the daily threats our officers face on the streets. This year, 26 on-duty cops were killed by gunfire including Dwight Maness, Joseph Ponder and Charles Gliniewicz in recent months. There’s a real threat out there on the street but we expect great discretion from officers as they make these life and death decisions. Too bad we can’t revive lost lives. As a world leader, America should not imply that it’s fine to kill an unarmed citizen just because an officer feels threatened for his life.

Lately, I’ve been trying to understand why our cops are prone to using deadly force when that should be the last resort. Could it be the thrill of pulling a trigger? Or has our society’s general apathy to the issue encouraged this growing trend? There could be other factors as well.

There’s no denying that academic qualifications tend to correlate with job performance. This is still true for police officers. Professor William Terrill of Michigan State found that cops with only a GED tend to use force more than those with higher credentials. Also the public is not happy when bush-league cops don’t receive just punishment for their crimes. It’s common for police departments to use victim-blaming and shaming strategies to cover up unjust activities. The most common punishments are paid administrative leaves or suspensions which do little to stem gross indiscretion. At other times grand juries also fail to indict “killer cops.” This encourages police impunity and faux pas which fuels public distrust. For instance, how does Ohio’s Beaver Creek or Cleveland police departments expect the families of either John Crawford III or Tamir Rice to trust them or believe they won’t suffer similar fates?

The streets of Ferguson and Baltimore provided glimpses into the unnecessary but growing militarization of America’s police forces. The general feeling was as if these police departments wanted to put up public reenactments of Iraq and Afghanistan.

There is also a lack of a national database to catalogue incidences of police brutality. Information is power and awareness of the actual magnitude of the situation is important for change.

Racial characterization of the situation by referring to the race of victims only divides public sentiment and collaboration needed for changing policing policy. There’s no doubt race relations is a big problem in America but the victims of police brutality transcend races. It’s not a black or white or Hispanic issue; it’s an American problem that needs an American solution.

If we can clean our police departments and streets of “killer cops,” we would improve public trust and our relationship with cops. A civilian shouldn’t feel he is about to have his last conversation when he encounters the police. We should have more training and professional development opportunities for police officers in addition to regular psychological evaluations. Killer cops should receive just punishment for their crimes. As a deterrent, it would perhaps be helpful to society if families of victims ask for huge financial settlements for these crimes. It should be very expensive for cops to kill unarmed civilians. The police should also improve their public outreach, especially with populations that feel unnecessarily discriminated against by the police.

The real change however starts with police officers’ decision to be very thoughtful in their actions. Lethal force shouldn’t be the first option because our streets are not war zones. Imagine the possibilities of American law enforcement truly protecting lives rather than taking it.

Philemon Abayateye is a doctoral student in geography and planning.

Print Friendly

2 Comments

  • [email protected]

    Well said Mr. Abayateye. Glad you made it.

    [Reply]

    Philemon Reply:

    Thanks!

    [Reply]