I’ve been thinking for quite some time about what police reform would look like. Frankly, most of it is impossible to accomplish without significant citizen buy-in. One of the things that must change is getting ride of bad officers.

Officer Chauvin is a perfect example of what needs to happen but didn’t happen. Various reports say he had anywhere between 12 and 18 citizen complaints. That can’t be allowed to happen.

A friend of mine in law enforcement told me that officers often get disciplined and kicked off the force. This friend then told me that officers that often get booted from the force then file an appeal in court, where the court orders them to be reinstated.

Another thing that we discussed was how difficult it was to work in big cities. My friend said that big city mayors frequently don’t put a high priority on public safety, instead putting a higher priority on quality-of-life issues than on public safety.

That’s foolish because people don’t care how many parks or bike trails there are when the city is overrun with violence. If cities don’t get the core functions of government right, everything else is meaningless. That led the conversation in another direction. When Minneapolis or St. Paul don’t get the money that they want in LGA, they immediately talk about cutting police and firefighters.

I might be wrong but I think that, under R.T. Rybak, they cut 2 officers and a firefighter but they were happy that they didn’t have to cut the city’s bike trail coordinator. This speaks volumes about liberals’ priorities. The Democrats’ priorities aren’t America’s priorities.

I used to think that more training was essential to better policing. Today, I’m convinced that better civilian leadership is essential. Politicians that moisten their finger, then play to the crowd, aren’t leaders. They’re just politicians. When holding office is more important than doing what’s right, corruption quickly follows.

There’s more to reforming law enforcement but that’s enough for tonight to chew on. Check back with LFR later this week for more on the subject.

3 Responses to “What law enforcement reform should look like”

  • Nick says:

    In 1967, the US Supreme Court basically gave law enforcement “qualified immunity”, which shields public officials from liability, even when they break the law.

  • eric z says:

    The Attorney General will investigate, and there already is an administrative agency complaint of denial of civil rights.

    The rule of law is being followed.

    Jumping prematurely to conclusions is a path facing potential error and having to walk back inflammatory assertions.

  • Gary Gross says:

    What does that have to do with law enforcement reform? That being said, Ellison is a former defense attorney. Color me skeptical of his prosecutorial skills.

Leave a Reply