Recently, I claimed that everyone\u2014politicians, academics, and media commentators\u2014who promoted the idea that police brutality is a national \u201cepidemic,\u201d or even a \u201cgrowing concern,\u201d as one self-styled libertarian put it, share some culpability for the murders of the two NYPD officers who were gunned down in their vehicle right before Christmas.<\/p>\n
More specifically, they are responsible, obviously, not for intending or consciously encouraging the murder of police, but for creating a climate for police officers that\u2019s even more<\/em> hostile than that in which officers must spend their days and nights. \u00a0After all, we don\u2019t need Richard Weaver to inform us that \u201cideas have consequences.\u201d\u00a0 Even simpletons and liars will concede this much.<\/p>\n And only simpletons and liars can deny<\/em> that this idea\u2014<\/em>the idea of a \u201cpandemic\u201d of police brutality sweeping the nation\u2014has the consequence of endangering police officers.<\/p>\n Yet this idea isn\u2019t just dangerous.<\/p>\n It is also a lie<\/em>.\u00a0 And it is a huge <\/em>lie at that.<\/p>\n \u201cPolice brutality\u201d is an all-purpose piece of rhetoric that, as such, can mean anything and everything\u2014and, thus, nothing at all. <\/em>\u00a0When anti-police misologists\u2014a \u201cmisologist\u201d was the word that the 18th<\/sup> century philosopher Immanuel Kant used when referring to an enemy of reason\u2014<\/em>sound off about \u201cpolice brutality,\u201d they are referring to the police\u2019s unjustified<\/em> use of force<\/em>.<\/p>\n Now, all but anarchists concede that police are authorized to use force when necessary<\/em> and when it\u2019s proportionate <\/em>to the situation in question. When, however, the force deployed is unnecessary<\/em> and\/or excessive<\/em>, then the force is unjustified. This\u2014the unnecessary and\/or excessive use of force\u2014is \u201cpolice brutality.\u201d<\/p>\n So, is <\/em>this a growing national phenomenon, an epidemic<\/em>?<\/p>\n Not even close.<\/p>\n According to the Department of Justice\u2019s Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS), in 1999, of 44 million<\/em> people who had face-to-face interactions with police officers, less than one-half of one percent <\/em>was \u201cthreatened with <\/em>or actually experienced force.\u201d <\/em><\/p>\n Notice, the assertion here isn\u2019t that less than one-half of one percent\u2014it bears repeating: one-half of one percent<\/em>!\u2014<\/em>was subjected to the use of unjustified <\/em>force; the claim is that of 44 million, this miniscule fraction of people were either threatened with\u2014threatened with<\/em>\u2014or subjected to the use of force per se.\u00a0 <\/em><\/p>\n What this in turn means is that the number of people who were \u201cbrutalized\u201d by police is even smaller <\/em>than \u201cless than one-half of one percent.\u201d<\/p>\n According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics\u2019 Police-Public Contact Survey (PPCS), of a national population estimate of roughly 240, 000,000 comprised of people of 16 years of age or older, of those who dealt with the police in some capacity in 2002, 2005, and 2008, 1.5%, 1.6%, and 1.4%, respectively, were either threatened with or subjected to force by the police.<\/p>\n In 2008, 22% of those falling into the latter group admitted that they \u201cargued with, cursed at, insulted, or verbally threatened the police.\u201d\u00a0 Twelve percent reported that they were \u201cdisobeying\u201d and\/or \u201cinterfering\u201d with police.<\/p>\n Of the 84% of people who felt that the threat or use of police use force was \u201cimproper,\u201d only 14% filed a complaint.<\/p>\n To further underscore just what a whopper of a lie is the notion that \u201cpolice brutality\u201d is a nationwide epidemic, consider this: Among those included in the class of people who have had to deal with police are those who have called on <\/em>the police for assistance.\u00a0 And among those who have done so, about 85 percent <\/em>claimed to have been \u201csatisfied with the police response.\u201d\u00a0 Moreover\u2014shocker of shockers!\u2014Hispanics (86%) and blacks (85%) were slightly more <\/em>satisfied than were whites (83%). Finally, about 90 percent <\/em>of people who requested police assistance said that they would do so again.<\/p>\n Only in the fevered imagination of the cop-hating ideologue is \u201cpolice brutality\u201d a national crisis, or any sort of crisis.<\/p>\n Of course, none of this is to deny that there are bad cops.\u00a0 Genuinely abusive police officers, like those who abuse their power and authority anywhere, deserve to be crucified.\u00a0 But there is zero<\/em> justification for abstracting from these relatively few instances a rule<\/em> encompassing police officers generally<\/em>.<\/p>\n Numbers aside, just some rudimentary common sense\u2014a rare commodity nowadays, and practically nonexistent among the police-hating ideologues\u2014should<\/em> determine that in this Age of the Camera\u2014a time in which everyone and their mother is armed with surveillance apparatus\u2014the police have no real option but to be better behaved than ever before.<\/p>\n Jeremy Bentham described the doctrine of \u201cnatural rights\u201d as \u201cnonsense on stilts.\u201d\u00a0 The dogma\u2014and make no mistakes about it, for the anti-police misologists, this is nothing less than a dogma\u2014<\/em>that \u201cpolice brutality\u201d is an epidemic, a crisis, blah, blah, blah, is indeed nonsense on stilts.\u00a0 But it is more than this: It is nonsense that kills. <\/em><\/p>\n <\/p>\n \u00a0 <\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Recently, I claimed that everyone\u2014politicians, academics, and media commentators\u2014who promoted the idea that police brutality is a national \u201cepidemic,\u201d or even a \u201cgrowing concern,\u201d as one self-styled libertarian put it, share some culpability for the murders of the two NYPD officers who were gunned down in their vehicle right before Christmas. More specifically, they are…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":399,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1209","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"yoast_head":"\n