I used to think police work a uniquely noble and important job. I still do. However, I now wonder why anyone would want to do it, and I worry those that do are quickly becoming precisely the wrong people for the job. Here’s an example of what 8 years of the Age of Obama has done to our police, and our nation, via The New York Daily News:
Chicago police released dramatic video showing a hulking gang member, allegedly high on PCP, attacking an officer — a brutal beating that left the cop, who said she didn’t use her gun because she feared public backlash, severely injured.
Parta Huff, 28, allegedly slammed the cop’s head onto concrete pavement over and over again, leaving her with a concussion as well as shoulder, wrist and neck injuries, the Chicago Tribune reported.
The bodycam video, released Friday, showed a other cops repeatedly shocking Huff with Tasers as he continued to ripped out chunks of the attacked officer’s hair.
Huff, 28, was charged with attempted murder of a police officer and aggravated battery to a police officer for the Oct. 5 attack.
The officer — who was rushed to a hospital after her partner and other cops pried Huff off of her — told Chicago’s police chief she didn’t shoot her attacker because she feared it would tarnish the force’s reputation.
‘She looked at me and said she thought she was gonna die,’ Superintendent Eddie Johnson said a day after the attack. ‘She knew that she should shoot this guy, but she chose not to because she didn’t want her family or the department to go through the scrutiny the next day on national news.
Be certain, gentle readers, that this female officer is not alone. I’ve no doubt that a great many officers are afraid of using force, particularly deadly force. I’ll discuss the consequences of this shortly.
Police said Huff was high on PCP when he crashed his car in front of a liquor store on Oct. 5. When the officer and her partner arrived, Huff tried to walk away from the scene and ignored their commands, authorities said.
The duo chased after Huff and tried to handcuff him, the newly released video showed. Huff struggled with the officers, who used a Taser on him. Eventually, Huff and one of the officers fell to the ground amid the chaos.
That’s when Huff began slamming the cop’s head onto the ground and pulling at her hair, video showed.
‘Let her go! Let her go!’ the officer’s partner yelled as more back-up officers ran over to help.
Body-cam video from another cop showed a group of officers struggling to restrain Huff as he continued to yank on his victim’s hair.
‘Ugh, he’s ripping my…’ she groaned before a police radio crackle drowned out her painful pleas for help.
Well, why didn’t they just tase the guy? They did:
The officers Tased Huff several times before they pried him off of the bleeding cop. They handcuffed him and carried him to a police wagon, as the injured officer explained to another official how she had been attacked.
Unfortunately, Tasers don’t always work, even if the criminal isn’t wired on PCP, even if their intended electric charge is delivered. Taking the circumstances as they are presented in the article—I have no other information on this incident—the officers would have been more than justified in using deadly force.
People on PCP are uniquely dangerous. They’re usually paranoid, enraged, and because they feel no pain, are able to exhibit extraordinary strength, sometimes actually tearing muscles away from bone and/or breaking (their own) bones. I’ve often watched people on PCP do one handed cop pushups as they struggle with multiple officers piled on top of them, trying to restrain them without seriously injuring them.
In this case, Huff was actually trying to murder the officer. She could not resist him, and banging her head repeatedly into concrete could easily have seriously injured or killed her at any moment. Her fellow officers couldn’t do anything to stop the assault for what must have seemed a frighteningly long time. They too would have been justified in shooting him, and not just once, but as many times, as quickly as possible, to make him stop trying to murder their colleague.
But they didn’t. None of them. Instead, they chose to use far less effective methods of stopping Huff, causing their female colleague to incur more, and more serious injuries.
Why would they do that? Why would any rational person, being beaten to death, fail to use the most effective means at hand to stop the assault? Why would anyone with the power to stop such an attack likewise fail?
The Ferguson Effect. It has spread across the nation, and while there are doubtless police agencies that will not immediately throw their officers to the wolves for any or no reason, the combination of an anti- American, racist, anti-police President, and the same in our Attorney General and Department of Justice, a lawless FBI director, and state and local politicians ready to turn on the police in an instant, has every police officer in America—at the very least—worried. Let us not forget an almost entirely progressive media determined to deny the existence of the Ferguson Effect because acknowledging it destroys many of their most cherished narratives. Even so, it is becoming harder every day for the media, and those it serves, to deny reality. For a brief article on the Ferguson Effect’s particularly pernicious effects in Chicago, go here for the invaluable Heather MacDonald.
This will not be the last such incident we see, and some will surely end with the deaths of police officers. I’ve no doubt many similar incidents have already occurred, but fortunately, the officers were able to escape without serious injury. I’m absolutely certain that most of America’s police officers are becoming far less proactive in their work, ignoring behaviors that would, in the past, at the very least have caused them to stop and question suspicious people. Many are surely ignoring potentially dangerous situations when they know no one would know about them, and for good police officers, that’s a great many. Good cops know where to find, and catch, bad guys.
The consequences of this are going to be severe. Not only are experienced, professional officers leaving police work—the best and brightest can find fulfilling jobs in many other fields—police agencies are discovering that recruiting is becoming far more difficult.
Most people don’t understand the process. Initial screening revolves around minimal education and criminal record requirements. This removes people at the lowest levels of intelligence and those with disqualifying criminal records. Felony convictions are absolute disqualifiers, and even felony arrests not resulting in convictions may be. Many misdemeanors, such as a few traffic tickets, aren’t normally a problem, but a history of such things, a DUI, a misdemeanor domestic violence arrest, and similarly serious offenses are disqualifiers.
All agencies require an initial written test designed to weed out people without minimum—and I do mean minimum—levels of general knowledge and common sense. A surprising number of people are disqualified at this level.
Those remaining must pass a physical fitness test, which eliminates those with chronic ailments, and those incapable of the minimum requirements of the job. Then there are personal interviews, and for a much smaller pool, polygraph tests.
All of this is time consuming and expensive, and produces nothing more than a list of potentially qualified candidates, normally ranked from top to bottom. No police chief or sheriff wants to hire from the bottom of this list. They normally consider, depending on the size of the agency and the size of the eligibility list, no more than that top 10 to 15% qualified.
That’s just the beginning. Once hired, a new officer spends most of their first year in training. It will normally be a year before that officer is deemed ready to patrol solo.
What matters to America, to every citizen, is which of two groups will wield the awesome powers of arrest: smart, honest and ethical people who take their oaths seriously, who are determined to do the right thing and to fairly and equally uphold the law and the Constitution, or people much more inclined to take advantage of their position, people who see their oath of office, like Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, as a general guideline, or merely an impediment to their desires, something to be ridiculed and ignored.
What’s happening now is more and more smart officers are seeing the writing on the wall. As they bail out, or choose never to enter the career field, that leaves far less capable and ethical people to populate eligibility for hiring lists.
I’ve begun to wonder if this isn’t part of a long-term goal of the Left. Only recently have they begun to seriously fly trial balloons about federalizing all of America’s police forces. A prelude to that has been DOJ lawsuits forcing agencies to lower their hiring standards, and also taking over agencies with consent decrees, and forcing the same lowering of standards. The DOJ is also restricting the ability of officers to deter and stop crime, while helping to empty the prisons of felons.
All of this is also causing the best and brightest, and the most experienced, to leave law enforcement, while preventing the next generation of ethical, highly qualified police officers from seriously considering the job.
I’ll be writing about this in more detail soon, but for now, consider, gentle readers, just who we want as police officers. Do we want the smartest, most ethical and professional people we can find? People aggressive in seeking out and catching criminals and preventing crime where and whenever they can? Or do we want the people from the bottom of the eligibility list, people barely mentally, intellectually, physically and ethically fit to do the job? Do we want people who are more easily influenced and led, people who will be more than willing to ignore the Constitution, and do as they are ordered?
I know what America’s elite want. They’re making that plain enough. More soon.