Carte Blanche: There's A New Sheriff In Town
Reza Estakhrian
Once more we’ve come to the point where partisan politics makes a pertinent issue nearly impossible to effectively navigate. The recent shooting of Jacob Blake seems like more of the same: police abusing authority and unloading seven shots into the back of a Black man on camera. The details of the Jacob Blake case still need to be fully vetted, but it is impossible to defend a clear misuse of force by law enforcement.
I believe society needs a well-regulated and fair police force. Robert Nozick’s position on the necessity of police for the sake of rights and property protection is a guiding principle in my evaluation of a just and minimal state. The police should be protecting your rights, so when we see short clips of police egregiously abusing their power protected by the rules of the state, it’s unsurprising that faith in the system is shaken.
However, political leaders and activists must be self-aware in how they craft their message, regardless of how difficult change in the American system might be. Furthermore, activists must be careful that their message does not veer out of step with the true desires of the citizens and victims they claim to represent.
A Gallup Poll released in early August asked respondents of White, Black, Asian, and Hispanic backgrounds their opinion on this poll question: “Would you rather the police spend more time, the same amount of time or less time as they currently spend in your area?” Sixty-one percent of the Black respondents said that they wanted police to spend the same amount of time in their neighborhoods, and twenty percent said that they want police to spend more time in their neighborhood.
The poll shows that over 81% of Black respondents want police to spend the same or more time in their neighborhoods. A poll like this shows how out of touch activists can be, such as the New York Times article from earlier this summer that called for the outright abolition of police. This sort of phraseology undermines the data that displays support for reform. Polling shows 80% of Black respondents wanting major changes (versus minor or no change) when asked “which of the following best describes your view about changes that may or may not need to be made to policing in the United States?”
There are serious flaws in the criminal justice system: qualified immunity makes it nearly impossible to hold police accountable for constitutional violations, police unions wield an enormous amount of power and shield cops that consistently exhibit problematic behavior, and the 1033 Program makes military equipment too easily accessible to domestic law enforcement. Nothing screams police state like your friendly neighborhood police officer pulling up on the local protest in a Sherman tankーa complaint littered career in tow.
I’m being a tad facetious, but Sen. Rand Paul agrees with me, our search for security and stability has unloaded billions of dollars of military equipment into the hands of officers shielded by qualified immunity. However, the reasonable voices are too often drowned out by videos of rioters beating the hell out of elderly dissidents and prominent voices like Shaun King calling for the destruction of images of “White Jesus.” Furthermore, King recently called for the identity of the officer that shot Jacob Blake and, regardless of your politics, that spells a recipe for disaster in civil society.
The anger felt by many towards the police community is just, but some of the proposed solutions are simply not publicly favorable. Misrepresenting the wishes of those you’re claiming to defend is in itself problematic. We need peaceful demonstration. It’s a sacred right in this country. We need rational policy advocates that can help solve these issues rather than demagogue to citizens righteously angry at a flawed system.
How should we go about this? Instead of calling for defunding or abolishing the police, we should shift focus to community policing. Most “Defund the Police” advocates call for “communal policing solutions,” that sort of thing exists: the sheriff. The sheriff’s department is mandated in most states across America, and a county sheriff is an elected position. Chief of police is rarely mandated, and it is not an electable position.
Elections are possibly the strongest form of political accountability because an official will not remain in power if he does not serve his community. Practicality wise I think advocating for the elimination of armed law enforcement might be a dangerously naive position, and could cause a power vacuum on a sub-state level allowing dangerous extra-legal actors to exert influence, but if an elected sheriff holds that power, then the people have a hand on the wheel. We must remember Locke’s social contract, the police derive their authority from the consent of those they police. If we wish to change the way we police in this country, we ought to have the ability to do as much.
Our law enforcement are supposed to be by the people and for the people, so what better way to further promote that than focusing resources into elected officials. Of course the situation is more complex than simply diverting funds from the police to elected positions, but there has to be an effort to promote innovative ideas. Otherwise we are at a societal impasse.
Both sides of the political aisle have fumbled the football on police reform negotiations after the George Floyd incident. Sen. Tim Scott (R-SC) considering qualified immunity a “poison pill” for policy negotiation is almost as infuriating as Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) calling Scott’s reform proposal “token [and] half-hearted.” These are our national leaders. The fact that qualified immunity is a “poison pill” is downright unacceptable, but the absurdity of political negotiation is overshadowed when cultural leaders divert attention from the cause.
Nikole Hannah-Jones, author of the controversial New York Times “1619 Project,” won a Pulitzer and has been deemed an important cultural voice, but says that “destruction of property is not violence.”
Looks pretty violent to me. It also looks violent to many other Americans, and it would be great if she repeated that same quote to the citizens of Minneapolis who now have a $500 million dollar pricetag to restore their city. Furthermore, favorability of Black Lives Matter has been steadily decreasing after being at an all-time high of 52% favorability earlier this summer. BLM is a powerful organization with a powerful voice, but the leaders hurt the credibility of the message when they don’t even condemn looting in Chicago, instead of labelling it as “reparations.”
Compromise isn’t often in the vocabulary of the modern progressive, nor is change the forte of the staunch conservative. However, we must be able to hold law enforcement accountable to the people. I think the libertarian movement’s approach to law enforcement might be the most culturally relevant and feasible plan to overhaul the police system. Threatening to destroy the American law enforcement system entirely will only further encourage reactionary rhetoric, but neglect of the issues will further disenfranchise a righteously indignant faction. So it’s time to let the people speak and decide how their communities are policed. Different areas need different solutions and as times change solutions change, but the people need always be paramount. You should have a voice in how policing works in your community, and for that to become a reality we need to reformulate the role of sheriffs as representatives of the governed organizing law enforcement.
Our state is supposed to serve the people who own it: us. It’s time we held it accountable.
