Article discusses the blind adulation of law enforcement in the U.S.

::::::::

The tragic and yet unexplained death of Freddie Gray while in custody of the Baltimore Police has once again brought the issue of police violence and misconduct to the forefront of the news cycle. The Freddie Gray matter followed a pattern that has become all too familiar in the U.S. A young man from a minority community is arrested for trivial, or in the case of Gray non-existent offenses, has a brief interaction with the police and inexplicably suffers a resulting death. Anger in the community, largely resulting from generations of poverty, despair and violence at the hands of police acting as an occupying force, boils over into civil unrest that by and large displaces the original police misconduct as the focal point of the media's attention.

The Baltimore protesters were quickly labeled as "thugs" and "criminals" by various media sources. President Obama took a similar tact when he said, "My understanding is you've got some of the same organizers now going back into these communities to try to clean up in the aftermath of a handful of protesters, a handful of criminals and thugs who tore up the place."

Regardless of how one wishes to characterize the protesters, many of those commenting on the events in Baltimore attempted to create a false dichotomy in which legitimate criticism of the murder of a suspect while in police custody was somehow akin to supporting rioters and looters. Under this Manichean view, you either support the police who are the purported representatives of order, or you favor the protesters who have been characterized as anarchists, thugs and criminals.

Media personalities attempting to offer a more nuanced view have been roundly criticized. CNN's Brooke Baldwin cited in her reporting the fact that many police officers are veterans of U.S. conflicts abroad who view those in the communities they serve as hostile insurgents.

While speaking with Democratic Congressman Elijah Cummings of Maryland, Baldwin recalled a conversation with a Baltimore City councilman about police officers not living in the communities they purportedly represent when she said that, "I love our nation's veterans, but some of them are coming back from war, they don't know the communities, and they're ready to do battle."

Baldwin's observation was immediately met with outrage and she quickly backtracked with an on-air apology. "I absolutely misspoke," Baldwin said on CNN the following morning. "I inartfully chose my words, 100%. And I wholeheartedly retract what I said. I have the utmost respect for the men and women in uniform. To all of you, I owe you a tremendous apology."

Writer David Masciotra claims that Americans "worship" military members and police officers. He goes on to say that the kneejerk use of the term "hero" to describe such persons "betrays a frightening cultural streak of nationalism, chauvinism, authoritarianism and totalitarianism."

Masciotra further explains,"Put a man in uniform, preferably a white man, give him a gun, and Americans will worship him. It is a particularly childish trait, of a childlike culture, that insists on anointing all active military members and police officers as 'heroes.'"

As Masciotra points out, it has somehow been decided that we are going to label all police officers as "heroes" and meet with open derision anyone who dares to suggest otherwise. Never mind the inconvenient fact that it is statistically more dangerous to be logger or a fisherman than it is to be police officer. If someone dons a badge, we make them into a god in uniform.

Much of the knee-jerk worship of the police comes from allegedly conservative sources who routinely criticize a variety of public servants ranging from teachers to public health officials.. Yet criticism of the police results in the inevitable name calling and labeling of critics as "libs," "cop haters" and "criminals." The conservative ideals of limited government, freedom from government oppression and guarantees of liberty and due process suffer immediate defenestration when they come in conflict with what has become reflexive police worship.

Contrary to what most conservative profess to believe, they are vociferously supporting a group of government employees with a very strong union who enjoy incredible job security while earning extremely comfortable salaries and rather cushy retirement pensions, all funded by taxpayers. This same group of public servants is rarely held accountable for actions that would result in a lengthy term of imprisonment for an ordinary citizen.

Somehow, even legitimate oversight and accountability of law enforcement is recast as "hatred of the police." New York City Patrolman's Benevolent Association President Pat Lynch is among the most vociferous of those demanding blind worship of law enforcement. In Lynch's worldview, police are never wrong, critics are haters and even the most outrageous police misconduct must be unquestioningly defended. One of his favorite retorts to allegations of police wrongdoing is "Police officers have civil rights, too."

Despite the blind support given police from most conservative circles, there are those who have begun to question the propriety of this position. John Whitehead of the staunchly conservative Rutherford Institute has written extensively on the dangers of militarized police that place themselves above the law. Whitehead, author of Battlefield America: The War on the American People, writes that "'We the people'" have now come full circle, from being held captive by the British police state to being held captive by the American police state." The overarching theme of Whitehead's writings is that the State, through the police, are seeking complete obedience and compliance.

Indeed, many reflexive police worshipers subscribe to the theory of "comply or die." This line of reasoning holds that those who suffer at the hands of the police caused their injuries by failing to fully submit. Proponents of this canard claim that the victims of police violence and misconduct are they themselves to blame for in some way "angering" the police.

Manifestations of this were seen after the tragic murder of Eric Garner at the hands of New York City police in various "I can breathe" shirts and signs. The message that "I can breathe because I obey the law" is anecdotal and absurd on many levels. The idea that being allowed to breath is contingent on one's obedience is not only insulting, but distinctly un-American.

Aside from being patently offensive, it supposes that everyone victimized by police violence was in some way breaking the law. The fact that Freddie Gray committed no crime and was at worst only running (arguably away from Baltimore police who have a long and sordid history of committing violence against area residents) does not seem to impact those whose blind worship of law enforcement acts as an impenetrable barrier to logic and reason.

But perhaps most offensive is the notion that in order to avoid injury and extra-judicial killing, one must obey the State through its police agents. Adherents to this belief may claim to be conservatives, but in reality can be better identified as statist. Their unyielding worship of the State and those in its employ reveal a totalitarian bent that threatens those in society who still place a value on individual freedom.

Authors Website: http://www.onlinepublishingcompany.info

Authors Bio:

Barry Scott Sussman- Born and raised in New Jersey. Graduated from Rutgers University with a BA in Sociology. Graduated with a JD from the Benjamin Cardozo School of Law specializing in Federal Criminal Procedure and Federal Prosecutorial Misconduct. Worked as a legal commentator during the Clinton impeachment debacle helping educate the public about federal prosecutors and their outrageous abuse of power. Active in the field of credit and collections for over 30 years before a federal trial, conviction and subsequent imprisonment. Now an outspoken critic of the United States Department of Justice and its proclivity towards mass incarceration. Current Criminal Justice Editor at Online Publishing Company Ltd., www.onlinepublishingcompany.info.