N.I. Krasnov wrote:
"Suburban culture, meaning the lack of gunfire, and Ghetto culture, meaning no lack of
gunfire, are equivalent?"
All cultures are equivalent. To distill the culture of North Minneapolis to the
presence of gunfire - perpetuated by a tiny minority of the residents - is absolutely,
completely absurd. Just as absurd as asserting that there is no gunfire in the
suburbs.
Krasnov again:
"Bridge misunderstandings? Why should it be incumbent on a suburbanite, or a resident
of any other city neighborhood, to <understand> the horrendous level of crap that goes
on in north Minneapolis?"
Why should it be incumbent on a resident of North Minneapolis (or Cedar-Riverside, or
Phillips) to put up with the horrendous level of crap coming from the MPD? The other
answer to that question is that if the particular suburbanite in question happens to
be an officer of the MPD, it's his/her JOB. If one does not want to deal with a
horrendous level of crap and be reasonably expected to keep one's cool (i.e. not use
unnecessary force), one can find another line of work. I hear dentistry is nice.
Krasnov:
"I want cops hired based on MERIT. Forget affirmative action, whether based on race,
gender or culture."
"Punishing officers for not being Somali enough? Oh, <PLEASE>...."
I want meritous cops as well. Unlike you, however, I believe that understanding the
culture in which you're doing your job is a vitally important skill in doing said job
well. The ability to communicate with the citizenry you're policing is necessary to
performing your duties. A lack of terror and rage when confronted with people who do
not look or act like you is absolutely central: it saves lives. The flipside is that
the presence of terror and rage _costs_ lives.
I want officers of the Minneapolis Police Department to do their jobs well, as it
seems you do. But it seems we have a disagreement as to what "well" means. Do you
believe shooting a fellow police officer with a submachine gun while he lies helpless
on the ground is a job well done? Beating a defenseless fourteen year old boy for so
little cause that you can't even trump up a charge? Shooting a mentally ill person
every now and then?
Krasnov? Yes:
"What a police officer is required to share with the citizenry is his sworn duty to
uphold the laws and Constitution, ethics, morality and objective truth."
I would submit that beating a fourteen year old boy for absolutely no reason violates
the law, the Constitution, ethics and morality. But this incident is in no way
isolated. It's endemic. As such, we must examine and change the system of policing
in Minneapolis to prevent such egregious violations of above. How is that not
eminently clear?
"Police are not there to protect anyone. They are commanded to keep the public peace,
investigate crime, and if possible, prevent criminal activity. The enforce the law.
The Courts provide justice."
I think your position - those pretty quotes from the statutes notwithstanding - is
purposefully myopic. What are laws for? Themselves? I believe we have a system of
law and justice to protect the vulnerable and/or innocent from those who would exploit
them and violate their inalienable rights. Law is the embodiment of the "negative"
rights of the individual: you have the right not to be killed, not to be robbed, not
to be beaten. That sounds a whole lot like "protection" to me, if the dictionary
definition ("To keep from being damaged, attacked, stolen, or injured; guard") is
correct.
Unfortunately, it appears that some members of the MPD and Police Federation agree
with you. We therefore find ourselves wondering who will protect us from the MPD.
Robin Garwood
Seward
TEMPORARY REMINDER:
1. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait.
2. If you don't like what's being discussed here, don't complain - change the subject
(Mpls-specific, of course.)
________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy
Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
