Over the last 72
hours, there have been a number of attempted murders of police officers in Los
Angeles County, yet there has been no community or media outrage.
Two prime examples
include an LAPD SWAT officer who was severely injured during a shootout with a
suspected gunman following a pursuit in South Los Angeles. In another case, a
sheriff’s deputy is facing a long recovery after undergoing surgery for life-changing
injuries he suffered in an unprovoked attempted murder by an “unarmed” man
already on probation for assaulting a peace officer. Witnesses said the deputy
was escorting a male suspect in a mall when the suspect unexpectedly turned on
the deputy and hit him several times, knocking the deputy to the ground, and
continuing his assault.
We should all be should be alarmed when
those whose job it is to fight crime on a daily basis are being targeted for
murder. Why are there so many others become reflexively critical of police? Why do these individuals
jump to the twisted conclusion that police officers’ lives are any less
endangered when encountering “unarmed” suspects than when they’re staring down
the barrel of a gun? Why do these same individuals assume all officer-involved
shootings—while always tragic—are always “bad” shootings? These individuals are
cherry-picking the facts and doing a disservice to the communities they serve.
Recently the LA Times editorial about the Ezell Ford shooting stated, “It is hard to
believe that police cannot refine their encounters with unarmed citizens to
avoid the use of deadly force.” In other words, according to the Times,
“unarmed” residents pose no threat to officers.
The reality is that
when somebody attacks a police officer, they should expect the reaction to
their attack will be swift, sure and met with enough force to end the assault. LAPPL President Tyler Izen respnded by stating, “While waiting for the facts to
be determined, I feel the need to restate the obvious. When a person attempts
to take an officer’s gun from them, no matter their physical or mental condition,
we should expect an officer to respond accordingly to save their life—and that
likely includes the use of deadly force.”
We also note with dismay that while compelled to devote
numerous pages of coverage to the unfolding situation in Ferguson, Missouri,
the Los Angeles Times Editorial Board cannot be stirred to write even a murmur
of protest over the violence directed against police officers there.
Apparently, throwing Molotov cocktail bottles, rocks, and other debris at
police officers is just not worthy of their commentary. Yet, you can be sure
that if a police officer were the perpetrator of equivalent violence, entire forests
would be decimated to print the hand-wringing editorials from the Los Angeles
Times.
If a suspect takes or
attempts to take an officer’s gun by force, he has sent a clear message that he
intends to murder that officer and possibly others, and must be stopped for the
safety of all. Whether that aggressive suspect is under the influence of a
controlled substance, alcohol, or has a mental illness, the target of his
attack will be in immediate danger nonetheless. When anyone grabs for the
officer’s gun, they become an armed suspect, and in most cases, predetermined
the tragic outcome of events.
I must ask why there is such little outcry from the public when an officer is murdered? And why is there little mention of police shootings of young unarmed White men. Had the races been reversed in Missouri, there would have been no outcry. You know, there were just over a hundred Blacks shot by police, yet there were over 5000 Blacks shot by Blacks last year alone? Where is the respect for Blacks for one another?
I'm sure this will become yet another travesty of justice like Rodney King and Travon Martin.
"Nuff said.
.
No comments:
Post a Comment