The Truth about Police Use Of Force: Part 2

The United States Constitution grants sworn law enforcement officers the authority to give lawful orders to citizens with the expectation of compliance. Citizens are legally required to comply with any lawful order by a sworn law enforcement officer. This could be a silent order, like turning on their lights to pull someone over for a traffic stop. It could be ordering someone to separate from another party at a domestic disturbance. There are many scenarios in which a law enforcement officer can issue lawful orders. A lot of misinformation gets distributed about what Cops can and can not tell you to do. Often, this leads to non-compliance, which leads to situations escalating.

Before I go forward, I must make one thing clear: I am not saying that every order given by every law enforcement officer is lawful. I'm not saying that law enforcement doesn't bear any responsibility (how persons are approached, the clarity of the order, etc.). My point is this: almost every incident of a Cop shooting a civilian started with the civilian not complying with lawful orders. 

Although it wasn't a shooting, the "Rodney King incident" in 1991 is a high-profile use of force incident still today. Two California Highway Patrol Officers attempted to stop King for speeding. He refused to stop and led CHP, later joined by LAPD, on a several-mile pursuit that reached speeds of over 100 mph. The force that was used is something that a reasonable person could argue was excessive. What can't be argued is this: if King had initially complied with the lawful orders of the CHP, this incident would have never happened. The LAPD officers would have never even been involved. Four LAPD officers were charged, but later acquitted, after a lengthy trial.

In 2014, a Ferguson, Mo, Police Officer shot and killed Michael Brown. Brown and a friend were walking in the middle of the road, impeding traffic. The officer ordered both of them to the sidewalk. His lawful order was ignored. Brown also fit the description of a person who allegedly had just committed a theft at a nearby convenience store. The St. Louis County prosecutor presented the case to a grand jury. The Grand Jury voted not to return indictments for the officer. 

As I mentioned in part 1, in 2016, Alton Sterling was shot and killed by a Baton Rouge Police Officer. Officers were called to a local convenience store with reports of a man waving a gun and threatening people. Sterling fit the description and was approached by officers upon their arrival. Sterling ignored lawful orders given by the officers. After a United States Department of Justice and Louisiana Attorney General investigation, no charges were filed against either officer.

I know some people will read this, and their immediate reaction will be that ignoring a cop's lawful order isn't a death sentence. I will agree with the statement one hundred percent. But this conversation is about preventing tragedy. These three incidents are three of the most notable use of force police use of force incidents in recent history. All three incidents started with a civilian refusing to obey a lawful order by police. As I mentioned in Part 1, I think law enforcement shares this responsibility. But if our goal is to change the ending, we cannot ignore the beginning. Anyone in more than a few fights can attest to this; they are dirty, dangerous, and scary. There is nothing sexy about a fight in real life. People get hurt, and people die, period. Altercation prevention is the only surefire way to guarantee safety during any police/civilian interaction. 

These incidents and the aftermath have created a climate that has become very dangerous for all of us (law enforcement and civilians). Citizens not liking or respecting law enforcement is their right. Being defiant to lawful orders isn't. We have to stop teaching our young adults that they don't have to listen to the police. I will repeat it: I'm not saying Cops are always right. I'm saying this: We cannot keep letting it be okay and even encourage people to disobey orders by police. If they are wrong or out of line, there are ways to handle it after the interaction. I'm not saying citizens shouldn't ask questions or expect an explanation. Being defiant to lawful orders, especially during the initial exchange, is very dangerous (I will cover this more in-depth in part 3). Unless this trend stops, we will not see a decrease in police/civilian violence. 

We can keep arguing about who is wrong or right when people are dead, and countless lives are changed forever, or we can start looking at the beginning. It's tough to argue that when we start changing the beginning, the ending will also change. 

In part 3, I will dive into training, who actually wins in a fight.