New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio's call for a cessation of the protests is consistent at least in part with a belief that the protests and the murders of the police officers are linked. That there is some causation there. The argument goes, and this is one that has been made explicitly by the police union head and the former governor of New York, that in acknowledging that there is an issue of unnecessary police violence in Eric Garner's killing the mayor was not supportive of the police, that in that way and others, the mayor was creating an atmosphere in which the police would be targeted for violence and that these murders were the predictable--and they were predicted by NYPD--result.
That argument, that Mayor de Blasio has "blood on his hands" in the words of the police union chief, fails. The police argument for linkage starts with the protests over the non-indictment. It should start with the killing of Eric Garner. The police argument for causation starts at the same point. Using police logic it does not matter what the protests are about, any protests are inevitably going to involve the police for crowd control, any protest brings the police into contact with citizens "breaking the law" e.g. by obstructing the streets (there's a law against that) by causing a crowd to gather (that's called disturbing the peace), precisely the crimes, at a minimum, in which protesters engage. Following police logic, all of the peaceful protesters should have been arrested for those "broken windows" crimes since:
1. The protesters qua protesters broke the law.
2. Police officers should arrest all law-breakers.
A. Eric Garner was breaking the law by selling untaxed cigarettes. Ergo,
B. The police had to arrest Eric Garner.
And, continuing the logic:
3. Since these protests were against the police, not for example, for the firing of the New York "Jets" coach, the mayor had even more a duty to "support" the police.
4. In whatever the police do, including killing a man during an arrest for selling untaxed cigarettes.
5. That he didn't support the police sufficiently for the police means that Mayor de Blasio is drenched in the blood of the murdered officers.
Under police logic there is no action that citizens should ever protest, especially not police action and a mayor who doesn't stand by the police no questions asked "has blood on his hands."
So yeah, the police argument fails. There is an issue of unnecessary police force in Eric Garner's killing. Mayor de Blasio represents all of the people in New York City, one of whom was Mr. Garner, another of whom was the officer who killed Garner, two more were the officers murdered Saturday. He has a duty when one of his constituents is killed by another of his constituents to speak and to act. He must ask questions; he must not support the police in whatever they do.
The police do not have to arrest all law-breakers. They have discretion, which their superiors, the mayor at the top, the citizens who they "serve and protect" at the bottom entrust to them. When the police abuse that trust, as they did in using deadly force to arrest a man for selling untaxed cigarettes, as they would have had they arrested all protesters for disturbing the police, in arresting many others under "broken windows" policing, in racial profiling, then their ultimate boss, the mayor, must not support the police.
Citizens are not going to support the police whatever they do. They are going to protest. It is not a legal duty to protest injustice in the United States of America but it should be done and it is a right. Americans have the right to protest. Inevitably, the exercise of the right to protest results in law breaking. We entrust our police officers with discretion in protecting the rights of all.
Following the logic of the police the people who have "blood on their hands" in the murders of Wenjian Liu and Rafael Ramos are not Bill de Blasio and the protesters, the people who have blood on their hands are the police. I do not subscribe to the police logic however you turn it, wherever the finger points. The only person who caused the deaths of Officers Lius and Ramos is Ismaaiyl Brinsley.
I am Benjamin Harris and this is Public Occurrences.
That argument, that Mayor de Blasio has "blood on his hands" in the words of the police union chief, fails. The police argument for linkage starts with the protests over the non-indictment. It should start with the killing of Eric Garner. The police argument for causation starts at the same point. Using police logic it does not matter what the protests are about, any protests are inevitably going to involve the police for crowd control, any protest brings the police into contact with citizens "breaking the law" e.g. by obstructing the streets (there's a law against that) by causing a crowd to gather (that's called disturbing the peace), precisely the crimes, at a minimum, in which protesters engage. Following police logic, all of the peaceful protesters should have been arrested for those "broken windows" crimes since:
1. The protesters qua protesters broke the law.
2. Police officers should arrest all law-breakers.
A. Eric Garner was breaking the law by selling untaxed cigarettes. Ergo,
B. The police had to arrest Eric Garner.
And, continuing the logic:
3. Since these protests were against the police, not for example, for the firing of the New York "Jets" coach, the mayor had even more a duty to "support" the police.
4. In whatever the police do, including killing a man during an arrest for selling untaxed cigarettes.
5. That he didn't support the police sufficiently for the police means that Mayor de Blasio is drenched in the blood of the murdered officers.
Under police logic there is no action that citizens should ever protest, especially not police action and a mayor who doesn't stand by the police no questions asked "has blood on his hands."
So yeah, the police argument fails. There is an issue of unnecessary police force in Eric Garner's killing. Mayor de Blasio represents all of the people in New York City, one of whom was Mr. Garner, another of whom was the officer who killed Garner, two more were the officers murdered Saturday. He has a duty when one of his constituents is killed by another of his constituents to speak and to act. He must ask questions; he must not support the police in whatever they do.
The police do not have to arrest all law-breakers. They have discretion, which their superiors, the mayor at the top, the citizens who they "serve and protect" at the bottom entrust to them. When the police abuse that trust, as they did in using deadly force to arrest a man for selling untaxed cigarettes, as they would have had they arrested all protesters for disturbing the police, in arresting many others under "broken windows" policing, in racial profiling, then their ultimate boss, the mayor, must not support the police.
Citizens are not going to support the police whatever they do. They are going to protest. It is not a legal duty to protest injustice in the United States of America but it should be done and it is a right. Americans have the right to protest. Inevitably, the exercise of the right to protest results in law breaking. We entrust our police officers with discretion in protecting the rights of all.
Following the logic of the police the people who have "blood on their hands" in the murders of Wenjian Liu and Rafael Ramos are not Bill de Blasio and the protesters, the people who have blood on their hands are the police. I do not subscribe to the police logic however you turn it, wherever the finger points. The only person who caused the deaths of Officers Lius and Ramos is Ismaaiyl Brinsley.
I am Benjamin Harris and this is Public Occurrences.
