MW, I will share a couple of thoughts about your essay. Whenever I effected an arrest of an adult, or juvenile in a “populated” area, the first thing I had to consider was the safety of the by-standers. When I contacted a suspect I knew I was going to arrest, I didn’t dilly dally around. I wasn’t concerned with their feelings. What I was concerned with was if they would try to run or get the crowd whipped up. I agree with you that public arrests can be beneficial to everyone. Each situation is different and needs to be handled that way. It sounds like the new Chief forgot one of the primary tenets of leadership, you praise in public and discipline in private. It sounds like there was an opportunity for the Chief to initiate some department training if that was a policy he wanted to institute. My hunch is he came from a larger department in a more urban setting.
Your hunch is right. While not from a huge city, he is from a Puget Sound city, so plenty big.
I also certainly agree, had he not mentioned what he found as a fault with his Officers response in his first public statement, nothing that followed would have likely come about. And I certainly imagine his Officers would have felt much better supported.
Another error, in my mind, is that sometimes when a storm is brewing because of what one may have said it is best to step back, shut up, and think a bit. Having worked for a long time in a media intensive, high scrutiny environment, I'm aware of how compelling the feeling of a need to reply in the moment can be. But most often doing so is a mistake. Better to stop and think instead of shooting from the hip. Apologizing for the initial statement, then apologizing for the apology... none of that will ever work, because people will keep pouncing.
In any event, despite the PR nightmare, I can't see any error in the Police response. They got the kid in handcuffs before he could harm anyone else, and that has to be the overriding consideration I think. And I can't help but believe that it might have had a positive impact on some other kid who might have been dreaming about doing something bad.
MW I read this during my lunch break and comments have swirled through my brain all afternoon. I finally realized there are so many thoughts that it warrants an article as well. Look for "Social Amblyopia" on Ouachita Optic Thursday morning. I'm linking back to this article as the inspiration for mine.
Awesome to know that it inspired you to write an essay of your own! I'll look for it, and please feel free to drop a link in the comments here when it is published, that should help drive some traffic to it.
MW, I have you by a few years and was working on my uncle's farm from 6 or 7 then go to market until ten that night. When I wasn't working, I did all the things kids can't do today without supervision. I'm going to make a lot of the ladies mad, but mothers of the 60s to today became overprotective and P-whipped the men to go along with it. That isn't the only thing, but lawyers were graduated in record numbers and lawsuits or the threats of stopped kids being kids doing dumb things. I feel I grew up in the best time for being a kid right after WW II to late 50s.
I think that my parents missed the overprotective bit. My Brother and I functioned without much supervision at all. And managed to live through it! But, of course, they both grew up on farms themselves, and that is an environment where kids need to learn things.
MWB Bailey, If we have laws that do not appear to be applied, then we have suggestions. Those who are not good willed or good natured are only bound by what they perceive will be enforced. If we fail to encourage or reinforce good order, anarchy ensues.
I found myself considering this recently as it relates to our obligations, and the real or perceived lack of consequences for failing to meet them. If we fail to encourage or require our erring Brethren to uphold their obligations and commitments, will they?
Worse yet, what happens if those who willingly honor their obligations feel their efforts and sacrifices are not valued by those who are unwilling to address these challenges as their duties and obligations require? Will they stay?
Peace and harmony are a fragile balance, if we do not preserve them, they will not maintain themselves.
MW, I will share a couple of thoughts about your essay. Whenever I effected an arrest of an adult, or juvenile in a “populated” area, the first thing I had to consider was the safety of the by-standers. When I contacted a suspect I knew I was going to arrest, I didn’t dilly dally around. I wasn’t concerned with their feelings. What I was concerned with was if they would try to run or get the crowd whipped up. I agree with you that public arrests can be beneficial to everyone. Each situation is different and needs to be handled that way. It sounds like the new Chief forgot one of the primary tenets of leadership, you praise in public and discipline in private. It sounds like there was an opportunity for the Chief to initiate some department training if that was a policy he wanted to institute. My hunch is he came from a larger department in a more urban setting.
Your hunch is right. While not from a huge city, he is from a Puget Sound city, so plenty big.
I also certainly agree, had he not mentioned what he found as a fault with his Officers response in his first public statement, nothing that followed would have likely come about. And I certainly imagine his Officers would have felt much better supported.
Another error, in my mind, is that sometimes when a storm is brewing because of what one may have said it is best to step back, shut up, and think a bit. Having worked for a long time in a media intensive, high scrutiny environment, I'm aware of how compelling the feeling of a need to reply in the moment can be. But most often doing so is a mistake. Better to stop and think instead of shooting from the hip. Apologizing for the initial statement, then apologizing for the apology... none of that will ever work, because people will keep pouncing.
In any event, despite the PR nightmare, I can't see any error in the Police response. They got the kid in handcuffs before he could harm anyone else, and that has to be the overriding consideration I think. And I can't help but believe that it might have had a positive impact on some other kid who might have been dreaming about doing something bad.
There comes a time when you have to put the shovel down and stop digging.
Yep!
MW I read this during my lunch break and comments have swirled through my brain all afternoon. I finally realized there are so many thoughts that it warrants an article as well. Look for "Social Amblyopia" on Ouachita Optic Thursday morning. I'm linking back to this article as the inspiration for mine.
Awesome to know that it inspired you to write an essay of your own! I'll look for it, and please feel free to drop a link in the comments here when it is published, that should help drive some traffic to it.
MW, I have you by a few years and was working on my uncle's farm from 6 or 7 then go to market until ten that night. When I wasn't working, I did all the things kids can't do today without supervision. I'm going to make a lot of the ladies mad, but mothers of the 60s to today became overprotective and P-whipped the men to go along with it. That isn't the only thing, but lawyers were graduated in record numbers and lawsuits or the threats of stopped kids being kids doing dumb things. I feel I grew up in the best time for being a kid right after WW II to late 50s.
I think that my parents missed the overprotective bit. My Brother and I functioned without much supervision at all. And managed to live through it! But, of course, they both grew up on farms themselves, and that is an environment where kids need to learn things.
Here is the article I was prompted to write after reading this one. https://ouachitaoptic.substack.com/p/social-amblyopia
MWB Bailey, If we have laws that do not appear to be applied, then we have suggestions. Those who are not good willed or good natured are only bound by what they perceive will be enforced. If we fail to encourage or reinforce good order, anarchy ensues.
I found myself considering this recently as it relates to our obligations, and the real or perceived lack of consequences for failing to meet them. If we fail to encourage or require our erring Brethren to uphold their obligations and commitments, will they?
Worse yet, what happens if those who willingly honor their obligations feel their efforts and sacrifices are not valued by those who are unwilling to address these challenges as their duties and obligations require? Will they stay?
Peace and harmony are a fragile balance, if we do not preserve them, they will not maintain themselves.