Opinion | How to Change an Entrenched Police Culture
06/22/2023
More from our inbox:
To the Editor:
Re “Police in Minneapolis Blatantly Disregarded Civil Rights, U.S. Says” (front page, June 17):
Once a police culture becomes entrenched, whether it is good or bad, it is very difficult to change it. But it can be done.
I am a retired deputy police chief with over 25 years of experience. I worked in Portsmouth, N.H., in a department that had a rather rough reputation when I joined it in 1987. There were officers who worked there who liked to hurt people, who had a “thump ’em and dump ’em” mentality, who abused their authority and power.
Officers who did not operate that way — and I was one of those officers — tended to be isolated, viewed with distrust, sometimes even threatened as a way to force them to leave the department.
But over time, officers were promoted to the upper ranks who made it safe for officers like me to do their jobs without fear of retribution from other officers, and officers who had questionable ethics and morals were either forced to retire or were fired.
I say over time. It took more than 10 years for the tide to turn, and I am proud to say that in 2004 my department won the Robert Trojanowicz National Award for excellence in community policing.
Changing a police culture has to come from the top, and it cannot be a “wink and a nod” policy. Because society imbues police officers with the power of life and death, officers must be held to a higher standard, and if they cannot meet that standard, they must be dismissed. Police work is not for everyone. The best officers are called to it.
A consent decree is a good start for the Minneapolis Police Department, but it will take more than that to turn that department around. It will require diligence, time and, most important, consistency in enforcing department policies. It will require working closely with the police union, weeding out and disciplining and/or dismissing officers who violate department policies, and complete and total transparency to the public it serves.
Len DiSesa Dresher, Pa.
To the Editor:
The two-year Justice Department investigation that dealt with the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis concluded that racial bias was present in the Minneapolis Police Department and that officers were more likely to choose violence in chance encounters with minority groups.
Although the report lists future Minneapolis corrections to this problem, it fails to address a possible consideration for the frequently observed police violence during minor altercations.
Less than 7 percent of the population has served in the military, but nearly 25 percent of those in our law enforcement agencies are veterans. Military service affords veterans unique skills suited for law enforcement jobs, but those agencies do not significantly assess these veterans for PTSD.
While symptoms of PTSD do not disqualify candidates for these jobs, agencies do not extend significant psychological help to these individuals, either before or during their employment. As a result, daily stress can quickly produce an exaggerated PTSD response to an insignificant altercation.
Better psychological evaluation for a veteran candidate before law enforcement employment and continued psychological help may be a viable avenue to avoid police brutality.
Juan Orellana Wake Forest, N.C.
To the Editor:
Re “How the ‘Defund the Police’ Movement Failed” (news article, June 17):
Not only were calls to “defund the police” not realistic, but they were harmful as well, as they were exploited by opponents of police reform. The constructive and productive mantra should have been “de-escalate,” “reallocate” and “retrain.”
Bruce Ellerstein New York
Searching for the Submersible: Public Funds for Private Risk
To the Editor:
While I hold out hope the passengers aboard the submersible return safely to their families, this event raises questions about what amounts to public insurance for private risk. It has been reported that the passengers paid a quarter of a million dollars each for this expedition. What should be the role of society and taxpayers with respect to extravagant, high-risk adventurism gone awry?
If space tourism someday includes, say, trips to the moon, should public resources be mobilized to rescue adventurers should they be stranded there? Should the cost of these extreme adventures include insurance to pay for recovery efforts, or acknowledgments that public resources will not be spent for such rescues?
The U.S. Navy and Coast Guard and the Canadian Air Force have been mobilized to find the submersible. Contrast this with the recent response of the Greek Coast Guard to migrants abandoned at sea (“Greece Criticized for Not Helping Migrants at Sea,” front page, June 20).
It’s disturbing to consider the greater concern for wealthy adventurers assuming great risk for pleasure than for migrants escaping war, famine and economic misery.
Richard Plevin Portland, Ore.
A Gift to Justice Alito, and the Supreme Court’s Ethics Problem
To the Editor:
Re “Alito Defends Using Billionaire’s Jet, Then Judging Cases Involving Him” (news article, June 22), about the ProPublica report on Justice Samuel Alito:
Justice Potter Stewart once said on recognizing hard-core pornography, “I know it when I see it.” I think every American who is not sitting on the Supreme Court recognizes hard-core violations of judicial ethics the same way: “We know it when we see it.”
That Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Alito and Clarence Thomas are unable to see, acknowledge and speak to their ethical lapses makes me question their ability to interpret the law correctly — any law.
Lois Berkowitz Oro Valley, Ariz.
To the Editor:
“I want to assure people that I am committed to making certain that we as a court adhere to the highest standards of conduct,” Chief Justice John Roberts said last month. “We are continuing to look at things we can do to give practical effect to that commitment.”
For that to be true would require the resignation or removal of Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, which is eminently practical. Of course, egregiously unethical people never do the ethical thing, like resigning.
Paul W. Palm Evanston, Ill.
To the Editor:
There is a simple fix to the gift problem with Supreme Court justices. Both the Republican and Democratic Parties should agree that all Supreme Court nominees be specifically asked a set of questions during future confirmation hearings. Such questions should include clear-cut pledges not to take the kinds of gifts mentioned in the article about Justice Samuel Alito.
This kind of pledge should even go a step further and require that nominees agree to resign if they violate the pledge. This would be easy to accomplish, and to be honest, I’m surprised such a scenario is not already in place.
Douglas Migden Seattle
Family Values: Fred and Donald Trump
To the Editor:
The June 17 letters from a psychiatrist and a psychologist offer insights into Donald Trump’s behavior. I propose a different take based on his relationship with his father, Fred, who was aloof, stingy with approval, hypercritical, a social climber and fixated on wealth.
Donald Trump followed in his father’s footsteps and has collected trophies including real estate, money, trophy wives, a trophy luxury estate and the adulation of his fans. All to prove to the ghost of his father that despite his own pathetic insecurity, he amounted to something as measured by the values of his father.
Ronald Kallen Highland Park, Ill. The writer is a nephrologist.
We and our partners use cookies on this site to improve our service, perform analytics, personalize advertising, measure advertising performance, and remember website preferences.Ok
Home » Analysis & Comment » Opinion | How to Change an Entrenched Police Culture
Opinion | How to Change an Entrenched Police Culture
More from our inbox:
To the Editor:
Re “Police in Minneapolis Blatantly Disregarded Civil Rights, U.S. Says” (front page, June 17):
Once a police culture becomes entrenched, whether it is good or bad, it is very difficult to change it. But it can be done.
I am a retired deputy police chief with over 25 years of experience. I worked in Portsmouth, N.H., in a department that had a rather rough reputation when I joined it in 1987. There were officers who worked there who liked to hurt people, who had a “thump ’em and dump ’em” mentality, who abused their authority and power.
Officers who did not operate that way — and I was one of those officers — tended to be isolated, viewed with distrust, sometimes even threatened as a way to force them to leave the department.
But over time, officers were promoted to the upper ranks who made it safe for officers like me to do their jobs without fear of retribution from other officers, and officers who had questionable ethics and morals were either forced to retire or were fired.
I say over time. It took more than 10 years for the tide to turn, and I am proud to say that in 2004 my department won the Robert Trojanowicz National Award for excellence in community policing.
Changing a police culture has to come from the top, and it cannot be a “wink and a nod” policy. Because society imbues police officers with the power of life and death, officers must be held to a higher standard, and if they cannot meet that standard, they must be dismissed. Police work is not for everyone. The best officers are called to it.
A consent decree is a good start for the Minneapolis Police Department, but it will take more than that to turn that department around. It will require diligence, time and, most important, consistency in enforcing department policies. It will require working closely with the police union, weeding out and disciplining and/or dismissing officers who violate department policies, and complete and total transparency to the public it serves.
Len DiSesa
Dresher, Pa.
To the Editor:
The two-year Justice Department investigation that dealt with the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis concluded that racial bias was present in the Minneapolis Police Department and that officers were more likely to choose violence in chance encounters with minority groups.
Although the report lists future Minneapolis corrections to this problem, it fails to address a possible consideration for the frequently observed police violence during minor altercations.
Less than 7 percent of the population has served in the military, but nearly 25 percent of those in our law enforcement agencies are veterans. Military service affords veterans unique skills suited for law enforcement jobs, but those agencies do not significantly assess these veterans for PTSD.
While symptoms of PTSD do not disqualify candidates for these jobs, agencies do not extend significant psychological help to these individuals, either before or during their employment. As a result, daily stress can quickly produce an exaggerated PTSD response to an insignificant altercation.
Better psychological evaluation for a veteran candidate before law enforcement employment and continued psychological help may be a viable avenue to avoid police brutality.
Juan Orellana
Wake Forest, N.C.
To the Editor:
Re “How the ‘Defund the Police’ Movement Failed” (news article, June 17):
Not only were calls to “defund the police” not realistic, but they were harmful as well, as they were exploited by opponents of police reform. The constructive and productive mantra should have been “de-escalate,” “reallocate” and “retrain.”
Bruce Ellerstein
New York
Searching for the Submersible: Public Funds for Private Risk
To the Editor:
While I hold out hope the passengers aboard the submersible return safely to their families, this event raises questions about what amounts to public insurance for private risk. It has been reported that the passengers paid a quarter of a million dollars each for this expedition. What should be the role of society and taxpayers with respect to extravagant, high-risk adventurism gone awry?
If space tourism someday includes, say, trips to the moon, should public resources be mobilized to rescue adventurers should they be stranded there? Should the cost of these extreme adventures include insurance to pay for recovery efforts, or acknowledgments that public resources will not be spent for such rescues?
The U.S. Navy and Coast Guard and the Canadian Air Force have been mobilized to find the submersible. Contrast this with the recent response of the Greek Coast Guard to migrants abandoned at sea (“Greece Criticized for Not Helping Migrants at Sea,” front page, June 20).
It’s disturbing to consider the greater concern for wealthy adventurers assuming great risk for pleasure than for migrants escaping war, famine and economic misery.
Richard Plevin
Portland, Ore.
A Gift to Justice Alito, and the Supreme Court’s Ethics Problem
To the Editor:
Re “Alito Defends Using Billionaire’s Jet, Then Judging Cases Involving Him” (news article, June 22), about the ProPublica report on Justice Samuel Alito:
Justice Potter Stewart once said on recognizing hard-core pornography, “I know it when I see it.” I think every American who is not sitting on the Supreme Court recognizes hard-core violations of judicial ethics the same way: “We know it when we see it.”
That Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Alito and Clarence Thomas are unable to see, acknowledge and speak to their ethical lapses makes me question their ability to interpret the law correctly — any law.
Lois Berkowitz
Oro Valley, Ariz.
To the Editor:
“I want to assure people that I am committed to making certain that we as a court adhere to the highest standards of conduct,” Chief Justice John Roberts said last month. “We are continuing to look at things we can do to give practical effect to that commitment.”
For that to be true would require the resignation or removal of Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, which is eminently practical. Of course, egregiously unethical people never do the ethical thing, like resigning.
Paul W. Palm
Evanston, Ill.
To the Editor:
There is a simple fix to the gift problem with Supreme Court justices. Both the Republican and Democratic Parties should agree that all Supreme Court nominees be specifically asked a set of questions during future confirmation hearings. Such questions should include clear-cut pledges not to take the kinds of gifts mentioned in the article about Justice Samuel Alito.
This kind of pledge should even go a step further and require that nominees agree to resign if they violate the pledge. This would be easy to accomplish, and to be honest, I’m surprised such a scenario is not already in place.
Douglas Migden
Seattle
Family Values: Fred and Donald Trump
To the Editor:
The June 17 letters from a psychiatrist and a psychologist offer insights into Donald Trump’s behavior. I propose a different take based on his relationship with his father, Fred, who was aloof, stingy with approval, hypercritical, a social climber and fixated on wealth.
Donald Trump followed in his father’s footsteps and has collected trophies including real estate, money, trophy wives, a trophy luxury estate and the adulation of his fans. All to prove to the ghost of his father that despite his own pathetic insecurity, he amounted to something as measured by the values of his father.
Ronald Kallen
Highland Park, Ill.
The writer is a nephrologist.
Source: Read Full Article