Holte's corner

Waging Law and Order

Sometimes the Cop has to look just a little like the people he is dealing with. The classic "good cop" is usually the mythical sherriff with the badge, the strong sense of justice, and a no nonsense attitude towards enforcing that justice. In reality cops are sometimes on the border between good and evil, sometimes crossing over into various kinds of corruption, from the alienated violent kind such as epitomized by the Barretta "Dirty Harry" or "Man with No Name" characters, to the mild sleazy kind epitimized by "Car 54 where are you" stereotypes of Cops best being found by looking for the nearest donut shop. Unfortunately corruption can also occur as depicted in movies where cops are shown doing their own drugs, taking bribes, or shaking down customers.

These kinds of behaviors lead to a breakdown of law and order. They lead to chaotic and violent situations where the Cops become the criminals -- just another gang of toughs. When that happens there is no law and order nor legitimate authority. Laws become something that both sides snear at and use or ignore strictly for their own benefit. When that happens the word for the society that results is "oppression." That is why no good police force can exist without strong rules applied to the cops; and without a strong "Internal Investigations" or similar to enforce those rules. Cops hate those rules as restrictive and resist them -- and well they should -- but they are for the good of the Cops. And eventually most of them come to appreciate them.

Likewise, the Constitution of the US and the concepts of rights and duties are no good without people who respect it and carry out it's precepts. These rights are inalienable. DA's like cops have to abide by the rules. Presidents have to abide by the oath of state they took to uphold the constitution. If the laws are not enforced, or are enforced arbitrarilly, then the US constitution becomes no better than particularly inadequate toilet paper. That is why this "torture issue" is so important to be resolved. I think that Congress has to debate what torture is and put the results of that debate into law. The various "cops" and "Intelligence" para-cops can't operate without clear and ethical guidelines. Some practices may be effective, but are unethical.

Moreover, it is possible to be fairly coercive without being unethical. This just takes more work. One of the forms of corruption that cops are subject to is the tendancy to round up the "usual suspects" for crimes rather than do genuine detective work. In the current "war on terrorism" this is expressed in the various shortcuts such as declaring that insurgents, because they don't belong to the geneva convention, shouldn't be treated within the rules of international law and common decency. Not because they deserve it by actions (obviously many of these people don't) but because they are human beings and it is a principle of US justice that people have inalienable rights. Even non-citizens outside the US.

Because it is their right as human beings -- at the very least prisoners should be afforded respectful treatment as human beings. That doesn't mean "coddling them" or letting them do anything they want. Incarceration is both punitive and aimed at preventing societies from dangerous people. And sometimes it is part of a system of "policing" aimed at getting information needed to do more policing. For that to work, the "police" need access to prisoners to question them. And some non-violent coercion may be the best way to get that information. And some "soft violence" is part of the nature of incarceration. So drawing the lines too idealistically is unrealistic.

Good cop bad cop; Making someone endure hours of questioning without sufficient sleep; other coercive measures, must be rated on two things. Do they provide reliable information? Are they fair to everyone? Fairness means not just whether or not they give information but on how reliable that information is. Criminals are by nature liars and information about any situation can prove unreliable even when eyewitnesses are present. So it's not fair to take away someone's life and liberty without investigating thoroughly whether or not the person is detained or being punished on evidence or not; the principle behind "habeus corpus."

Justice is accurate punishment and reward. For that reason putting prisoners in the hands of untrained or badly trained intelligence officers is unjust by nature. And for that reason the administrations policies need to remember the importance of the two words "justice" and "inalienable rights."

Posted by cholte at January 10, 2005 06:08 AM