auf wiedersehen Logic

Bill Neinast

The German phrase auf wiedersehen is very appropriate today.  The English translation is until we see each other again or until we meet again.

Today, though, it is auf wiedersehen logic.  Auf wiedersehen reasoningAuf wiedersehen facts.

City councils around the country are throwing common sense out the window as they try to placate the mobs demanding defunding and/or disbanding police departments.

The only sensible step that has been taken in this rush to placate is to ban or prohibit the use of choke holds in the arrest or control of an individual.

Next, however, was a big step off the cliff of logic.  Some years ago in a similar atmosphere of mob protests, the police use of deadly force  in controlling the violence was prohibited.  Tear gas and bean bag bullets were the only means permitted.

As of today, those two control methods are not even permitted in some jurisdictions.  Guess the cops will just have to break up the looting, destruction of property, arson, fighting, etc. with bare hands.  Billy clubs probably are not allowed either, because those wooden batons might hurt rioters.

Although it is difficult to determine which of the proposals or considerations is the most ludicrous, the discussions of mandating “zero racial disparity” in law enforcement has to take the title.

Anyone seriously proposing this policy obviously got double “F” or “F Plus” in any logic course he or she took.  How can any reasonable person believe that the crime rate is directly tied to population rate?  How would they describe or define the black homicide and assault rate in Chicago?

On second thought, placing the most ludicrous crown on the zero racial disparity movement was premature.  Defunding or disbanding police departments has to be king.  Some police departments are already understaffed and are having difficulty recruiting new members.

The recruiting is difficult because of growing vilification  of police, the danger involved, and the relatively low pay.  How will defunding or cutting the budgets of forces that are already struggling help that?

This was summed up by Tulsa Police Major Travis Yates, whose father was also a policeman.  In his view, "I wouldn’t wish this job on my worst enemy. I would never send anyone I cared about into the hell that this profession has become. It’s the only job you can do everything right and lose everything. It’s the only job where the same citizens you risk your life for hate you for it."

The consideration of disbanding police forces is so far out there that it hardly warrants discussion.  Nonetheless, when a proponent of this drastic action was asked who would respond to 911 calls about an assault or domestic violence in progress, her response was, “A neighborhood association would.”

Unfortunately, she was not asked to elaborate.  No one asked her how many neighborhoods there were without hotheads like the three who shot the black man jogging through a white neighborhood in Georgia.

So here’s the perspective.

According to Google, in 2018 there were 586,665 full time law enforcement officers in the United States.  These men and women put their lives on the line every day to protect their neighbors’ lives and property.

That number is equivalent to more than 50 U.S. Army divisions.  Any organization that large is bound to have a few bad actors.  

Today it appears that a bunch of armchair quarterbacks calling themselves city council members are going to straighten out this organization of 686, 665 civil servants.  Before they do so, they should be required to get out of their armchairs and spend 30 ten hour days in a patrol car.  Half of those patrols should be daytime and half nighttime.

When the accompanying patrol officer is called to a crime scene, the armchair quarterback should not be allowed to remain in the patrol car.  He or she must get out and confront the suspect close and personal.

Dispatchers should know which patrol cars are carrying the quarterbacks and try to dispatch those cars to the more serious calls.

After experiencing even one encounter when the visiting quarterback might have felt his or her life was in danger, the decisions on whether to shorten the reigns on law enforcement might be much different from those being contemplated today.

After experiencing the thrown rocks and molotov cocktails while retreating from a marauding crowd “exercising their First Amendment Rights of free speech,” they might reconsider their ban on tear gas and bean bullets in controlling the crowds.  

Those control methods were brought in to replace lethal weapons in such situations.  What can be used now?  Billy clubs break bones, so they are probably prohibited also.  Will the police just have to stand there now and ask in a pleasant voice, “Please do not enter the Mayor’s office?”

So auf wiedersehen logic, reasoning, and common sense.  We hope this will not be a long absence.



HOME page>                  NEW STUFF page> 
          WRITING CONTENT page>       GUEST ARTISTS page>Home_1.htmlNew_Stuff.htmlEssays.htmlGuest_Artists.htmlshapeimage_1_link_0shapeimage_1_link_1shapeimage_1_link_2shapeimage_1_link_3