Short Take: The Divide Between Brass And The Beat Cop

See? Not even the police approve of Trump’s absurd and illegal call to rough up perps.

Prominent police chiefs and prosecutors first raised their voices months ago against the Trump administration’s attempt to revive failed policing strategies and its repeated suggestion that fair, constitutional law enforcement is somehow inconsistent with public safety.

Some of those officials spoke out again over the weekend, after President Trump gave a speech on Long Island urging police officers to rough up suspects arrested in their campaign against MS-13, a violent gang with roots in Los Angeles and Central America.

That’s great that “prominent” chiefs and prosecutors spoke out. They should. Trump’s speech was typically moronic and wrong. The brass running police departments immediately realized the damage to their public relations efforts his rhetoric would cause. And, to be less cynical about it, they want their officers to behave professionally, courteously and lawfully. There may be some differences about what exactly that means, but they don’t want cops to be bad.

And that’s what Trump, in his ignorant pandering, called for. It’s good for bad cops to be bad. They should be bad.

But the Times fails to grasp that there are two distinct groups at play in the world of policing. There are the “prominent” chiefs and there are the cops on the beat, the ones walking streets, driving cruisers, finding drugs exactly where they put them and tuning up perps who get a little too mouthy.

The assumption in the Times’ homage to “prominent” chiefs who disagree with the dreaded Trump is that cops are a monolith, all alike, all the same. Malarkey. Greg Prickett knows better.

The President’s words were clear:

[W]hen you see these thugs being thrown into the back of a paddy wagon—you just see them thrown in, rough—I said, please don’t be too nice. Like when you guys put somebody in the car and you’re protecting their head, you know, the way you put their hand over? Like, don’t hit their head and they’ve just killed somebody—don’t hit their head. I said, you can take the hand away, okay?

It didn’t take long for responsible police leaders to respond. The IACP released a statement covering the police use of force. The New York Times and other news outlets noted that police department after police department issued statements that excessive force would not be tolerated and officers would be punished if they mistreated suspects.

But the underbelly of copworld doesn’t necessarily see the same thing as the guys with shiny stars.

I was discussing this issue at RallyPoint,† where some immediately defended the speech. One warrant officer who is also a California deputy sheriff made statements that it is worse now than ever for police officers, and that Trump’s statements are appropriate. This is typical of the new mindset of police officers. First, his statement is factually incorrect. The crime rate is at its lowest level in about 50 years, and there are far fewer officers being killed now than in the late-80s, early-90s.

The brass can condemn Trump’s rhetoric and should. But the rank and file aren’t buying. Maybe they aren’t as enamored with the big shots as the Times is, or maybe they just believe what they want to believe, which makes cops the unappreciated victims of this lawless society the president spoke about. And that means they get to bang heads, because “these people” deserve it.

Many police officers don’t like this, naturally. That’s who Trump was pandering to, the audience he was targeting. It encourages bad officers to step over the line, convinced of their own righteousness.

Trump played to them, which is why they stood behind him, in front of him, and cheered and applauded. The brass can spout whatever it wants, and the Times will take it seriously because it wants to. Anything to condemn Trump. Anything to close the gap between cops and its political agenda. But the beat cops? They don’t care. And they don’t read the Times. And when you wonder why they treat people so roughly, so disrespectfully, so violently, after the Times told you they know better, this is why. The brass said the right thing, what it had to say. On the street, however, banging heads is still what cops do. Now with Trump’s endorsement.


Discover more from Simple Justice

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

5 thoughts on “Short Take: The Divide Between Brass And The Beat Cop

  1. B. McLeod

    The cheers and applause were the giveaway, no matter how many disclaimers are passed down from above for media consumption. It won’t be the chiefs or deputy chiefs passing out the side order of beatings with the arrests.

    1. SHG Post author

      It’s actually kind of amusing to see the divide happen when cops go up the ranks to supervisor. “He used to be a good guy, and now he’s brass.”

      1. Greg Prickett

        Scott, it works something like this. When you are an Officer, you don’t trust anyone with rank. When you’re a Corporal, you don’t trust anyone with a gold badge. When you’re a Sergeant, you don’t trust anyone with bars or stars.

        At this point a Lieutenant will pop up, asking about them and their trust–and you answer that it doesn’t matter, because when you are promoted to Lt., you also have your brains sucked out just prior to the pinning ceremony…

  2. Pingback: Trump Says Cops Should Rough Up Suspects; Receives Backlash From Police Officials – Curtis Ryals Reports

Comments are closed.