 |
Trust in a Time of Tear Gas: Reflections on Ferguson September 5, 2014 by Spencer Santilli |
 |
Ideally, bankers, business owners,
policemen, politicians, and media members are all people we should be able to
trust for our own financial, physical, legislative security and in theory—the
truth. However, each passing month
brings to light yet another reason not to trust these people as far as we could
throw them. As of late we’ve once again
lost the trust of the men and women taxpayers employ to protect their lives. After an alleged incident of police brutality surfaced
in Missouri, the town of Ferguson erupted into riots protesting the killing of
a young African American male by the police.
In response to this numerous important questions were raised and I'm
concerned we have reached the point where we can’t trust any authority figures to
be responsible with our money, physical safety, or information. The real
question is who is going to be around to protect us from our “protectors”?
I am a skeptic. I am most certainly jaded. I am without a doubt a pessimist. Trust really isn’t my thing. But how could it be, when I walk into an
office or store the first thing I notice are the cameras? You might call me paranoid but I know full
well that I’m being watched, observed, and recorded in almost every facet of my
life. Edward Snowden told us that the
NSA has the capability to monitor our keystrokes in real time as we Google anything
and everything.
“To Protect and Serve” has been the
longstanding motto for many American police forces. Even the New York Police Department insist
that their motto of “Courtesy, Professionalism, Respect” is of the upmost
importance while invading the privacy of thousands with the now repealed right
infringing policy of stop and frisk. Don’t
get me wrong, I believe that the police in this country have a dangerous
occupation and that the majority of them are committed to protecting and
serving the citizens that pay their wages.
However, in the wake of the military style response to the rioting crowd
in Ferguson, a very important question has once again surfaced that concerns
the rapid militarization of police forces in this country after 9/11. Why is it that our police are becoming more akin
to the armed guards of a dystopian state than the dutiful men and women in blue
who help old ladies cross the road and chase after the real bad guys?
As live video footage from Ferguson
streamed over the internet, a bizarrely sci-fi-esque scene unfolded, depicting full
body-armored cops holding assault rifles in front of military grade vehicles in
the hazy smoke of tear gas backlit with the eerie glow of street lamps. Not to
make a direct comparison to the American invasion of Iraq, but one would be
hard pressed to not feel that the militarized response was one of shock and
awe. The actions of the Ferguson police
department were intentionally meant to frighten and terrifying the protestors
into submission. Albeit their tactics
backfired, it still left the country questioning their drastic measures.
Photo Credit to Reuters
It was
Spiderman’s Uncle Ben who reminded us, “With great power comes great
responsibility.” Instead of urging that our police need more advanced and
powerful militarized equipment to defend us from terror, we should really be
asking whether or not we can trust the
police to be responsible with these devices.
When you get a new car you’re likely going to want to show it off,
right? Now imagine you’ve received a
Kevlar armor suit and a land mine resistant vehicle with mounted machine
guns—how long before you’re itching to take it out for a spin? These thoughts leads me to
two separate points.
One: how can anyone trust that the
police will use restraint in bringing out their full riot militia when they
seem so openly eager to use the military equipment they’ve been given? Once the crowd began to grow and intensify in
Ferguson I’m sure that some of the policemen tasked with protecting the
citizens had a raging hard-on at the thought of suiting up in their full armor
and walking through the streets like some kind of futuristic goon squad. This could be supported by the many claims of
policemen confronting journalists and reporters whilst simultaneously
destroying cameras and threatening arrests. (1)
Or how about Lt. Ray Albers, who is on video pointing his military grade
assault rifle at protesters and screaming, “I’ll fucking kill you!” (2) These people, who we are supposed to trust
with our lives, are in such heated rush to pull out the riot gear that they
aren’t thinking rationally when it comes to their actions and are consciously
abusing their status of power and our trust. How are any of us supposed to
trust the police again when they are so ready and willing to heavily arm
themselves against the civilians they’ve been sworn to “protect and serve?”
Two: if this is the response to a
rather small-scale protest, what will it look like when there are a thousand
angry people? Five thousand? Ten? Is
it really that hard to believe that those sly hands in Washington want the
police to be armed military style to suppress these types of events? As American’s we have no shortage of corrupt
men, women, and policies to protest against — but if this is the law
enforcement response to a relatively small scale protest who among the
population is going to be itching to march when the scale escalates? In an article from the NY Times by Matt Apuzzo that precedes the events in Ferguson it is
reported that under President Obama, “Police departments have received tens of
thousands of machine guns; nearly 200,000 ammunition magazines; thousands of
pieces of camouflage and night vision equipment.” (3) The quote goes on to
mention silencers, armored cars, and even aircraft. Ironically, after the goon squad takeover of
Ferguson President Obama ordered a review of his own policies.
Without question Obama ordered the review as a means to appease the
public and his political cronies. That
said, the American media also plays a role in abusing our trust by swaying the
facts of the case to keep their own viewers happy.
Repeatedly, major news sites like CNN, Fox
News and MSNBC are so hurried to
report on a significant event that they skip the very important step of vetting
their sources and confirming the validity of their information. It has gotten to the point where being
outraged is in vogue without even justifying the anger with credible
information. We live in the age of the
rise of gossip media: a billion-dollar game of telephone where the end result
is a sickening mutation of the original event.
Flicking between both CNN and Fox News it was easy to see how each was
reporting on Ferguson differently. CNN reporters were saying, “We go now to
Ferguson where a young black male was shot by a white police officer.” Fox
News instead reported, “We’re live in Ferguson where riots have erupted in
the wake of a police officer shooting an unarmed black male.” It might not be clear at all times, but as
the two sides continue to fulfill their bias they are knowingly altering the
small facts about a story to a point that the truth is a long lost relic. Although
I wish most people chose to get their news from independent news sites like Can
the Man, I’m more concerned about the level of trust citizens attribute to the news they’re hearing. Although there are those who continue to
believe that their favorite station is the one and only source of fair
reporting, the rest of us are hopefully well aware of the biases that exists in
media.
Fox News steers right and CNN
steers left – both accusing the other of biased reporting and slandering
the opposite party. More often than not
these stories work their way up the food chain until the major sites are
reporting false information and have to retract their statements. False information is almost as common as the
bare facts in today’s media—how are any of us supposed to trust the news when
everyone is continually implicated in these kinds of incidents?
There is little doubt in my mind
that the events of Ferguson will be buried under another shitstorm of gossipy
news within a month. We'll forget about
the protests and the suggested changes to law enforcement. There is no trust left to give to police officers,
politicians, or the media when it comes to giving us the respect we as
taxpayers deserve. I for one side with
those clamoring for all policemen to wear cameras, but we cannot think that is
the only thing wrong with our law enforcement system. Do you truly trust these people to use their
government surplus M4 Carbine Rifles responsibly? Do you really think that when push comes to
shove they'll hesitate to pull the trigger?
Despite us losing trust in them, the Man continues to trust that their
diversion tactics will distract us from this issue in a month's time. We as Americans have vowed to not give in to
terror and we must remember that this terror and fear can be coerced from
within by the very men and women who have sworn to "protect and
serve."
-Spencer James
(1) https://pressfreedomfoundation.org/blog/2014/08/documenting-arrests-journalists-ferguson
(2) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dzomt1xx4vw (LT.Ray Albers Video)
(3) http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/09/us/war-gear-flows-to-police-departments.html?_r=0
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|