Washington D.C., Apr 7, 2017 / 03:02 am (CNA/EWTN News).- “Ultimately, this report is about the sanctity of all human life.”
This remarkable line opens up an international police group’s flagship document on how to improve incidents of officer-involved shootings and the kinds of non-armed crisis situations that take place regularly across the United States.
“The essence of policing is the preservation of life,” Chuck Wexler, executive director of the Police Executive Research Forum in Washington, D.C., told CNA.
“That’s why we exist; life is very precious, and we have to remind ourselves of that.”
This ethic of protecting human life extends even to the use of force in responding to incidents, Wexler argued: “Everything should be what we have to do to preserve human life – especially in the area of use of force.”
This principle, that human life is sacred has found itself at the core of PERF’s work as an independent research and policy organization that looks at best practices in policing, as well as assistance, education and advice for law enforcement agencies.
With the idea that “the sanctity of human life should be at the heart of everything an agency does” at the center of the organization’s 30 Guiding Principles on the Use of Force and training guide, the group is already revolutionizing the way police departments approach policies on force and the response to crisis situations.
Keeping everyone safe
The pro-life approach to police work is part of a years-long project undertaken by PERF, which has more than 2500 members from around the globe.
Wexler explained that the organization was inspired to readjust their recommended policies and training after high-profile cases of police violence in Ferguson, Mo., and elsewhere sparked a national conversation on the appropriate force.
“We needed to take a hard look at what we were doing,” he said.
It’s hard to capture the scope of the issue of police-involved shootings in the United States, because there is no data or source of official reports that’s collected on a national level.
FBI Director James B. Comey explained in a 2015 speech at Georgetown University that the federal agency can’t even investigate the issue because “reporting by police departments is voluntary and not all departments participate. That means we cannot fully track the number of incidents in which force is used by police, or against police, including non-fatal encounters, which are not reported at all.”
This means that any information available is at best unreliable, and hampers both investigating and addressing the issue, the director said.
In its report, PERF pointed to attempts by journalists at the Guardian and the Washington Post to help fill this void of data by documenting the number of people killed in officer-involved shootings in the United States. The Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank in Washington, D.C., also collects data on allegations of police misconduct, including shootings, at the National Police Misconduct Reporting Project.
PERF furthermore noted that according to the data collected by the Washington Post, nearly one-third of fatal police-involved shootings in 2015 could have a significant potential for de-escalation, either because the subject killed was mentally ill, unarmed, or armed with a weapon that was not a firearm.
Wexler was assisting colleagues in Scottish police departments when these issues rose to public prominence in 2014. It occurred to Wexler that these colleagues – most of whom are not armed in departments in the United Kingdom – still must respond to and stay safe when dealing with incidents involving weapons like bats or knives, without the option of deadly force.
“For me it was an epiphany,” Wexler said. He asked himself, “If they can do it, why can’t we?”
PERF had researchers spend time studying police tactics in Scotland as well as in special emergency units in New York City and other departments around the United States. While the organization’s later research made a point not to blame most of the officers at the center of these events, PERF reassessed the training and policies surrounding the use of force in challenging situations.
“It really got us to think about how to re-engineer use of force policy and training,” Wexler said.
The result of their research was a document outlining guiding principles on the use of force and a training guide to teach officers how to better diffuse situations where de-escalation is possible. The guiding principles document notes that in most non-firearm cases “the threat is not immediate and the officers will have options for considering a more methodical, organized approach,” and many lives have the potential to be saved.
All of this is about trying to de-escalate a situation, giving officers the tools they need to do that.
It is this potential for saving lives – and not only the lives of civilians who interact with the police – which is the focus of the revised guidelines and tactics. PERF’s research states that changing approaches to incidents can increase officer safety, too.
“Rather than unnecessarily pushing officers into harm’s way in some circumstances, there may be opportunities to slow those situations down, bring more resources to the scene, and utilize sound decision-making that is designed to keep officers safe, while also protecting the public,” the report states.
In its findings, the document emphasizes the sanctity of human life as well as administering life-saving aid, transparency in reporting officer-involved shooting, use of less lethal options, and promoting effective means of managing mental illness in crisis situations.
The documents also criticize “line in the sand” policies and other training and field tactics which they found escalated, rather than calmed, crisis situations not involving firearms.
Wexler also said the principles of proportionality and effective communication are key to protecting the lives of all involved.
“All of this is about trying to de-escalate a situation, giving officers the tools they need to do that,” emphasizing the importance of teamwork, tactical skills and crisis intervention. “What’s really important is the safety of the officer and the safety of the person you’re dealing with.”
From the church to the streets
These policies aimed at respecting the dignity of life are not just formulated in an abstract environment, but with feedback from around the world.
“We have consulted with literally hundreds of police officers and police departments. We met and studied best practices around the country,” Wexler said.
The research organization consulted with hundreds of police chiefs for over two years, and looked at countless case studies and reports to put together their findings and then their training program.
“We would not be recommending something if we didn’t think it would work, and we’ve seen enough cases in the United States and in other countries where some may already be doing it or are in the process of implementing it.”
One of the other sources Wexler and PERF president, Scott Thompson, consulted in putting together the report was the archbishop of the largest city in the United States, Cardinal Timothy Dolan of New York.
“The person who we thought would really be interested in this concept was Cardinal Dolan in New York,” Wexler recalled. “We went to see Cardinal Dolan because we thought our principles, and in particular that principle, would be very significant to him.”
Cardinal Dolan was elected as the chairman-elect of the U.S. Bishops’ Committee on Pro-Life activities beginning his term as chair in 2015.
“We had a really good meeting and he really understood and embraced” the core principle of protecting life, Wexler said. “It was something he could be very supportive of.”
There has been pushback from a lot of the major organizations.
PERF mentioned that Cardinal Blase Cupich of Chicago has also lent his support in helping the group’s training programs for the Chicago Police Department.
While the police policy guidelines have been met with support among the hundreds of departments who worked with PERF, the organization’s focus on prioritizing the sanctity of the lives of all persons involved in police incidents has not been without controversy.
“There has been pushback from a lot of the major organizations,” Wexler acknowledged.
When PERF first released its guidelines in March 2016, it was met with harsh criticism from both the International Association of Chiefs of Police and the Fraternal Order of Police.
“We cannot reasonably expect law enforcement officers to walk away from potentially dangerous situations and individuals in the hope that those situations resolve themselves without further harm being done,” the organizations said in a joint response to PERF’s initial report.
A year later, however, national police organizations have started to adopt consensus principles that echo many of the ideas emphasized by PERF.
In a document laying out “National Consensus Policy” on the use of force, released in January 2017, 11 national police organizations – including the FOP and IACP – emphasized the importance of de-escalation policies, “reasonably prudent” responses, and less-lethal force. The policy also asks that departments around the country openly state that the “policy of this law enforcement agency is to value and preserve human life.”
While Wexler said he could not comment on these adaptations, he did say the shift in focus to emphasize the dignity and value of all lives – even in the most challenging situations – is a “difficult” shift in perspective: “The changes we’re recommending are probably some of the biggest changes in police tactics that we’ve seen in 25 years.”
And the size of the policing community in the United States – more than 18,000 departments – only adds to the challenge.
Still, while the values and emphasis in police policy might still face some debate, PERF’s training and concrete policies have met with wide acceptance.
“We’ve had no pushback from our training,” he said, pointing to the hundreds of departments who have come to their training workshops in New Orleans, Baltimore, and Los Angeles.
With this support in the year since putting out the guidelines and what they’ve seen in the research process, Wexler is confident that they can create a culture that defends the sanctity of human life in all aspects of its police work.
“I’m optimistic that in five years, this will no longer be controversial,” Wexler said. “This will be the way people handle these situations.”
[…]
This woke notion that a pastoral decision to have Pelosi refrain from receiving the Eucharist because of her support of killing defenseless human persons in their mothers’ womb is a “politicization of the Eucharist” is nothing more than the “Ghost of McCarrick” rearing its ugly head in the Church.
The Archbishop’s purpose was Pastoral, not political – that is obvious, no matter what his detractors say.
The person involved is a prominent politician, and – outside of repenting – she and her defenders really have no other way of responding other than on political grounds.
So yes – it has unavoidably become a political AND pastoral issue, but that is NOT the fault of the Archbishop.
Her earnest position advocating abortion on demand is highly disturbing, as it is with her cronies. She should be disciplined, and if I remember correctly, the New Testament instructs us to confront those who persist in sin.
Also, she’s not allowed to rewrite the Catechism.
Her earnest position advocating abortion on demand is highly disturbing, as it is with her cronies. She should be disciplined, and if I remember correctly, the New Testament instructs us to confront those who persist in sin.
Also, she’s not allowed to rewrite the Catechism.
Of course the left would reject the excommunication of Pelosi as exercised as the politics of power. More importantly, the announcement revealed the balkanization, the internal politics, of the American Roman Catholic Church as the preponderance of bishops are simply sitting on the hands. Nancy will simply take her clues from Rome by never responding to the letter while taking communion within other dioceses.
Pity poor Nancy Pelosi that she is up against such a kind, articulate and infinitely patient sparring partner.
Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone thank you for your sincere saving of the soul of Pelosi. Even though I have another opinion of her remaining Speaker of the House, I do agree that she should NOT be allowed the Holy Eucharist, she goes against the beliefs of the Catholic Church, plus she is a public figure and that her actions have been saying to other catholic’s that it’s ok. No it’s not. Perhaps now the Pope will do the same…. He needs to speak up on this to be a sheppard of his flock– after all he is pope to save souls as well.
Nancy Pelosi (and Joe Biden, along with other pro-abortion Catholics) has denied herself Communion by declaring her “devout Catholic” status (her claim) while supporting the murders of millions of babies before birth (and sometimes after). The “Women’s Health” bill is so misnomered as to make it laughable, because statistically half of those killed are females. Having made many attempts to talk with Pelosi, Archbishop Cordileone has simply agreed with her decision to deny herself the Sacrament.
Pelosi won’t back down, retract or change her stance because she knows that when she passes, she will get full catholic honors at her funeral and whoever does her mass will tell everyone that she is in heaven and all the people will nod in agreement and comment what a great person she was……..guaranteed!
Passes what??? Doesn’t anybody DIE anymore?
The Archbishop is not a politician. Does any government pay his living expense? No.
The People of God, the Mystical Body of Christ, employ him. No Protestant, atheist, Muslim, Hindu, None, or Shamanist pagan has any part to play in the Archbishop’s religion. Pelosi claims to represent the same religion while acting in opposition to its laws. This is a falsehood which harms Christ’s Church, His Body, and Nancy is harmed most of all, jeopardizing her eternal happiness.
The People of God, acting on behalf of God’s Law, accept and support the teaching of God, His Law, and the Laws of His Catholic Church. The Archbishop has every right and duty to act in accord with the Lawful and Just Mission of God’s Church. The Archbishop acts totally within the right, duty, mission, and just operation of God, His Church, His People, and His Body.
The man saying otherwise unlawfully and unjustly opposes the Body of Christ. Nancy P., and others who believe as she does, have besmirched their once-beautiful souls which God’s power cleansed at Baptism. That is not politics. That is sin. Simple ghastly and ugly SIN. Nancy is called to come clean.
He’s being a true Soldier of Christ. It takes bravery (particularly in these times) and always did. Thank you Archbishop Cordileone.
So what if it IS political? Pelosi’s stance needed to be addressed in a public way. Time for Joe Biden to be called out too.
Of course it’s political if it were not he would deny communion to supporters of the death penalty or the second amendment. He’s sided with the white supremacy party which is his right. It’s my right not to continue to attend or support a church that supports republikkkans.
Oh, right, Nancy.
The Demokkkrats who actually founded the KKK, and who initiated and for a hundred years enforced Jim Crow laws through the threat of lunching, and who in recent decades have supported the murders of nearly half of the African-American babies born in America, is the diversity party.
And the Republicans, who don’t want any babies of any race murdered, are the racists and killers.
Amazing. What you say makes about as much sense as everything the other Nancy says.
I had little respect for Pelosi. Now that she has been told she was barred from Communion by a Bishop, she did it ANYWAY at another diocese. Its clear by that action how little respect she has for her church or for God. What absolute nerve and disrespect. She made a statement that the church bars contraception, etc,”Its all the same to them”a statement she made in the sense of the church being a negative for women. . Its not up to Pelosi to decide what is fit or not in church doctrine. I have not heard she was a theologian. The Bishop of the DC diocese where she took communion is another person who has made his liberal stance known.I would not count on him to discipline this priest in any way, nor to support the archbishop of San Francisco. In the absence of any action or statement by the pope supporting the Archbishop of San Fran, I think there is little hope this ban can be effective discipline, which is a sad state of affairs. It shows how weak and what a mess the church is in right now. No leadership and few true to basic church principles. Jesus spoke of sin and punishment more than once. The church hierarchy is not doing the people any favor by pretending all is sweetness and light. Penance and confession is a long running theme in the Catholic church for a reason. I pity the Bishops too week to go along with Cordileone. They too will have to account for themselves some day.
Now. if only our cardinals (where are they?) and other bishops would
follow Archbishop Cordileone in upholding church teaching, despite the
rich and powerful. Other clergy claim to “dialogue” with pro-abortion
“Catholics.” And how many pro abortion politicians have become pro-life
because of a dialogue with their bishop?
It is not Archbishop Cordileone who has politicized the abortion/communion issue, it is Pelosi herself and the progressives who believe as she does. They politicize everything; as the party of government, confirmed statists, they can do nothing else.