I read something and it gave me pause for thought.
Essentially the statement was cops in high crime areas police different than low crime areas. It was stated in relationship to Adam Toledo's fatal encounter with a police officer, and made reference to if it was a different
neighborhood it wouldn't have happened.
I've seen renditions of the same idea revolve around racism, implicit bias, and these things only happen in Black and Brown neighborhoods. That if it was a Black or Brown cop the shooting wouldn't have happened.
I partially agree.
Having not come from the Garfield Park neighborhood and having limited knowledge of what the west side was, my interactions and experience of the area was as a cop.
The display of violence, struggles with substance abuse, mental health resources nearly non-existent, and poverty
were an eye opener and slightly shocking. However I had already begun a journey into understanding my role in an area I'm not from and among people that don't look like me. I had a fantastic mentor in the academy, who is now a DC in the department, and his lessons and words
were invaluable.
Despite being equipped I wasn't necessarily ready. Death and violence was abundant, and there is a WHOLE other conversation as to why that is, it's pretty established that it exists in it's current form in the GP neighborhood.
I could always tell when working
details with other cops, OT initiatives (♥️uVRI), and so on who were the "ghetto coppers". PC term or not, it was a badge of honor working in tough areas. Cops develop faster as the police, judging a person is tweaked, and overall they are a much more aware cop.
They have to be. Working in an area where kids are shot consistently, bad car crashes, lots of weapons, and a constant barrage of violence and trauma DOES take its toll. Any cop who says it doesn't is either lying or ignorant.
With that increase in the experience of violence
and trauma a police officer learns to be more aware. With that comes a bias. Not necessarily against someone for a skin color or income level or lifestyle, but a bias that your chances for a violent encounter are increased.
Whether that is as a victim or the paper car.
The best way I can describe it as "violence bias". As cops we've all gone thru the implicit bias training, pointing out an individual's personal biases can inform their decisions.
Violence bias would be an officer's bias that a violent action is likely to occur.
Looking at the shooting of Adam Toledo, and having years of experience in a similar area, I would imagine the officer was expecting the encounter to turn violent. As would most cops who have worked similar areas.
It happens to be that in an urban community environment of a big
city chances are it is poor, struggles with violence & trauma, lacks any real resources, and is going to be filled by BIPOC.
Do I think if this was a nicer area, with a cop that has worked that nicer area and had no experience in a poor area, that the outcome would be different?
Yes. A cop from that nicer area would not have the bias towards every encounter becoming violent because their experience would be they never did.
Now if you take that "ghetto copper" and put them into that nicer area and the same situation plays out, I would imagine it would
end the same as with Adam Toledo.
That's not to say what happened is not tragic.
I don't think it was racially motivated, a bad shoot, or shows a systemic problem with law enforcement. This is a bias that has roots within our entire society. As a kid I knew there were
neighborhoods I didn't go to when I wanted to play with classmates. That's not an indictment on my parents, that's an indictment on society having created systems that forced the hands of the people who live in those areas, and have created the "violence bias".
Before anyone points it out, YES, police are grouped into those systems, this isn't a blame deflection.
Schooling, healthcare, jobs, grocery stores, access to necessary services, good housing, and yes, the police, have created and built in this violence bias.
Could Adam's death been avoided?
Yes. Just about every fatal police encounter can be avoided.
Society likes to point blame on anyone else but themselves. When the mayor said "We failed Adam" I agree.
The ball was rolling way before Adam and the officer had their encounter
that led to Adam's death. Even before the 21 yr old with Adam gave him access to a firearm, there were things already written in stone that just needed a name added.
What that officer did was based in his training AND experience. In my experience an encounter like that has
a better chance of ending with an officer being on the receiving end of hot lead.
Instead what we ended up with was a situation reminiscent of 13 yr old caught eating a candy bar before dinner and trying to throw it behind the couch.
Except it wasn't a candy bar.
Unfortunately everyone wants to have a single person to put the blame on. Reality is there isn't one person.
Not Adam.
Not his mom.
Not the officer.
Not even 21 yr old with him.
Most police officers will go through a career never having been shot and killed. Many may never ever draw their weapon or need to use force. What separates out LE from other more "deadly" professions is the human aspect.
A logger goes to work w/ specific tools and a job to do
Somewhere they may have an awareness they could get hurt and killed. But their work is more predictable.
Trees, chain saws, and heavy equipment will operate in a certain way. The "deadly" part comes from failures or misjudgments. Tools break, trees fall the wrong way