Trump’s Plan to ‘Unleash’ Police Risks More Abuses of Everyone’s Rights
It wasn’t a surprise when President Donald Trump penned his recent executive order that calls “for cities to unleash high-impact local police forces.” In 2017, the president told a police audience about handling crime suspects: “When 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.'”
The official line was that he was just joking, but even some police officials were uncomfortable with making light of police brutality. In the ensuing years, Trump’s rhetoric has only gotten worse. His recent use of the word unleashing wasn’t by accident. Unleash means “to let happen or begin something powerful that, once begun, cannot be controlled.”
The purpose of the Constitution is to put the leash on the government and its agents. In the Declaration of Independence, colonists complained that the British king “sent hither swarms of officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance.” Police officers are the front line between the government and the people—and few others have such power to deprive us of our liberties and lives.
Many conservatives applauded the order, arguing that he’s merely empowering police to do their jobs. But police and prosecutors have plenty of tools. Similarly, this administration has mocked the constitutional process of due process, whereby the accused get their day in court. That protects the innocent more than the guilty by simply requiring the government to prove its case.
As someone who has covered police-abuse cases, I can guarantee that officers make mistakes, can be overly aggressive, and on occasion are corrupt. After the 1980s-era War on Drugs, police often have used tactics more appropriate to an occupying military force rather than to civilian police officers. If you think police should be unrestrained, get back to me after a SWAT team gets the wrong address and invades your house instead.
This is not about letting police do their jobs. Let’s say a President Kamala Harris or Gavin Newsom—or whichever potential Democratic politician keeps you awake at night—issued an executive order calling for the feds to “unleash high-impact” Internal Revenue Service, Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms, or Environmental Protection Agency officers. Would you say, “That’s great, they’re just cracking down on tax cheats, illegal guns, and environmental scofflaws”?
Of course not. You’d instead fear they are going to tread on the rights of honest taxpaye
Article from Reason.com
The Reason Magazine website is a go-to destination for libertarians seeking cogent analysis, investigative reporting, and thought-provoking commentary. Championing the principles of individual freedom, limited government, and free markets, the site offers a diverse range of articles, videos, and podcasts that challenge conventional wisdom and advocate for libertarian solutions. Whether you’re interested in politics, culture, or technology, Reason provides a unique lens that prioritizes liberty and rational discourse. It’s an essential resource for those who value critical thinking and nuanced debate in the pursuit of a freer society.
