I am originally from New York and had several cousins and friends, now retired, in the New York City police and fire departments. I was proud of their work then, and continue to be proud of their service. Even without this background, I would have been interested in the behavior of the NYPD and its union, in light of protests following the killing of unarmed black men by members of their department, and their efforts to link these protests with the tragic killing of two police officers by a mentally unstable man as they sat in their patrol car.
To listen to the NYPD union, always ready to defend their members, the protests have encouraged the killing of the two police officers and, thus, anyone participating in or supporting the protesters is partly responsible for the murder of their colleagues. This, of course, is absurd.
The choice between supporting the rights of protestors and supporting the police is a false choice that reminds me of other false choices in our nation's history. I remember when it was considered by some to be unpatriotic to protest against our war in Vietnam. Americans, we were told, could not love their country and be against the war. "Love it or leave it" we were told by some conservatives who, interestingly, now don't think twice about criticizing our current president.
Protesting is not only protected by our Constitution, but fundamental to our democracy. Protestors are American heroes. They brought us our independence from England. They brought us equal rights for women, minorities and people with disabilities. Americans don't discourage people from lawful and peaceful protests. When we stop protesting, we give up our free speech.
If the NYPD wants people to stop protesting against recent questionable tactics against black men by a few of their members, they might consider listening to their fellow black officers who understand first hand why people are protesting. If they want their police behaviors to be beyond question or investigation, they should work in Russia or China or dozens of other nations where people are not allowed to protest, and where the abuse of civilians by the police is beyond question.
Protestors come in all sorts of political colors. Tea party protestors can walk up and down their streets with anti-Obama signs because we live in a free nation. We don't need to agree with the cause of any protest, but we must be willing to protect everyone's right to do so.
The cops in New York City are out of line if they think that civilians don't have the right to question their tactics and voice their concerns when they see unarmed people shot and killed, or strangled to death. It is not inappropriate to criticize members of the police any more than it is to criticize a teacher or minister who engages in questionable behavior. Protests against individual police actions are not anti-police any more than protests against sexual abuse by priests are anti-Catholic.
When we can't criticize the police, we live in a police state, not a democracy. When we can't criticize and protest against questionable police behavior, then we are no longer free.
My message to the NYPD is to do their job in a professional manner and they will earn the respect and praise they seek. When you serve others, however, you are always open to public criticism. Just ask any teacher or other public employee; you will never be able to please all the people all the time. But when you work for the government, when you work for the people, criticism comes with the territory. In fact, many politicians make careers out of criticizing the government and its employees.
We give our police officers a badge, a gun and the authority to temporarily remove our freedom. It is a mighty responsibility that should come with the highest standards of behavior. We have the right to demand that our police, teachers and other public servants with significant responsibilities don't abuse the authority that we bestow upon them.
Tom Zirpoli writes from Westminster. His column appears Wednesdays. Email him at tzirpoli@mcdaniel.edu.
