Last Sunday, a Dallas police officer fired 13 rounds of pepper dust to disperse a small peaceful crowd that had formed as people were leaving the bars at closing time in a popular nightlife area. It turns out that the officer had just been trained to use the pepper ball gun and apparently just couldn’t wait to assault people with his new toy.
Deputy Chief Vincent Golbeck apologized for the officer’s actions and stated that the officer “made a mistake.” A mistake?! If anyone other than a police officer fired pepper dust into a crowd, they would be charged with a crime. I have endured pepper dust at the hands of a prankster. I would rather be punched in the face. Clearly a case could be made that this officer’s actions constituted assault or, at the very least, he is guilty of police officers’ favorite one-size-fits-all crime, disorderly conduct. In Texas, disorderly conduct includes creating, “by chemical means, a noxious and unreasonable odor in a public place.” Here is the Dallas Police Department’s chance to arrest someone for disorderly conduct who actually deserves it. Instead this officer will “likely be disciplined.” Once again, there is a double standard when it comes to the thugs in blue.
You can contact the Dallas District Attorney and the Dallas Police and recommend that this officer receives more than just a little note is his file.
Dallas District Attorney’s Office- 214-653-3600
Dallas Police Department- 214-671-3001
I am not a psycholigist, sociologist, or statistician, but it seems to me like access to these implements of non-lethal violence, like tasers, rubber bullets, bean bag bullets, pepper balls, etc. actually increases the level of violence used against both the guilty and the innocent. I like to think that even the most sadistic law enforcement officer might hesitate to use lethal force unless there is a shadow of a legitimate threat. But if the weapon is non-lethal, even an otherwise peaceful person might be tempted to use force in the absence of any threat because the individual responsibility and accountability has been removed. If someone else knows more about this phenomenon than me, I would love to hear your take.
Well, all these supposedly “non-lethal” weapons actually are lethal. Tasers, rubber bullets, flashbang grenades, etc can and do kill people.
But I do suspect that telling police officers that weapons are “non-lethal,” “safe,” or whatever while training with them encourages them to see the use of these types of weapons as not being a big deal.
Bill:
You bring up a great point. I do wonder if there has been studies about this.
I also think that things such as tasers change how people in the community respond to the police’s use of force. I think it is interesting that few people would agree that an officer should be able to hit someone in the head with their baton in order to get them to “comply” but these same people have little problem when an officer uses a taser to get someone to “comply”. Is it because most people can imagine what it would be like to get hit in the head, but can not really imagine what a taser feels like? I don’t know, but it amazes me that people do not view the use of tasers as violent.
When I was in college I remember having a conversation with my brother about non-lethal devices for police use. This was at a time when tasers were just starting to become widely used. I said, at that time, that I thought it was great for officers to have this option. I pictured non-lethal as a substitute for when lethal action may have been warranted. I never pictured them being used in the way they are now. I guess that is why I don’t gamble. I am horrible at predicting the future.