Photo via Flickr user
Mark Wyman
December saw New York City on edge to an extent it probably hasn't been since 9/11. Ignited by the decision to
not indict Officer Daniel Pantaleo in the chokehold death of Eric Garner, the city has been swallowed protest, counter-protest, death,
and despair, culminating in what has become a political showdown
between Mayor Bill de Blasio and the NYPD, with the rest of us in the
middle unsure of what to do.
The murders of Detectives Wenjian Liu and Rafael Ramos in mid-December
was when things really started to get weird, a validation of many of the
sentiments I heard at the
pro-cop rally the night before it happened:
that de Blasio is a menace to the city's police force, that his
"defense" of the protests has been dangerous, and of course that he
should resign, effective immediately. Now that the two officers are
dead, the mayor is to blame; he has "blood on [his] hands," as Patrick
Lynch, the Patrolmen's Benevolent Association chief, said
the night of Liu and Ramos's death, arguing the mayor stirred the pot
of protest that eventually led to the deaths of the two officers by acknowledging he'd talked to his black son Dante about the cops.
If you've searched "de Blasio" on Twitter since then, you'll find that
he was (and still is) being accused of everything from direct to
indirect murder. The NYPD is
reportedly
looking into 63 threats made just this week against the mayor and the
police. It's a grim scene, for sure. But more than anything else, this
past week will go down as when the cops shifted from symbolic
protest—turning their backs on the mayor—to actually packing it up and not doing their jobs.
A quick glance at the numbers tells the story. As Rocco Parascandola of the
New York Daily Newsreports,
citywide summons issued this past week numbered just 2,128, compared
to 26,512 a week earlier. In that period, exactly one summons was issued
in the 84th Precinct, where Liu and Ramos were stationed—just one.
The most logical culprit here would be Lynch, the police union
provocateur who unsuccessfully talked with the mayor as recently as
Tuesday. It was rumored that
a memo
was passed around NYPD precincts this week, advising rank-and-file
officers to join in on the slowdown. However, the union has denied any
involvement, and, from what I've heard, this may be more about fear than
politics.
"[There's] just not motivation," one police officer told me. "I'm not
writing people summonses if I have a chance of getting my head blown
off." When asked if this was his own choice or a precinct-wide
initiative, the officer added, "Seems like the entire department is on
the same page."
(I've reached out repeatedly to the NYPD and the mayor's office, but they have not yet responded.)
Regardless, the NYPD is no longer arresting people at the rates we are
used to, particularly when it comes to low-level infractions. So once we
put the politics aside, what we're left with is a protest of the mayor
who defended the Black Lives Matter demonstrations inadvertently meeting
one of those very demonstrators' central demands: pausing "
broken windows"
policing and its emphasis on quality-of-life crimes like selling
illegal cigarettes. In other words, this temporary cessation of force,
whether it's political or not, provides us with a momentary glimpse into
what New York City would look like with a modern approach to crime, one
that reflects NYC's turnaround since the 1990s.
In Bed-Stuy, Brooklyn—the neighborhood where Detectives Liu and Ramos
were gunned down—that difference has been felt in real-time. As Batya
Ungar-Sargon
reports
in the Daily Beast, residents have noticed a far different NYPD, one
that's less intrusive and more observational. "They just walk around,
they ride in their patrol cars, and they just pass by," one resident
told the reporter.
"The reported offenses they aren't enforcing as much are [mostly] not
criminal offenses: parking violations, urination in public, public
intoxication, as well as some marijuana possession. Do we really want
over 4,000 people a week locked up for peeing behind a dumpster?" Marc
Krupanski, a program officer at the Open Society Justice Initiative,
asked me. "The police sources have stated police are not making
'unnecessary arrests.' This should be a good thing!"
Krupanski also argues that this is why he believes it is a union-backed
effort; these arrests are key to NYPD Commissioner William Bratton's
ideology, so why would he order them to stop? In a statement, Bob Gangi,
the head of the Police Reform Organizing Project, made the case that
some police officers actually enjoy the work stoppage because they no
longer have to make arrests that disrupt communities. Which begs the
question: Why are they making those arrests in the first place,
especially if those same arrests can be reduced by 66 percent
without—from what it seems in these early days—much in the way of
Mad Max–style chaos?
"We speculate, though we have no hard evidence, that some officers are
pleased to engage in this ostensibly anti–de Blasio protest because they
have never been comfortable with having to enforce 'broken windows' law
enforcement," Gangi added. "It engenders anger and distrust in the
community and puts their physical well-being at risk."
However, unlike Gangi, other reform groups were not as welcoming to the
work stoppage. Joo-Hyun Kang, director of Communities United for Police
Reform, one of the main organizing groups behind the recent protests,
sees the move as an attack rather than an alternative universe for New
York City. And the culprit? Lynch's police union.
"Unfortunately, police unions have a long history of personalizing
attacks on mayors and blocking police reform that many New Yorkers
support. This apparent work stoppage is part of a larger effort to
obstruct and oppose much-needed change to the NYPD," Kang said in a
statement. "By continuing to obstruct and oppose necessary changes at
the NYPD, the police union leadership's divisive tactics are making it
clear that they are not acting in the best interests of New Yorkers,
including police officers. These tactics will backfire. In fact, they
already have."
But this era of lesser law enforcement is almost certain to be
short-lived; if coordinated, it's hard to imagine the work stoppage will
last much longer into 2015. As the editorial board of the
New York Times(and plenty of other prominent local voices) instructed,
the cops will eventually go back to their jobs. Once they do, Gangi
hopes change can come the good ol' fashioned way, rather than via hatred
of the mayor.
"While we welcome the drop in petty arrests and summonses, we greatly
prefer that it came as a result of lasting, meaningful, and systemic
reforms put into place by Mayor de Blasio and Police Commissioner
Bratton," he said. "Such a step would enhance safety and justice in our
city and provide benefits to our police officers and all New Yorkers."
No comments:
Post a Comment