Note from the Author: I first drafted these thoughts in 2016 and revisited them in 2019. Looking back in 2026, as I prepare to conclude nearly 26 years of service, it is striking how little the “narrative” has changed, even as the “reality” of the street becomes more complex. I’m dusting this off because the distinction between the national headlines and the local professional remains the most critical conversation in our craft.
This week marks the anniversary of the day I was sworn in as a police officer. I managed to work one year before the world changed in 2001, and almost fourteen years before the events in Ferguson ignited the social and media narrative that my profession still navigates today.
In that time, I’ve seen, experienced, and done enough to have at least a small amount of insight into the law enforcement side of the current “conversation.” Unfortunately, the dominant voices usually belong to the media and politicians, while the perspective of the practitioner is often drowned out.
The Spectrum of Service
Let me be unequivocal: there are “bad cops” out there. There are inept cops, poorly trained cops, and those who simply don’t take their oath or their training seriously. Anyone who has served in the military or worked in any large organization knows that no profession is immune to the “screw-ups.”
But the current trend of using universal adjectives—”The Police”—is a logical fallacy.
In any other context, using broad-brush terms like “those people” based on race or identity would be rightfully condemned. Yet, there is a pervasive willingness to hold “The Police” universally responsible for the actions of individuals in departments thousands of miles away. It is a bizarre logic that leads people to “understand” how an officer in one city can be targeted for the actions of an agency they don’t work for, in a state they’ve never visited.
The Myth of the Nationalized Force
The public often speaks as if we are a uniform, nationalized force. In reality, police service is intensely local. Large metropolitan agencies operate in a different universe than a mid-size department, and both are worlds apart from an eight-person village PD.
However, we do share a common language of experience. Taking an armed person into custody “is what it is.” Walking up to a car occupied by a suspect you believe is armed feels the same to an officer in Anchorage as it does to one in Miami.
The “Knee-Jerk” Trap
This shared experience is why most veteran officers won’t “knee-jerk” declare a high-profile incident as “bad” based on a ten-second viral clip. We know that what appears on a phone screen—often fueled by an initial, incomplete media narrative—is rarely the whole story.
Practitioners can often see how a situation that appears unjustified to the uninitiated could, based on the totality of circumstances, be legally and tactically justified. We aren’t defending “bad” actions; we are defending the right to a full investigation before a verdict is rendered by the court of public opinion.
Questions for the Field
- The Scale of Context: How do we balance the need for immediate transparency with the professional requirement for a complete, evidence-based investigation?
- Local vs. National: In an age of viral media, how can local departments better communicate their unique “local reality” to a public that is being fed a “nationalized” narrative?
- The Practitioner’s Burden: For those who serve, how do you maintain your dedication to the craft when it feels like the “The Police” umbrella covers the actions of people you’ve never met?
Leave a comment