|
One of the questions that seems to have been lost in the Gates/Crowley debate is whether Sgt. Crowley's actions constituted an appropriate use of police power with respect to the economics of policing. Taken at face value, Sgt. Crowley's report does provide probable cause for a police officer to make a charge of disorderly conduct. However, what has not been considered is whether it might have made more sense, economically, to issue a citation to Dr. Gates than to arrest and book Dr. Gates.
We have decided as a society to submit ourselves to police powers which, it is our hope, protect both the rich and the vulnerable. To that end, I think it's fair to say that we all expect the policing power to treat us with equal respect and deference. If we think of the policing power as a limited resource, which it surely is, then I think that as a society we'd all prefer to see that limited resource be used to combat crimes that affect all of us (e.g., theft, murder, rape) than used to combat slights to a police officer's ego.
I've yet to see any evidence that Dr. Gates posed a greater threat that could lead to civil unrest, etc. Acting as an asshole though he may have been, he was not, and Sgt. Crowley's report clearly demonstrates that, disorderly conduct was the thinnest of veneers on which to retaliate against a pompous ass.
So,it seems pretty clear to me that the end discussion will be whether Gates acted like an asshole. Unfortunately, I think the bigger question is whether police are using their nearly unstoppable powers to settle petty differences instead of using those resources to defend indefensible arrests.
Let me be clear: Dr. Gates' arrest did not in any way further the interest of the citizens of Cambridge; and Sgt. Crowley's actions did nothing to protect or serve the society he allegedly serves.
|