NEWSPAPER COLUMNS
 ¶ Most Recent
¶ Miscellany
|
COMMENTARY
August 13, 2011
Riot policing
Not only the "England riots," but the Vancouver hockey spree, last year's G20 "masked ball" in Toronto, Renault-torching sessions in France, racial "wildings" at American summer fairs, debt-related street-fights in Greece, and so on, put us in mind of the joys of policing. If there is one thing we can foresee, it will be a lot of violent (bleeps) on our streets, making points beyond their own comprehension, as "events" unfold over the next few years.On the English affair, I wrote Wednesday, and have already written again for tomorrow. It is it's own little universe of disorder. Instead I propose to think aloud, today, about our generic preparations for riots. As the well-bred child of a middleclass family, I did not grow up staring at cops. I was taught that the policeman was my friend, and for years I came very close to believing it. Only in extended adulthood, after witnessing the transformation over time, of the "flat foots" patrolling "beats" into what might be described as the "sensitivity police" (fully indoctrinated in the latest leftist twaddle), have I come to appreciate the rich ambiguities. Having meanwhile also witnessed police in action, in several other countries, whose governments are actually more corrupt than ours, I have come to fear deeply politicized police forces. Yet not being a leftist myself, I do not have the luxury of ignoring the real threats to public order against which the police are deployed. Crime is real, and the criminal mind is ruthless. We need defences against it. The first line, in the natural order, is self-defence. In free societies, the honest citizen is always permitted to act as necessary, against those tangibly breaking the law. It is important to realize that police are a fairly recent invention, in the grand historical sweep. They are the State's way of trying to be helpful. Riots are a special case, in which we find large numbers suddenly participating in criminal acts. I have seen a few from close up (my first, at the age of seven, helped make me a lifelong Tory), and I cannot recommend them to anyone. They don't get started without some kind of goad, and that is invariably supplied by ruthless individuals. This ruthlessness is communicated through the "Gadarene swine" - persons of inadequate moral formation - by well-known tactical means. The riot, like a fire, grows with the fuel of readily available "demoralized" people. It continues until it has burned out, or is hosed down. An important point is that the rioters are giddy; they are in an "elevated" state, like persons on drugs. They need the equivalent of immediate detoxification, followed by the "drying out" experience. And as any professional firefighter can tell us, the methods of hosing down vary with the "shape, size, and nature" of the fire. This is a craft; it requires study and practice, to say nothing of calm, tactical sense. I am almost prepared to leave that to the experts. What concerns me, along with every other "law-abiding citizen," is that the police in fact know what they are doing; that they are not themselves reduced to a mob, or zombies; and that they have resources adequate to the task in hand. Yet, on days when there are no riots, we do not need so many police. We do not keep our military sized up for war, in peacetime; and even fire departments have voluntary reserves. In both of those cases a tradition is sustained, in which citizens are encouraged to sign up for training, and to maintain it at so many (paid) hours a month, in the knowledge that they will be called up in time of need. The Conservative government in Britain is now toying with an analogous scheme, and several related improvements in overall policing strategy. David Ruffley, MP, wrote an instructive piece on this in the Daily Telegraph this week. A principal point is that significant savings can be made, if a courageous government can overcome the union mentality that has settled into police forces throughout the western world, and make them flexible. There must be direct attacks on the proliferation of police paperwork, and on shifting arranged only for the convenience of staff. (For example, there are always more cops working Monday mornings than Friday nights. Yet, Friday nights they are more needed.) For much less money than is now being spent on full-time wages, with the usual public-sector benefits packages, a downsized regular police force could easily do more street-front work, and have reserves on call for those "special occasions." Moreover: an ample reserve would help spread the ethic and discipline of policing through the larger society. For we, too, should be ready-aye-ready. Given the ineluctable facts of diminishing budgets and greater policing needs, a sane government in a sane society would get right at it. David Warren
© Ottawa Citizen
|
Top