OCR Text |
Show UVU REVIEW OPINIONS A5 The haunting norm of police brutality The trend of police intimidation and overreaching authority has to end The police need to know the rights of the people and their own stretch of authority. By Jimmy Hall Assistant Opinions Editor @Jimmyrhall I'm driving down 1-15 and catch a glimpse of a police vehicle parked on the side of the road. My heart rate goes up. I check my speed. I involuntarily push the brakes out of pure instinct. I then realize I was on cruise control at exactly the speed limit. So, what am I so afraid of? Besides not wanting to pay the couple hundred dollar ticket or the hassle of being late to my destination, most of it comes from the fear of the boys in blue: the police. "To Protect and To Serve" is the LAPD's motto that has applied to all other police forces around the country. Yet, in the past few years, there has been a growing and frightening trend involving those who are sworn to do the protecting and the serving. YouTube is a major factor that brings this issue to light. Recently James Boyd, a homeless man "had held off officers for four hours at an illegal camp site with a small knife, threatening to kill them, before agreeing to exit the Sandia foothills with the police," according to Examiner.com . Boyd wasn't armed with anything that could reasonably be called deadly, yet the policemen took upon themselves to sick their K-9 on him, pelt him with bean bags, tasered and shot six live rounds killing him. Although we can't fully know the extent of what happened, the camera footage only shows a few minutes of their confrontation, it is safe to say that this would be considered excessive and deadly force. On our own campus a UVU staff member was aggressively handled by campus police for writing on a campus map. If this isn't excessive, then I don't know what is. These are different types of situ- ations, but both should raise serious concerns about whom we are giving authority to and how are they using it. The men and women in uniform have a job to do. I understand this. And not all people are compliant or respect authority as they should. These type of people are usually found in mass protests and have the crowd mentality. In these situations, the authorities need to use force to control the crowd. It's unfortunate, but that's what we have in this ugly world. Not all the men and women in uniform who police our streets are the power-hungry ones who we see on YouTube or the news. or There are kind and respected ones as well and that needs to be appreciated. What this all comes down to is knowledge and accountability. The police need to know the rights of the people and their own stretch of authority. Without this we will just have police officers thinking they can do whatever they want to whomever they want and whenever they want. "The only thing that the Sheriff's Office gives us is a Policy and Procedures to follow," Austin McDonald, of the Provo Police Department, said. "When it comes to training there is none that we have to take. Policy and Procedures may vary between agencies." Also, citizens are carrying around cameras to capture these kinds of hot-headed police officers as they are in the real world. But this isn't the only thing that should deter officers. De- ( partments everywhere, our campus included, need to take the initiative to properly train and educate their officers to know what is and isn't acceptable in any given situation. Not only that, they need to be held accountable for abusing that given authority. This can only come from the powers-that-be to discipline those officers and not give into a public apology letter or, even worse, a false rationalization. The old and extremely troubling adage, "If you have nothing to hide, you've nothing to fear" doesn't have any grounds in this discussion. We shouldn't have to fear the ones who are responsibility for protecting us. Our society is slowly becoming a police state and one I don't want to live in. 1 ILLUSTRATION BY TREVOR ROBERTSON Free speech doesn't mean freedom from consequences Speaking one's mind could lead to consequences and there's no changing that By Michael Houck Staff Writer mikehouck0604@hotmail.com Free speech is one of the main principles that made the U.S. how it is today. It was one of the reasons why we went against and seceded from Britain all those years ago. It was for us not to have to worry about a government or hierarchy to detain or punish us when we voice our opinion about a current issue. We can talk about how the current president might be an idiot on Facebook, say that God will bring hellfire down upon us on the streets with signs or I could talk about how I have distaste for a topic and write about it in this paper. We are protected from the government because of the First Freedom of speech does not free us from responsibilities. PHOTO ILLUSTRATION BY LAURA FOX Amendment of our nation's Constitution. But I think that what people are forgetting when they say that they have the right of free speech is that while people can say whatever they'd like there are consequences for doing so. The latest example involves Mozilla Firefox CEO Brendan Eich. Or, I should say former CEO, because after 10 days of being appointed the new CEO of the popular internet browser, Eich decided to resign for the good of the company since some new info about him was released. Back in 2008, Eich donated $1,000 to Proposition 8, the referendum that defined marriage in California as being between only a man and a woman. This referendum was later struck down by the courts. And that is it. Eich didn't really do anything else to cause such hate towards him. He hasn't been as bad has others that have spoken up about their views. Celebrities like Phil Robertson from the popular A&E show "Duck Dynasty" and celebrity cook Paula Deen have been got a lot of attention last year for their controversial remarks about samesex marriage and racism. With Robertson, it was obvious that he was going to suffer major consequences for his remarks about same-sex marriage and the LGBTQ community in a GQ interview. Robertson basically said that homosexual behavior will morph into bestiality and how he doesn't understand why people are homosexual. Deen was accused of making re- Now, I am not saying that they cannot voice their opinions about issues like same-sex marriage, but they have to accept the backlash that will come from what they said. marks against African-Americans and also using the "n-word" in the past. In these cases I can see why Deen and Robertson got in so much trouble for what they did. For Robertson, it caused him to be suspended from the show for about a week, and the show's rating have shown a decline since then. Deen had her cooking programs, publishing deals and endorsement contracts canceled with many of her employers, such as Food Network and Walmart. Now those who support these two individuals (mostly in Robertson's case that I have seen) say this is against the U.S. founding principle of free speech. While you have the constitutional right to say hateful things, you have to appreciate that there might be consequences for that. More so when you are representing a huge television company like Food Network or A&E, who need to stay neutral with topics like this as much as they can. Now, I am not saying that they cannot voice their opinions about issues like same-sex marriage, but they have to accept the backlash that will come from what they said because they are not just representing themselves when they are talking; they are representing a whole company's voice when they open their mouths. I can't see why Eich got so much criticism for what he did eight years ago. With his donation to support Prop 8 he does show that he does support the traditional marriage movement and opposes gay-marriage, but he hasn't made any remarks that seem to be controversial or upsetting about the issue. Still, people wanted him to step down. I feel bad for the guy who was basically forced out of a company he loved. I really don't think he should have been punished in this way for what I consider a small thing like supporting a view that you believe and doing so by donating a small amount, at least compared to other donations. Everyone has a right to voice an opinion and say what he or she wants to. But we also need to remember that the first amendment doesn't protect us from contractual obligations of companies and organizations that we might be representing. And, even in the court of public opinion, every word has its consequence, whether we like it or not. |