“What about our lives? Who protects us from the people who are supposed to protect us?”<\/p>\n
The question is from Tonya Jameson<\/a>, a black kid who was held at gunpoint by an off-duty cop<\/a> when he was changing a license plate on a car\u00a0that he’d bought from the cop’s mother in law<\/em>.<\/p>\n And he asks a very legitimate question: \u00a0 why should we, the citizens, have to de-escalate our police?<\/p>\n Jameson expresses polite disagreement with the police chief, who explained to him\u00a0why\u00a0<\/em>the officer’s actions were, inevitably, found to be perfectly lawful:<\/p>\n Chief Rausch said that when investigating complaints, it is essential to understand an officer\u2019s mindset to determine the facts. A mindset is not a fact.<\/p>\n Here are the facts that Janish appeared to focus on \u2013 the unmarked cab, a black person, the duffel bag and the license plate.<\/p>\n Then here are other facts that he ignored \u2013 he knew his mother-in-law was selling the car, it was broad daylight, and I knew her first name, but not her last name. I offered to show him the keys, registration and bill of sale signed by his mother-in-law.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n Those are the actual facts. Officer Janish\u2019s mindset was the scenario he created in his head. His fears weren\u2019t facts.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n The law cuts a\u00a0very\u00a0<\/em>wide swathe of tolerance for cops’ “mindsets”. \u00a0 Technically, so does all “use of force” law.<\/p>\n But part of cops’ “Mindsets” these days is constant exposure to the idea that violent death awaits around every corner; that every stop could be their last; that their first, last or next contact with the public could end up like this:<\/p>\n