I argued this point with maggle and gave up due to irreconcilable differences of opinion.
Instead I asked my retired Chicago copy buddy as a purely hypothetical question, if an officer who has sworn an oath to uphold the law sees criminal acts occurring, but is under orders from his superiors not to make arrests, what should he do?
His answer was: “I don’t even have to think about that one. It’s just like the military, you are responsible to your ranking/superior officers. You follow orders. When the superiors determine their plan or tactic, that is the way you perform”.
He added that in the case of obvious malfeasance or when action is needed to prevent some imminent life-threatening crime, you may choose to act. But “you’d better be right with all the elements of the wrongoing clear and present.”
In the case of these riots, the cops were following orders from their chain of command who was following orders from mayors and police commissions or city councils. That’s the way our system works, and it’s far from perfect. But it’s better than the alternative which is anarchy and vigilantism.
This is why I stand by what I said previously: if you don’t like what’s going on look up the chain of command. Do not blame the sworn officer who is at the point of the spear.
Thank you, and thank you for sharing the thoughts from a man who lived it. I’m here in this broken down state of IL and also know cops, active and retired and they seriously can’t win in this current chaotic situation