The Horns of a Dilemma

 "Does a writer ever actually retire?" Just about every writer.

Get up in the morning, make so coffee, scan the news and the social media... Whuuuut?

Writers write so readers can read. So said fictional novelist William Forrester. The only problem with that statement for a small-market writer - that's me - is that readers won't read something if they don't know it's available. In a very real sense, writers write so they can pester people into reading. You can quote me on that.

Social media is an appropriate, if not fabulous, place to alert people that you are selling something. Appropriate because a lot of people visit social media. Not fabulous, because: first, a site may not contain enough, if any, of the demographic toward which your writing is directed and; second, there is a lot of stupid with internet access. A wise and intelligent psychologist warned me about that. But, I already knew.

Nevertheless, I will hardly turn down an opportunity to write, even when the audience is not entirely receptive. Even then...

Do you know - I'm just asking a question derived from a web site discussion involving normally intelligent people - that most public servants, including police officers, are thuggish morons (or moronic thugs, when the writer runs out of descriptive gas) unfit for any other work? Their jobs are cushy, their paychecks fat. They should stop depriving their fellow citizens of their constitutional rights, no matter what they are ordered to do. None of them are educated enough anyway for work in the private sector. It's a fact. I am confused, and need guidance.

To paraphrase fellow cancer patient and former NYPD cop and Secret Service Agent Dan Bongino, readers of Bikecopblog have figured out what is about to happen.

Are police officers just a bunch of dumb, uneducated thugs who can't find a real job, or constitutional scholars empowered to act independently of the legal system into which they fit? I'm just asking, so I know. I'm an old retired guy, and I'm trying to blend.

Where did all of this start? Apparently, there was a health inspector who arrived at a restaurant in California, on a mission. One of the shops on his route was serving take-out (because COVID) but, and this is the rub, the customers were not going immediately home like good little girls and boys and eating where the 'Rona can't get them. They broke open their food and ate in public.

I know, right? But, the health inspector has no jurisdiction over people sitting on a park bench eating take-out. So, he chose the next best venue - he threatened to close the restaurant unless the owner reigned in his customers.

Don't get bogged down in the details (like, really, that's the ditch you want to die in, Mr. Health Inspector?), because this is where the fun starts. The business owner is incensed, and parks his monster truck behind the inspector's car so he can't leave. "I can't work, you can't work" is approximately what was expressed. Well, guess who ends up getting invited to this little party?

Police officers circa 2020 are trained to handle this kind of situation, which essentially is "Don't take sides, keep them from killing each other. Enforce the law, when appropriate." It isn't like 1979, when I started. Then, I got three weeks of field training, worked on my own for a couple months and then went to a police academy. Now, officers get average 24 weeks of academy training and 16 weeks of field training before anyone would think to put them on the street alone. 

The men and women who showed up to this call deescalated the situation. They talked sense to the guy. They suggested some reasonable alternatives for him to follow, including the restaurant guy asking the inspector's boss WTF? (Only, the boss apparently had ordered this.)

"Nope. Not listening. Too angry, too frustrated. End of my rope, etc."

This is where the social media experts, setting aside their primary jobs as immunologists and epidemiologists, dusted off their roles as constitutional scholars and went after the cops. And, where I asked my entirely reasonable question.

As we've discussed previously, while police officers are invested with considerable discretion, one of the things they are obligated to do is follow the lawful orders of their superiors. Just about every police department and sheriff's office has that in their manual. Failure to do so is called "insubordination" and is grounds for termination.

Are you with me so far? My friends on social media suggest that officers are thugs, brutes and morons because they are enforcing the rules set down by their state. Those laws are unconstitutional, they argue, and the police officers are too stupid, too comfortable in their mundane public sector jobs and too happy to lord it over their fellow citizens to recognize that they are one step away from loading people onto railroad cars.

This is something we've discussed, Jacobson, police powers and all of that. Remember the dude with his hat on backward, the guy telling other cops to refuse lawful orders?

Some of you are saying "But, the governor of Cali has no problem going to $300 an entree restaurants to celebrate his birthday. What the actual frick? Isn't this whole thing an invention of Dr. Fauci so he could get on TV?" I get that. It isn't about whether the governor is a dick, or if The Good Doctor is a showboat. It's about whether the law enables the governor to issue public health orders, and makes people respect them.

So, here is my question. Do people expect their cops - when they are not neutralizing active shooters and evacuating people in the presence of an RV bomb and almost getting killed in the process - to also be constitutional scholars able to make fine distinctions Johnnie Roberts and his eight goofballs can't agree on, when half the people you serve think you're an idiot, and the other half applaud you for enforcing rules many citizens think are not nearly strict enough?

Just about every officer I served with, or met along the way of my 40 years in the justice system, is a fabulous person trying to do a damn difficult job. If there is a solution to my quandary - let's hear it!   

 

The Right Stuff

 Mourning the passing of Charles Elwood "Chuck" Yeager, USAF (ret).

"So Yeager takes [Project Engineer Jack] Ridley off to the side in the tin hanger and says: Jack, I got me a little ol' problem, here. Over at Pancho's the other night I sorta...dinged my goddamn ribs. Ridley says, Whattya mean...dinged? Yeager says, Well, I guess you might say I damned near like to...broke a couple of the sonsabitches." Tom Wolfe, The Right Stuff, (1979).

In fact, a few days prior to attempting the first official supersonic flight, Air Force test pilot Chuck Yeager had been thrown from a horse and broken two ribs. Rather than see the base doctor (which might result in his grounding) he rode an old motorcycle his friend Pancho Barnes (herself a pilot and owner of Pancho Barnes Happy Bottom Riding Club - a dude ranch and bar) and had them treated on the sly. So far, so good.

However, it meant that he could not shut the entryway door from inside the cockpit of the tiny, temperamental X-1. Jack Ridely, an accomplished test engineer and pilot, fashioned a solution using a length of broomstick handle. The rest, on October 14, 1947, is history.

Chuck Yeager grew up in West Virginia, and entered the US Army Air Forces as a private. He became an aircraft mechanic, then a non-commissioned pilot. He was shot down once, evading capture and assisting local partisans until he could be return to Allied lines. He resumed flying duties - why wouldn't he - and shot down several more aircraft, including one of the new jets deployed by Germany.

Yeager returned to the US after the war, and became a test pilot. This is where he steps onto the front page of aviation legend.

Aeronautical engineers once believed that the "Sound Barrier" actually represented something finite, an absolute wall. Hear again Tom Wolfe:

This led engineers to speculate that the g-forces became infinite at Mach 1 [the speed of sound], causing the aircraft to implode. They started talking about "the sonic wall" and "the sound barrier."

Not being an engineer, Yeager didn't believe the "barrier" existed.

How pervasive was, or is, the Yeager Legend? How deeply did his influence go in the aviation world? Wolfe:

Anyone who travels very much by airlines in the United States soon gets to know the voice of the airline pilot...

It was the [Appalachian] drawl of the most righteous of all the possessors of the right stuff: Chuck Yeager.

 There are no old, bold pilots. Somehow, a man who made a profession of testing cutting edge aircraft, who served in three wars (including combat missions in Vietnam) made it to ninety-seven.

With thanks, from a grateful nation.

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker

 "It's not that I'm smart. It's that I stay with the questions much longer." Albert Einstein.

What memories do you have of your father?

My father was no ordinary man. He grew up in the city, but loved the country. He was small in stature, but backed down to no one. In 1943 he and a friend patted the side of the Liberty Bell in his home town of Philadelphia and then enlisted in the Marine Corps. He survived a battle in a place called "The Meat Grinder," among the many other places he fought. He came home from the war to work in the US Space Program, raise a family and retire.

He was Irish, the grandson of a man who moved his family from Donegal.  Consequently, he had something of the poet in him. He had committed to memory countless verses, which he could recite seemingly at will.

Lest one think they were some of the better known of Yeats, or Joyce... Usually, they were ribald limericks about a man from Nantucket, or a hermit named Dave. He had a sufficient repertoire that, while on guard duty after Japan surrendered, he would write them on the outsides of the vehicles he was supposed to be guarding without being repetitious. The company commander was unamused.

And then, there was the free verse poem about a legislator from Arkansas who took offense at how the name of his state was being pronounced. My dad would burst forth: "Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker you bald-headed old son of a bitch. I've been trying to get your goddamned attention for the last half hour..."

My mother, who grew up in a more refined part of Philly, was openly horrified at the things my father could recite. One, a Christmas poem based in a penitentiary, made her swear.

Out of curiosity, over many years, I tried to locate the source of my father's Arkansas poem. Even in the internet age, it eluded me. Then...

I purchased a book on Kindle recently, On the Warpath in the Pacific, the life story of Admiral Joseph James "Jocko" Clark. Born in Cherokee Nation in pre-statehood Oklahoma, Admiral Clark was the first Native American to graduate the US Naval Academy, in 1918. Navy was a bit rough around the edges, something the blue blood regular Navy officers tried to remedy. Jocko found himself caught up in a hazing scandal in which plebes were made to memorize and recite a poem called "Change the Name of Arkansas."

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Goddamn your ornery soul all to hell.

No wonder I could never find it. That is the most marginally re-printable sentence. That, and one suggesting that comparisons between Kansas and Arkansas is like comparing the "gentle oscillations of a little June bride to the frantic clutches of a Klondike whore."

I can hear the echoes of my mom... "Daaaaavvvve."

According to legend, and owing to the significant passage of time, the version recited by Naval Academy plebes was but one version, my father having access to a varient, perhaps one embraced solely in the Marine Corps. Whatever, over the course of fifty-six years knowing the man, his memory of the poem never wavered.

I miss the old guy, for no other reason than he could be obnoxious, he could be irritable, he could get under a person's skin. But, he was never dull. As we approach the tenth anniversary of his passing, I can only say that he was one of a kind. 

 

Happy Turkey Day

 Consider a turkey who is fed every day. Every single feeding will firm up the bird's belief that it is the general rule to be fed every day by friendly members of the human race "looking out for its best interests" as a politician would say. On the Wednesday before Thanksgiving something unexpected will happen to the turkey. (On the problems of inductive reasoning), The Black Swan: The Impact of the Highly Improbable,(2010), Nassim Nicholas Taleb

In 2020, is WuFlu the Black Swan moment? Or, is the election?

Imagine you're some guy who is a politically engaged resident of a so-called Red State. You walked the soles off of several pairs of shoes, banging on doors. Spent hours on the phone, wore your hands raw pushing in lawn signs. You got your boat out for the parades, fired up the F250 on the weekends for the socially-distanced meets. Your wife made sandwiches, your kids pulled wagons full of pamphlets. Maybe you made the sandwiches and your wife banged on the door. Maybe your husband watched the kids. Whatever it was, you played your part, and cast your ballot.

Around you, something like 65% of your neighbors agreed with you. Upwards of 100% of your neighbors understand that, in a Constitutional Republic, the only way for the people to steer the Ship of State is for the ballot count to be fair. Your candidate wins because they got more votes. They lose because the other person did better. You sleep soundly.

You wake up the next day only to hear that "the other guy" is being dragged across the finish line because individuals in other states aren't nearly as principled as you. There are wild, unexplained swings involving hundreds of thousands of votes - almost all (99%?) in favor of "the other guy." The national press seems eager to play along, and social media blocks any attempt to call bullshit on what may be, or may not be, fraud.

There are real issues at stake in this election, fundamental to how you think America should work. You did your thing in Iraq, helped load a couple of your friends into plastic bags. Got a lot of their blood on you in the process. Maybe you were there when it happened, to hear them plead with God to let them live. And, here you are. Some asshole in some other state tipped the scales with a box of fake ballots and you're left asking yourself if your buddies died for all of this.

There are a very few Americans left who know what an existential threat to America feels like. We think it is our birthright to be fed by friendly politicians who are "looking out for our best interests." Candidate A wins, or Candidate B wins. We're all Americans, right?

If you say so, brother. I just wonder about that guy, his candidate's flags hanging from his porch. At what point does he drop "The Deuce" and start to seriously ask if it's time to cut ties with people who will lie, cheat, steal, murder, burn... Maybe he goes in to work in the morning and just figures "Fuck it, I'm okay."

What if he, and a lot of guys like him, don't? What happens when they get tired of playing the game straight, only to get fucked over without anyone giving a good goddamn? Countries have come and gone through history. Eventually, that guy gets pushed too far.

  That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

If you don't know where that paragraph comes from, you don't read enough.

I am advocating nothing. Just a cautionary tale - civilizations rely on one of two things to succeed. Force, or an unshakable belief among most of the citizenry that the system is equitable. You will win some, and lose some. The playing field is level, at least as level as humanly possible. In the absence of equity, the question becomes how much force leaders are willing to exert to stay in power. If you're interested, I wrote an excellent book about just how awful governmental violence looks, close up.

Happy Thanksgiving.     

Election Day 2020

 "They should be taught to deescalate. Shoot 'em in the leg."

Bikecopblog attempts to be non-partisan. We are not afraid to express an opinion. You are not required to like it, commit to it or even respect it. This is America. You are free to do your own thinking.

A vote for the Biden/Harris ticket is a vote against law enforcement. It is a vote to empower the Marxist Left who have advocated defunding and disbanding police departments all over the country. Both of the candidates have expressed their support for the defunding movement. Extreme radical members of the House have already stated they believe a Biden Presidency will be pliable enough to accomplish their agenda.

You don't have to take my word for it.

There is a reason the NYPD Union endorses Donald Trump. There is a reason the National Fraternal Order of Police endorses Donald Trump.

There is always room for improvement, reform. Hell, I just wrote a book about that. On these pages I've discussed police misconduct and the need for change. And, I know - Orange Man Bad.

What good are the millions of dollars spent on body cameras, if politicians stand by bleating anti-police rhetoric and facilitating unrest when officers clearly are defending themselves against a person with a weapon? What good is the "rule of law" when officers who are clearly responding to a lethal threat are indicted for political purposes? How many good men and women have turned their backs on a police career because they don't want to land in jail for the mere fact they went home at the end of their shift, instead of to a hospital, or a morgue?

We are not endorsing a candidate, or telling you how you should vote. All we're saying is this - the Biden/Harris ticket has expressly stated their support for the defunding/disbanding movement. And that's a fact.

Was This In The Brochure?

 "If I remember my training correctly, one of the lessons was titled 'Don't dig up the big box of plutonium, Mark.'" Mark Watney (Matt Damon), The Martian (2015).

I went to a pre-op conference with one of the surgeons who will be part of implanting the radioactive plaque on my left eye... Oh, did I miss a step?

About two weeks ago, I was diagnosed with a rare form of melanoma in my left eye. Apparently, only about 2000 people in the US hear those words every year. Believe me, I don't feel all that special.

This is a serious illness, but fortunately it was early and the PET scan (have you ever fallen asleep in a tube, woken up with a mask on your face and then had a panic attack?) was clear, so far. So, I have that going for me, which is nice...

I've enjoyed embarrassing good health over the years, to the point that the medical history I've had to share with about a dozen people usually includes a pause, they set down their pen and say "Nothing?" Our joke has been that when I get something, it will be a doozie. When I related this to one of the nurses, she said "You won't tell that joke again."

She doesn't really know us.

The prognosis is good, at least in the near term. I have surgery on October 7th and - amazingly - I will be too radioactive for Pat or the dogs to come near me for more than one or two momentary PDAs a day. There is a slight possibility the radioactive pellets might escape, in which case we - pick them up with tweezers, put them in a jar of water and set it someplace remote. One of the lessons...

After that, maybe double vision for a while, with no real way to know how much more sight I get back.

It's a long story and at some point I'll be available for margaritas, Mexican food and a story to tell. Until then, I can feel the strength and good wishes you are conveying. We'll make sure to keep everyone in the loop.

Until then - keep a happy thought.  

RBG

 Mourning the passing of Associate Justice of the Supreme Court Ruth Bader Ginsberg.

It has become chic to occupy the parapets of partisanship, and become amateur political operatives at every opportunity. It is particularly so upon the death of a Supreme Court Justice. Friends and family members have not had time to digest the sad news before Washington moves on, if one can call it that.

Ruth Bader Ginsberg served her country in an indispensable way. She was a tireless advocate for equal rights, especially where gender is concerned. At a time when women were openly discriminated against - and the law permitted it - she began the long, arduous process of evening the playing field. A gifted and accomplished law student, she was initially deprived of the opportunity to serve as a judicial clerk because of her gender.

It is easy to disagree with Justice Ginsberg on matters of law. Were it not for reasonable differences of jurisprudential opinion, law would be a sterile and boring endeavor. It would not be very difficult to find an array of her opinions where even a cursory reading results in head shaking and tut-tutting.

It is also not hard to find a person fully committed to justice, equality and freedom. Her opinions were well written, precise and forceful. It was common during a Supreme Court term to select one of her missives and admire the pith with which she stated her position. Sometimes, grudgingly, I had to admit she changed my mind.

Justice Ginsberg served her country by being a strong advocate for her principles. They didn't change with the prevailing wind. When she wrote an opinion, it was hers - not, as so many mistakenly conclude, constrained by either rigid ideology or political party talking points. If the breadth of her work does not demonstrate that, one need only know that her closest friend on the Court was, until his own death, Antonin Scalia.

The law is more just and fair because you served admirably, Justice Ginsberg. Thank you.

A Sequel to Embrace

How many good movie sequels have you seen? How many were disappointing? And, how many were left unmade?

Part of being a fiction writer is being vigilant, looking for story lines, weaving and interweaving lives that never were into characters that readers enjoy. It isn't something that can be turned off, then on again. It is a presence.

Before this gets too weird, let me go a little Andy Rooney on you. For many, that reference is obscure. I'll be right here after Google or Bing is through with you.

Okay. Did you ever wonder what happened to Zack Mayo? He was the lead in An Officer and a Gentleman, a Naval aviation officer candidate who falls for one of the "townies." The plot gets dark for a while, and there is tension between Zack and their senior instructor, Marine Gunnery Sergeant Foley. Foley thinks Zack is going to defect with an F-14. Zack is doing the things that have always worked for him - when Foley labels him a "slick little hustler" it's not far off the mark.

Zack makes it, graduates with his class and becomes an officer in the US Navy. His career path includes basic flight school and then... What?

An adorable WWII movie, made more so because of the cast, is Operation Petticoat. Cary Grant plays a sub captain whose boat is caught up in the first days of the war. It is damaged and sinks at anchorage. He enlists (after a fashion) the talents of another "slick little hustler" - Lt. (jg) Nick Holden - played by Tony Curtis. Holden joined the USNR because a uniform gets a person into all the right clubs. The film ends with... Well, it's now Commander Holden, whose next command is a nuke boat.

Is it like that? Does Zack Mayo win his wings? Does he fly the F-14 in combat, maybe become CAG on a carrier? Does he lead his pilots into war on 16 January 1991? Was Mayo pulling Pentagon duty on 9/11?

Or, does he fail, wash out? Did he lack the delicate touch and nimble mind necessary to fly a military aircraft? Maybe he said the wrong thing to the wrong person and, to quote Top Gun's Commander "Stinger" Jardian, ended up "flying rubber dog shit out of Hong Kong." 

Maybe there was a night when his Tomcat was acting up, the weather sucked and he was bingo fuel, that he and his RIO never made it back to the ship. Wife Paula was left with a folded flag, and kids to raise.

Zack had that "slick hustler" side that would have come in handy when all of the book answers failed. When the airplane was having a day, when things looked bad, when there was somebody out there who needed a bomb put in exactly the right place... When a Marine who sounded a lot like Gunny Foley was on the radio saying things like "danger close" and only Lt. Commander "Mayonnaise" Mayo had the balls to do what had to be done, because he'd once been the man with no place else to go. A Marine had given him the chance to prove what he had, when no one else believed in him.

We have a start, don't we? This is one of the reasons I love being a writer. 

A Small Fortune

 "To make a small fortune owning a bike shop, first start with a big fortune..." Anonymous.

The Austin Police Department - according to reports in their local paper - is looking for a new bike shop to service their gear. Mellow Johnny's, an outfit that once was (or, maybe still is) owned by Lance Armstrong, terminated the contract early. They left a substantial amount of cash on the table in the interest of expressing some kind of principle. That makes me think Lance does not still own the shop.

I'll pause here, and draw a distinction between me and actual journalists. An actual journalist would probably have investigated Lance's interest in Mellow Johnny's. An actual journalist would have said how much money the shop gave up. An actual journalist would have written that Mellow Johnny's is/was owned by Disgraced former bike racer stripped of his mellow johnnies Lance Armstrong.

But, as has been said by Kings and Queens, I am not an actual journalist.

The article describes that the activities of the Austin Police Department during recent nocturnal festivities there were not in keeping with the sensibilities of Mellow Johnny's wrench-turners and goo-slingers. Something about community policing, or something.

Huh.

There is no better way to get cops out of their cars and interacting with the community than on a bike. Readers of these pages don't have to be told that. Hell, if you've gotten this far, you're probably aware of that.

Mellow Johnny's can do what they want - they are a private business free to make these decisions for themselves. Austin PD will just have to muddle along and give someone else hundreds of thousands of dollars.

But, if Mellow Johnny's thinks a meaningless, transparent, futile gesture like that is a way to improve law enforcement, they are wrong.

Oh, Mellow Johnny is a play on maillot jaune, the yellow jersey, awarded after each stage to the race leader (and then, to the ultimate race winner) in the Tour de France. That Lance, what a clever guy.

A Moment of Weakness

 "Build up your weaknesses until they become your strengths." Knute Rockne.

I love to write. No kidding, huh? I often write just for the pure joy of creating scenes, characters, situations. I like nothing better than to take a long bike ride, think about a writing project (often with the help of my cycling friends) and then sit in front of a laptop for several hours.

I suck at marketing. 

It isn't that my writing sucks - it doesn't (I say that in all humility). It's just that when it comes to telling other people that they should buy one of my books, read it, and enjoy the ride, finding the words is a chore.

I took a class. It helped - a little.

I've had other people write things. It helped - a little.

I've "boosted" things on line. It helped - a little.

I thought maybe I'd look around, see who I could copy. I discovered a guy who plays guitar. Maybe...him?

His name is Joe Bonamassa. He's a blues guitarist of some repute, a guys who's won awards, played with some people I've actually heard of (as though that's the gold standard?) and appears at Red Rocks during years the 'Rona hasn't kept us all inside. He does brief videos, has voiceovers from that drag race guy ("Sunnnnddaaaayyy...") and generally makes a big deal out of his own music. Fine.

Torn from today's headlines, police procedural titan James A Greer's pithy new novel "A Guardian's Promise" combines grit, determination and sacrifice into a stunning web of fast-paced action and mystery. Enter the searing world of a policewoman whose femininity is often masked by the hardened, street-smart beat cop she has had to become. 

I dunno... Too much?

I actually think you'd like it, especially if you've ever wondered what really goes on inside a police department. I guess I'm something of an authority on that.

A little.

Letting Go

“If we can just let go and trust that things will work out they way they're supposed to, without trying to control the outcome, then we can begin to enjoy the moment more fully. The joy of the freedom it brings becomes more pleasurable than the experience itself.”
― Goldie Hawn

Release Day for "A Guardian's Promise."

My first release day was in the fall of 2007. A small-imprint publisher had agreed to market a short story called "A Parasol in a Hurricane." Pat and I were in Mexico, at a resort near Playa del Carmen. We excitedly got onto the computer in their clubhouse - it being pre-readily available Wi-Fi - and awaited the announcement. And... There it was, my first published fiction work.

Release day means a lot of things. It means income. It means seeing a book cover with my name on it. And, it means - gasp - that it no longer truly belongs to me. I've let it go, given it to those who open the cover and begin to read. The book is now about wherever the reader's mind takes them.

Since then, I've seen the release of five full-length novels featuring three distinct characters - Sergeant Amy Painter, Detective Karen Sorenson and Deputy Cecilia (Cici) Onofrio. Each release day has been filled with feelings of accomplishment, anticipation and joy.

I don't write because I think it will make us rich - good thing. I don't write because I think I'm making a contribution to great literature - police novels are stories.

I write because I had an interesting job, and I think others would love to see what some of it entailed. "Guardian" is more of a classic police procedural - cops doing law enforcement like cops. But, it is also a cautionary tale, something being born out in headlines, in nightly news and via online video links from streets across the country.

Policing is a noble profession, and anyone who works as an officer has made a solemn pledge - that they will deal with the needs of their community, come what may. They have pledged to uphold the law, to risk their own lives to save others, and to do it day in-day out, for years. In spite of the stress, the ambiguities and the drama - day in-day out.

No human endeavor is perfect. What "Guardian" also represents is how imperfect people can sometimes forget who they serve, and why they are invested with the awesome power to deprive another citizen of their rights to life, liberty and property.

In that case, who stands up and says "No more?"

A Guardian's Promise

“If there's a book that you want to read, but it hasn't been written yet, then you must write it.”

― Toni Morrison

 

I’ve written several blogs about the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis, and the immediate aftermath of unrest and political opportunism. That’s not why we’re here, today.

In about two weeks, I’ll be announcing the release of a book that sat dormant for almost a decade, as others took shape and were published. 

I’ve had the benefit of a number of great editors, and a writing instructor who has read thousands of rough draft pages. Friends have helped shape characters, suggested plots and helped smooth out ragged writing. Family members – my wife especially – have supported what is, in essence, a solitary pursuit.

I loved being a police officer. It was a difficult job. I was surrounded by some of the best people, anywhere, individuals committed to risking their lives to save others. My experiences have given me all the material a writer could ever ask for, while I was serving in a manner that was richly rewarding in and of itself.

This book began as an examination of how a policewoman’s life can take abrupt, unfortunate turns. The plot’s undercurrent of law enforcement work was secondary.

That secondary plot involved misconduct of the most insidious and yet modest, almost innocuous sort, something all police departments wrestle with on an ongoing basis. There are small, seemingly insignificant indicia of trouble, often ignored. Then, something public occurs and everyone looks around in amazement, wondering how that would occur here.

A variety of causes are generally bandied about. Bad people, ineffective leadership, weak supervisors (especially from the outside looking in). There is rarely the observation, made in the comic strip Pogo, that “We have met the enemy, and He is Us.”

Massive police reform (or, even more massive police defunding or disbanding) is all the rage in some circles today. I’m not here to weigh in on what would be massive mistakes running contrary to what the actual citizens of a jurisdiction actually want. Maybe another day.

I didn’t write this book to suggest specific reforms. The department from which I retired has successfully employed a “co-response” initiative. There are other things departments should look at. My bias is education and training, but that’s not this book's objective.

I wanted to call it Preserve, Protect, and Defend based on the oath each law enforcement officer takes. It didn’t seem to fit the overall message of the book, how each individual doesn’t just take a formal oath, but makes a series of promises – to family, to co-workers, to lovers. They make a promise to themselves, one that is often the most difficult to keep.

Constructing the cover was a struggle – thanks to all who contributed observations. At some point, it is about letting go, getting the book out, doing my best and taking ownership. You’ll get the idea when you read the acknowledgments section.

A Guardian’s Promise. I hope you like it.

Human Events

Among the darkest times in living memory was the early part of 1942, when Hitler's armies were nearly to Moscow, when German submarines were sinking our oil tankers off the coast of Florida and New Jersey, within sight of the beaches, and there was not a thing we could do about it. When half our Navy had been destroyed at Pearl Harbor. We had scarcely any Air Force. Army recruits were drilling with wooden rifles and there was no guarantee that the Nazi war machine could be stopped. It was then, in 1942, that the classical scholar Edith Hamilton issued an expanded edition of her book The Greek Way, in which in the preface she wrote the following: "I have felt while writing these new chapters a fresh realization of the refuge and strength the past can be to us in the troubled present. Religion is the great stronghold for the untroubled vision of the eternal but there are others, too. We have many silent sanctuaries in which we can find breathing space, to free ourselves from the personal, to rise above our harassed and perplexed minds and catch sight of values that are stable, which no selfish and timorous preoccupations can make waver, because they are the hard won, permanent possessions of humanity. When the world is storm driven and the bad that happens and the worst that threatens are so urgent as to shut out everything else from view, then we need to know all the strong fortresses of the spirit which men have built through the ages."

David McCullough, The Jefferson Lecture, Washington, DC (May 15, 2003)

Who among us, as we gather (or, not) to celebrate the birth of our nation, does not recognize these as trying times? One could not be criticized to any extent for turning their backs on The Great Septic Tank otherwise known as social media. Neither can one look down on eschewing the sweeping grandiosity of a media who collectively reject the words of Edward R. Murrow (The thing you have to remember is that just because your voice carries halfway around the world, you are no wiser than when it carried only to the end of the bar).

To Whom shall we turn, in times like these, to steady our hands, and our hearts? The answer is the course of human events.

It is currently unfashionable, and in certain quarters potentially physically dangerous, to reflect back on the Founders of our country, and to access their individual and collective wisdom. Flawed men, for sure. Hear, once again, David McCullough:

Those we call The Founders were living men. None was perfect. Each had his human flaws and failings, his weaknesses. They made mistakes, let others down, let themselves down. Washington could be foolhardy, Adams could be vain, irritable. Jefferson evasive, at times duplicitous, and even in their day many saw stunning hypocrisy in the cause of Liberty being championed by slave masters. They were imperfect mortals, human beings. Jefferson made the point in the very first line of the Declaration of Independence - "When in the course of human events" -  the accent should be on the word human.

They left us a legacy, one that is not easily ignored because the original expression of these ideals is kept safe behind glass, guarded constantly, and displayed for all the world to see.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That, to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That, whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.

Institute government... The Founders did not believe that a free people would prosper through the lack of government, but through a government that they themselves organized to further "their safety and happiness." It was not rule by mob or rabble, not laws made by proxy, not the cry of loud and selfish voices. It was the intent of Americans to be governed by Americans, organized under American laws created with the consent of Americans acting together for the general welfare of Americans.

There is a video, one that is readily available and has been seen by millions, detailing a solo flight taken by a seventeen-year-old girl - Maggie - in Beverly, Massachusetts. The business end of her right landing gear departs the aircraft on takeoff. At first a bit upset, she settles down and lands her crippled plane successfully when her instructor says over the radio: "Remember what we've talked about, Maggie. Go back to the basics."

Back to the basics. One final time, David McCullough:

The American experiment was, from its start, an unfulfilled promise. There was much work to be done. There were glaring flaws to correct, unfinished business to attend to, improvements and necessary adjustments to devise, in order to keep pace with the onrush of growth and change and expanding opportunities. Those brave, high minded people of earlier times gave us stars to steer by, a government of laws, not of men. Equal justice before the law, the importance of the individual, the ideal of equality, freedom of religion, freedom of thought and expression, and the love of learning. From them, in our own dangerous and promising present, we can take heart.

Let's all be Maggie. We may be in trouble, but we know the basics, know what we have to do. May you and yours have a happy, healthy and optimistic Independence Day. It was the gift of the Founders to us.  

    

That's What Independence Day is all about, Charlie Brown

"[A]s Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor."

Declaration of Independence, 1776


In 1776, a document circulated, alleging that a free people could describe the enumerated, limited scope and structure of their government, choose their own representatives, create and enforce their own laws, and determine the course of their own lives in peace and liberty. Representative government was not unheard of in history, or even in the Empire of Great Britain. The extent to which the Colonialists took it was beyond anything seen in that era. It was, as historian David McCullough wrote, "[A] declaration of political faith and brave intent freely arrived at by an American Congress."


Each July 4th, we celebrate our declaration of political independence from the English Parliament and from the Crown, and our commitment which, essentially, binds us to a republican (representative) form of government. We elect representatives, who wield only the powers we've described, and in a manner to which we've agreed beforehand.


There have been many dark periods in our history. We may be living through one of them now. It was inconceivable, when the Revolutionary War began, that the citizen army of George Washington was a match for the professionals among the King's forces. But, Washington prevailed. It was a cause for celebration, and remains so even during the trying and tumultuous times of 2020.


We celebrate, among other things, the freedom of nameless, faceless basement dwellers to post stupid stuff on the internet. To wit:


"Please remember if you allow your government to tell you, you can't have fireworks. Then also allow your government to cancel your city firework show (that you already paid for). Then you have missed the entire purpose of independence day."

Really? The free people of my city duly elected representatives to hold office, and make those laws they deemed are in the best interest of order, and public safety. They have made fireworks of any kind illegal. We, as citizens of a political subdivision organized under the laws of the state of Colorado, and the United States of America, have spoken.

Would you assholes setting off bombs in the middle of the night, and then proclaiming it is because that's what Independence Day is all about, knock it the fuck off?

You don't know what you are talking about. 

Safe Behind A Wall

SB 217 was going to pass, come what may. Some of the more idiotic proposals were modified with amendments, or dropped altogether. Much of it is obviously virtue-signaling. How the Colorado Legislature and Governor felt moved to this hasty piece of work because some asshole in Minnesota couldn't put an arrestee in a patrol car without killing him... Incomprehensible is the exact opposite of what it is. It is entirely comprehensible.

Colorado's politicians were always going to do what they did. They were always going to add additional layers of "accountability" to police officers, whether cops in Colorado deserve the additional layers or not. Our state constitution permits these individuals to pass this bill, the Governor to sign it, and have it become law. That's the way it works. One need not agree with the outcome to support the right of the people to decide these issues.

Why do you have to call us names in the process? The pronouncements from individual legislators, and the Governor, suggest that these "long overdue" measures are necessary to overcome the "racism and oppression" found in the system.

Thanks. On top of everything else, being called a racist by my own government makes me feel a lot better.

This is a slap in the face to the thousands upon thousands of Colorado Law Enforcement officers, deputies and State Troopers who have served, and continue to serve honorably. It is an abomination to the memories of officers who have given their lives ensuring the safety of, and protecting the rights of, Colorado citizens and the people who visit our state. It is an example of denial by people who forget that members of the detail protecting them have encountered armed individuals within the very walls of their workplace, the officers risking their lives to protect the "leaders."

The politics of 2020 probably demanded that "something" be done. But, you made it personal when you said it was because of dishonor on the part of Colorado law enforcement. I served proudly, honorably, in all or parts of five decades. I was surrounded by some of the best people I will ever meet.

You could have had it both ways. You chose, instead, the insults. It is unworthy of a Coloradoan.

Between a Rock, and Harry's Place

"History repeats itself. That's the trouble with history." Clarence Darrow (Henry Fonda), IBM Presents Clarence Darrow, 1974.

It has certainly been an historic...or, is it a historic...few months. In an historic... In a very historic era, we have seen, among other things, a pandemic leading courts to brush the cobwebs from a case one hundred and fifteen years old to approve of and justify the first peacetime, long-term, shelter-in-place orders of healthy people in, well, in anybody's memory.

Then George Floyd died at the hands of a Minneapolis police officer in clear view of three other officers and a street full of people. The ensuing unrest led some legislatures - Colorado's being one of them - to consider banning the affirmative defense of Qualified Immunity for police officers.

I handled at some length what qualified immunity is in the post Headlines, Not Solutions. There is no real need to do that here. But, the irony of the situation that it places cops in is too ironic to ignore. Let me set the scene.

You and a cover officer are dispatched to "Harry's Place" restaurant on a report that the owner, in violation of your state's shelter in place law, has thrown open their doors and is doing business. The Governor has declared a state of emergency, the health department has issued their finding closing all restaurants; your chief, your division chief, your commander, your sergeant and your legal advisor all assure you that every executive order issued by the Governor is valid. They toss around some case law, just so you know they aren't pulling this out of their asses. Your sergeant gets you on the phone and asks you to stand by while the Health Inspector cites the owner for violation of Title Blah blah blah. Let's stipulate that every one of those officials - on that fateful day - has correctly stated the law.

You aren't so sure. You've read a bunch of stuff in cop groups on Facebook, watched some YouTube videos and interacted with senior officers who think all of this is, frankly, buuullshit. Things are getting better, there is talk about a phased opening in a week or two and some courts around the country are nibbling around the edges of finding exceptions to the 1905 Supreme Court case your command staff says is valid. Against your better judgment, you go.

This isn't Sultans of Swing. Harry does mind, he minds a great deal. There are words, an argument. You take Harry by the arm (which he also minds a great deal) and escort him out to your car, away from the customers who are beginning to ask - politely, at least at first - just what in the fuck you think you are doing. You watch as the germ geek gives Harry his summons, you politely tell Harry to have a nice day...

And, six months later you show up in court to testify that you did, indeed, witness countless persons consuming unknown alcoholic beverages and assorted food items, apparently served by employee or employees of Harry. Only, there is no court, and the judge isn't going to look at the 27 8X10 glossy pictures you took proving Harry's was open. The court dismisses the ticket on the grounds that the "emergency" as defined in the governor's declaration had passed. The law Harry was summoned for was invalid. Not to worry, your legal advisor says soothingly. You followed the law as it stood six months ago.

Only, your state has eliminated qualified immunity as an affirmative defense. The fact that your participation in citing Harry had not been "clearly established" as a violation of his rights doesn't matter anymore. You detained Harry by involuntarily escorting him to your car - he was not free to go - without probable cause because the law you relied on was unconstitutional. You are not just subject to lawsuit, but it will have to go to the jury because it turns on matters of fact, not law. Even the reasonableness of your conduct doesn't matter. What a reasonable officer should have known doesn't matter because the whole concept was tossed in the shitter up on Capital Hill. You could lose. Everything. Including Fasha, your dog.

As if that isn't bad enough, the burden of proof in civil court is "preponderance of evidence." The definition of preponderance is: evidence which is more credible and convincing than that presented by the other party or which shows that the fact to be proven is more probable than not. Isn't that a happy thought?

 

So, guess what happens, State of Colorado, when the next governor-defined state of emergency declaration happens? It won't? See above. 

Any reasonable, rational officer will tell their chain to fuck off and take their letter of reprimand for inviting the Chief to do it herself.

Ironic, don't you think? 

An Open Letter

To Governor Jared Polis; Senator Jessie Danielson; Representative Chris Kennedy; Senator Leroy M. Garcia, Jr.; Senator Rhonda Fields; Representative Leslie Herod; Representative Serena Gonzales-Gutierrez

Dear Governor Polis and esteemed members of the Colorado General Assembly,

I am writing to express my high level of concern regarding SENATE BILL 20-217 as currently written. While I understand the need to do something given the current climate of anger, frustration, and worry, rushing a bill of this magnitude and impact will result in bad law, diminished trust in the process, and misplaced financial impact.  

Briefly – I spent thirty-five years as a law enforcement officer for a Front Range Department, twenty-one of which were as a first-line supervisor. I spent twenty-seven years teaching in the police academy, and five years assigned as a supervisor to the Jefferson County/Lakewood PD Academy, arguably the premier academy in Colorado. I spent ten years as an adjunct faculty member at Metropolitan State University. I have practiced law in Colorado and New York.

I began my studies in Criminal Justice in 1972 as a direct result of disillusionment with what I was seeing on the TV news about police corruption, a lack of training and discipline, and an overall sense that departments were unresponsive to the needs of their communities. When I began my career in Colorado in 1979, the professionalism wave had picked up momentum – there was still a lot of work to be done.

There is still a lot of work to be done. Recent events have highlighted that reforms still do not prevent uncommon but totally unacceptable aberrant behavior on the part of officers. High-profile, intolerable, shocking and fatal episodes of police mis- and malfeasance appear, on their face, to be immune to incremental or traditional means of reform. That much does not abide disagreement in any form.

The natural reaction among leaders is to do something, on the reasonable theory that anything is better than the status quo. It is comforting to put down into words anguish, frustration and a sense of powerlessness, clothed in the legal structure of proposed legislation that has a facial relationship with progress.

What is now on the table, what passes for reform, has so many pitfalls in the shape of unintended consequences that I wonder – perhaps it is time not for haste, but for prudence. Here in Colorado, we have the advantage of our temperament, our western style of common sense problem-solving, and a very real sense that policing in our state is, for the most part, woven successfully into the fabric of a society nominally at peace with itself.

I do not presume to tell you how to lead. I only make one basic suggestion, which I think will make the resulting legislation something for the rest of the country to emulate, and something for which Coloradans can be proud.

Before sending anything to Governor Polis’s desk, begin the inquiry by asking the advice of the average Coloradan. Police Chiefs and command officers are fine men and women, but their relationship with line policing is attenuated by the distance between their office and the street. Find out the frustrations of the officers who are tasked with solving Colorado’s law enforcement issues, and see what tools they would want.

Find out what citizens want, not by asking so-called community leaders, but the average citizen. What are their expectations of government, of public safety and the law. Surveys and studies have their places, but what does the average citizen say.

Colorado can easily be broken up into three distinct regions. Do your efforts attempt to address problems that don’t manifest themselves in – say – Grand Junction, or Sterling?

Finally, please understand – as well-meaning as any effort is, we are people. Flawed, fearful, freedom-loving and generous. We can do this, together. We can make Colorado a beacon of hope in turbulent times. We successfully balanced the priorities of a vibrant state during the recent pandemic by listening to an array of Colorado voices. Law enforcement reform is no different.

Thank you. God bless Colorado, and the United States of America.

James Greer

Lakewood, CO  

Getting to Good

Whenever you're faced with an explanation of what's going on in [government], the choice between incompetence and conspiracy, always choose incompetence.

Charles Krauthammer

As one might imagine, police reform has been a hot topic among the Bikecopblog Family of readers. There is some agreement, some dissention, an allegation on the part of another police officer that I am, in fact, an idiot (he's not the first) and the real possibility that my alter-ego is the Underminer. 

I'll give that one a chance to percolate.

It's a million degrees and, at the time of this, our AC has crapped out. It is amazing to sit in the sun and revel in summer temperatures, but only if there is a place to cool off. So - no bike ride today, but time on the stationary trainer (in the very comfortable basement) bridges the gap.

I generally put on either: A fitness workout from GCN Network, or; Dan Bongino. Dan is a dose of red meat, with a bit of My Cousin Vinny thrown in. Today was an interview, which ended before my countdown clock expired. So I got to watch Peter Robinson on Uncommon Knowledge talk to NY Times columnist Ross Douthat.

Think what you will about the NYT. They may be obnoxious partisans, but no one ever said they are stupid. The fellow made an especially interesting point about The 'Rona that I think carries over to what is happening across our country. It might be a way - just one way - to bridge a few gaps.

Mr. Douthat explored - in a long and meandering interview - the role of competence in government. He employed the "You had one job" methodology (this about the CDC) to explain that people's animosities toward government aren't entirely that government is corrupt, but that government isn't competent even to deliver basic services. Think about it. I did, in the context of the "Defund the Police" movement.

I'm with former US representative Trey Gowdy - defunding the police is the single stupidest idea expressed during the recent turmoil. Public safety is a basic role of government ("Among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure those rights governments are instituted among men deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed."). Law enforcement is a core duty, a core role, of governments...like, for forever.

In 1969, citizens of a section of Jefferson County (Colorado) decided to incorporate for the purpose of...wait for it...creating their own police department. They wanted to create a model of excellence, capacity, character and competence. Whether they did or not (I think they did, but I'm not objective - I worked for them for thirty-three years) is beside the point. Americans see protection by their police department as a right endowed by their Creator. With me?

The defunders have a plan - community members trained to intervene in disputes using proven methods of... Blah, blah, blah. It's all very pre-Sir Robert Peel. Eventually, we are right back to what we have now. Okay, but peel (I know, right?) back their naivete and they may be saying something worth considering.

Let's look past the rhetoric, and the anger, and the emotion. What are they saying to police departments, these people who want to defund the police?

"We don't trust you to do the basic job of protecting us, of respecting us. We'd rather give it a whirl ourselves."

Maybe that's silly. But, wait! Remove the anarchists, the common criminals, the opportunists and the pimply guys just trying to get laid and what do you have? Very angry, very emotional people who don't just think four cops in Minneapolis let them down, they think cops everywhere are letting them down. Cops may be great dancers, they may look cool when you pour a bucket of water on them, but if you have to call them for something, well... It's like Forrest Gump's box of chocolates. No, it's Bertie Bott's Every Flavour Beans. You might get something that makes your day brighter. You might easily get ear wax, or vomit.

You call the cops and who shows up? A caring, empathetic, talented man or woman (who probably went to our academy) or do you get "Mr. Perpetual Bad Day?" People understand that cops have to be able to meet violence with some level of violence, but... Shouldn't the citizen be, I dunno, violent? They understand the cops didn't make the 'Rona laws, but could they at least read the sign whose dictates they are enforcing?

Folks, before you get all defensive, let's play a game. You call out on an occupied suspicious vehicle at three in the morning, and dispatch sends you a backup. You think...them? Your friends all the way across town think - "Them?" - and start your way. Go ahead, tell me I'm wrong.

Poor training, non-existent leadership, crappy standards, politicians catering to the mob. The overwhelming majority of cops, and I say this based on experience in five decades (three days short of a sixth), are courageous, intelligent and caring people. They want to do the best job possible.

Yes, this includes the Minneapolis cops. They work in a tough environment, with minimal support from even their own command staff. They've stayed because they want to do a good job. You try it sometime, when the training money isn't spent on core competencies.

The protesters are saying, in theory if not in fact. "We pay our taxes and we get you. Brilliant."

I spent three years working for the housing authority in Syracuse, while I attended law school. I met hundreds of people living on government assistance - public housing, food stamps, welfare. They were, almost without exception, honest, intelligent people who were trying to make their way in life. They wanted safe communities, they wanted the best for their children and they wanted Syracuse PD to arrest criminals, keep the peace and treat them with respect. Does that sound familiar?

Before you think this is a leftist idea to throw us all into turmoil...how many guns have you bought this week? And, where are they?

We owe it to ourselves as citizens, but we also owe it to our cops, that when police departments ask the questions of how to gain and maintain the trust of our communities, we make a commitment to them, that we support excellence in the core competencies. Support we will back up at the ballot box, at city council meetings and at tax time.

The best cops I ever met are the ones (you know who you are) who were always asking themselves, pushing themselves, demanding of themselves - how can I be better? When someone calls the cops, and I get there... Will I make a positive difference? If not, where do I go to get what I need?

Because they always want to be competent.

Oh yeah. "Behold, the Underminer! I'm always beneath you, but nothing is beneath me!"