The perpetrator as person: Theological reflections on the just war tradition and the use of force by police

Abstract

Introduction Since the end of the Cold War, much of the attention of citizens and politicians the United States has swiveled inward upon other issues of life and death, particular the crime and violence on their own streets. Cries for action this domestic arena appear to be growing, as evidenced by the past decade's call to arms a so-called against drugs and by Washington's recent, torrid advocacy for a crime bill and for more police officers the war against crime. Indeed, such trends have led one observer to remark credibly: We are a nation at with ourselves: a civil war. of law enforcement against the forces of crime.(1) At the same time, however, several highly-publicized incidents, which may or may not have arisen from such an aggressive approach to dealing with crime, have provoked public alarm and scrutiny; and therefore reflection and assessment is called for to consider whether and how this kind of war ought to be waged. One notorious incident involved an African-American male named Rodney King. While driving on the evening of March 3,1991, King was pulled over by and had a confrontation with Los Angeles police officers, who proceeded to arrest him on a number of charges. On the surface this sort of incident occurs frequently and could have been reported as a routine traffic arrest, except for the additional fact that it was filmed by a bystander with a video camera. Indeed, the video showed all who watched the replays on the news media how several of fifteen uniformed officers repeatedly beat, bruised, and lacerated King. Although shocking to many Americans, one criminal justice expert writes: That beating was not unique the history of policing. It probably has kin every state the Union, every country, and indeed every significant police force as far back as we can trace the police function.(2) To be sure, considering the prevalence of violence our culture, and given the rote adoption of the war model or paradigm for law enforcement by the government, such incidents are likely to be less rare. In fact, researchers estimate that police officers kill about 600 criminal suspects yearly, shoot and wound an additional 1,200, and fire at and miss another 1,800.(3) This being the case, the issue of the use of force, especially deadly force, by law enforcement officials the performance of their duties deserves vigilant scrutiny. How are such uses of force justified and restrained? Is there a uniform approach? What model for restraint would be most appropriate for law enforcement the U.S.? If police forces are a against crime, how do they determine when to use force and when it is excessive? What can prevent another Rodney King incident from happening? Is there a way to restrain the use of force among our police, and if so, what is its ethical basis? Such questions are certainly formidable and are attracting, the light of incidents like King's, a burgeoning interest and attention which is evident among social scientists, criminologists, and increasingly, philosophers. For example, criminal justice ethicist Lawrence Sherman proposes that, on the one hand, many issues police ethics are in fact clear-cut, and hold little room for serious philosophical analysis, while on the other hand, the use of force deserves such attention since it is very complex, with many shades of gray.(4) Furthermore, Sherman sweepingly asserts: The most basic question of all criminal justice ethics, of course, is whether and under what conditions one can reconcile doing harm to others with our widespread norms against harm.(5) At this juncture, he muses that the literature on pacifism, non-violence, and conscientious objection may be relevant, but adds that he has unfortunately not seen such an approach applied to the domestic use of force by police. Moreover, he queries: a pacifist be a police officer or a judge? Can a Christian? Can a Rawlsian? …