WHEN DID THE THIN BLUE LINE BECOME A TOWERING WALL?
“Every society gets the kind of criminal it deserves. What is equally true is that every community gets the kind of law enforcement it insists on.” — Robert Kennedy
In 1979, I swore an oath to become a police officer. The San Diego Police Department at the time had a slogan, a slogan affixed to every city police car today still, “America’s Finest — Protect and Serve.” I worked 28 years upholding those ideals.
On Nov. 7, 1979, Police Chief William Kolender wrote a letter to my graduating academy class reminding us of our responsibility and promise “to become a part of that community and not an entity apart from it. This is the promise of police work as a humanistic profession, and its contribution to a free and just society.”
What came along with the promises and responsibilities Chief Kolender alluded to are the Law Enforcement Code of Ethics. This ethics code was adopted by the International Association of Chiefs of Police in 1957 and codified in the California Code of Regulations. The ethics code calls for officers to keep their lives unsullied.
The idea of a thin blue line is regularly bandied about in public, in popular media and among the ranks. Peace and law and order on one side; disorder, lawlessness and chaos on the other. The cops that line.
At the outset, most police cadets carry with them a compassionate calling to help those who cannot help themselves. Some call it a noble cause, which can be altruistic and invites self-sacrifice. This is what allows cops to walk the thin blue line.
Cops would stand in the middle, blending the separation by bringing the lawbreakers to justice, or setting the stage for perpetrators’ eventual reintegration with the law-abiding side. Yet there is wear and tear to the thin blue line.
Somehow, over four decades of law enforcement and societal change, the thin blue line transformed, for some, to represent a great divide. The cops on one side and the rest of society on the other. This divide is represented graphically with the iconic misrepresentation of a black and white American f lag with a singular blue line through the middle.
How and when did this transformation begin to represent a division rather than the community together? Did the cops pull away from and set themselves apart from the communities they police? Or were they pushed away, pushed aside and apart by society? Was the transformation happening as far back as the 1960s when Robert Kennedy wrote those words?
Law enforcement has a long history in civilization. Some form of law enforcement were is described in records within ancient civilizations. Peoples have needed and wanted members to help protect local societies from injustices. They sometimes need protecting from themselves.
Some suggest the thin blue line f lag represents solidarity. Solidarity of what? An us and a them? Belonging and othering is nearly always fueled by fear. We humans seem to find our in-groups and out-groups all too easily. Could it represent symptoms of an emotional, psychological, existential or spiritual infection that has been festering within society and law enforcement for generations?
In 1965, President Lyndon B. Johnson established the Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice. The subsequent reports it generated made recommendations that have become mainstays within modern policing.
During the 55 years since, police departments have altered hiring practices and attempted to form departments that represent the cultural, racial and ethnic make-up of the communities they serve. Police misconduct, corruption and racism were among the issues raised over 50 years ago, and they are still seen today.
How can it be that when the processes and screening criteria are so extensive, police corruption and misconduct surfaces? Is it possible the expectations are too high? Or wrongly placed? Or are the human beings working to live up to these expectations are not given the psychosocial support they need? Could the expectations actually result in removal of compassion? Can we accept that cops are human and come from the fabric of society? Each officer carries his or her own frailties and weaknesses and family dysfunctions. Officers are not perfect. The code of ethics is asking for perfection. Expected perfection then sets the stage for tremendous challenges and opportunities for intense suffering among police officers and society when perfectionism is not met.
What if the code of ethics, in its present form, is exactly that which has inadvertently provided fodder to foment the thin blue line into becoming a towering wall between law enforcement and everyone else? If we tell officers they are perfect and this is why we hired them, they may begin to believe it. We certainly want to believe it. Yet everyone knows deep down, consciously and subconsciously, that they are not perfect. They are sullied.
The emotional, psychological, physiological, existential and spiritual toll can be devastating on cops and society. Officers do make mistakes. Both sides are yearning for understanding and compassionate acceptance in being human.
Foreman