Washington D.C., Apr 7, 2017 / 03:02 am (CNA/EWTN News).- “Ultimately, this report is about the sanctity of all human life.”
This remarkable line opens up an international police group’s flagship document on how to improve incidents of officer-involved shootings and the kinds of non-armed crisis situations that take place regularly across the United States.
“The essence of policing is the preservation of life,” Chuck Wexler, executive director of the Police Executive Research Forum in Washington, D.C., told CNA.
“That’s why we exist; life is very precious, and we have to remind ourselves of that.”
This ethic of protecting human life extends even to the use of force in responding to incidents, Wexler argued: “Everything should be what we have to do to preserve human life – especially in the area of use of force.”
This principle, that human life is sacred has found itself at the core of PERF’s work as an independent research and policy organization that looks at best practices in policing, as well as assistance, education and advice for law enforcement agencies.
With the idea that “the sanctity of human life should be at the heart of everything an agency does” at the center of the organization’s 30 Guiding Principles on the Use of Force and training guide, the group is already revolutionizing the way police departments approach policies on force and the response to crisis situations.
Keeping everyone safe
The pro-life approach to police work is part of a years-long project undertaken by PERF, which has more than 2500 members from around the globe.
Wexler explained that the organization was inspired to readjust their recommended policies and training after high-profile cases of police violence in Ferguson, Mo., and elsewhere sparked a national conversation on the appropriate force.
“We needed to take a hard look at what we were doing,” he said.
It’s hard to capture the scope of the issue of police-involved shootings in the United States, because there is no data or source of official reports that’s collected on a national level.
FBI Director James B. Comey explained in a 2015 speech at Georgetown University that the federal agency can’t even investigate the issue because “reporting by police departments is voluntary and not all departments participate. That means we cannot fully track the number of incidents in which force is used by police, or against police, including non-fatal encounters, which are not reported at all.”
This means that any information available is at best unreliable, and hampers both investigating and addressing the issue, the director said.
In its report, PERF pointed to attempts by journalists at the Guardian and the Washington Post to help fill this void of data by documenting the number of people killed in officer-involved shootings in the United States. The Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank in Washington, D.C., also collects data on allegations of police misconduct, including shootings, at the National Police Misconduct Reporting Project.
PERF furthermore noted that according to the data collected by the Washington Post, nearly one-third of fatal police-involved shootings in 2015 could have a significant potential for de-escalation, either because the subject killed was mentally ill, unarmed, or armed with a weapon that was not a firearm.
Wexler was assisting colleagues in Scottish police departments when these issues rose to public prominence in 2014. It occurred to Wexler that these colleagues – most of whom are not armed in departments in the United Kingdom – still must respond to and stay safe when dealing with incidents involving weapons like bats or knives, without the option of deadly force.
“For me it was an epiphany,” Wexler said. He asked himself, “If they can do it, why can’t we?”
PERF had researchers spend time studying police tactics in Scotland as well as in special emergency units in New York City and other departments around the United States. While the organization’s later research made a point not to blame most of the officers at the center of these events, PERF reassessed the training and policies surrounding the use of force in challenging situations.
“It really got us to think about how to re-engineer use of force policy and training,” Wexler said.
The result of their research was a document outlining guiding principles on the use of force and a training guide to teach officers how to better diffuse situations where de-escalation is possible. The guiding principles document notes that in most non-firearm cases “the threat is not immediate and the officers will have options for considering a more methodical, organized approach,” and many lives have the potential to be saved.
All of this is about trying to de-escalate a situation, giving officers the tools they need to do that.
It is this potential for saving lives – and not only the lives of civilians who interact with the police – which is the focus of the revised guidelines and tactics. PERF’s research states that changing approaches to incidents can increase officer safety, too.
“Rather than unnecessarily pushing officers into harm’s way in some circumstances, there may be opportunities to slow those situations down, bring more resources to the scene, and utilize sound decision-making that is designed to keep officers safe, while also protecting the public,” the report states.
In its findings, the document emphasizes the sanctity of human life as well as administering life-saving aid, transparency in reporting officer-involved shooting, use of less lethal options, and promoting effective means of managing mental illness in crisis situations.
The documents also criticize “line in the sand” policies and other training and field tactics which they found escalated, rather than calmed, crisis situations not involving firearms.
Wexler also said the principles of proportionality and effective communication are key to protecting the lives of all involved.
“All of this is about trying to de-escalate a situation, giving officers the tools they need to do that,” emphasizing the importance of teamwork, tactical skills and crisis intervention. “What’s really important is the safety of the officer and the safety of the person you’re dealing with.”
From the church to the streets
These policies aimed at respecting the dignity of life are not just formulated in an abstract environment, but with feedback from around the world.
“We have consulted with literally hundreds of police officers and police departments. We met and studied best practices around the country,” Wexler said.
The research organization consulted with hundreds of police chiefs for over two years, and looked at countless case studies and reports to put together their findings and then their training program.
“We would not be recommending something if we didn’t think it would work, and we’ve seen enough cases in the United States and in other countries where some may already be doing it or are in the process of implementing it.”
One of the other sources Wexler and PERF president, Scott Thompson, consulted in putting together the report was the archbishop of the largest city in the United States, Cardinal Timothy Dolan of New York.
“The person who we thought would really be interested in this concept was Cardinal Dolan in New York,” Wexler recalled. “We went to see Cardinal Dolan because we thought our principles, and in particular that principle, would be very significant to him.”
Cardinal Dolan was elected as the chairman-elect of the U.S. Bishops’ Committee on Pro-Life activities beginning his term as chair in 2015.
“We had a really good meeting and he really understood and embraced” the core principle of protecting life, Wexler said. “It was something he could be very supportive of.”
There has been pushback from a lot of the major organizations.
PERF mentioned that Cardinal Blase Cupich of Chicago has also lent his support in helping the group’s training programs for the Chicago Police Department.
While the police policy guidelines have been met with support among the hundreds of departments who worked with PERF, the organization’s focus on prioritizing the sanctity of the lives of all persons involved in police incidents has not been without controversy.
“There has been pushback from a lot of the major organizations,” Wexler acknowledged.
When PERF first released its guidelines in March 2016, it was met with harsh criticism from both the International Association of Chiefs of Police and the Fraternal Order of Police.
“We cannot reasonably expect law enforcement officers to walk away from potentially dangerous situations and individuals in the hope that those situations resolve themselves without further harm being done,” the organizations said in a joint response to PERF’s initial report.
A year later, however, national police organizations have started to adopt consensus principles that echo many of the ideas emphasized by PERF.
In a document laying out “National Consensus Policy” on the use of force, released in January 2017, 11 national police organizations – including the FOP and IACP – emphasized the importance of de-escalation policies, “reasonably prudent” responses, and less-lethal force. The policy also asks that departments around the country openly state that the “policy of this law enforcement agency is to value and preserve human life.”
While Wexler said he could not comment on these adaptations, he did say the shift in focus to emphasize the dignity and value of all lives – even in the most challenging situations – is a “difficult” shift in perspective: “The changes we’re recommending are probably some of the biggest changes in police tactics that we’ve seen in 25 years.”
And the size of the policing community in the United States – more than 18,000 departments – only adds to the challenge.
Still, while the values and emphasis in police policy might still face some debate, PERF’s training and concrete policies have met with wide acceptance.
“We’ve had no pushback from our training,” he said, pointing to the hundreds of departments who have come to their training workshops in New Orleans, Baltimore, and Los Angeles.
With this support in the year since putting out the guidelines and what they’ve seen in the research process, Wexler is confident that they can create a culture that defends the sanctity of human life in all aspects of its police work.
“I’m optimistic that in five years, this will no longer be controversial,” Wexler said. “This will be the way people handle these situations.”
[…]
Read his marching orders earlier. “Additionally, the document calls for more lay participation in all ecclesiastical decision making. It specifically calls for more women in leadership roles but does not settle the question about a possible women’s diaconate. It also condemns exclusion based on a person’s ‘marital situation, identity, or sexuality’”.
He can’t be serious. A pastor is condemned if he refuses Trans folks to advise how to pastor his parish? But unfortunately he is. Although what right in heaven or hell does a pontiff have to condemn, or even suggest condemnation [by God?] if a priest declines? In an earlier CNA article “Pope cites ‘Amoris laetitia’ on doctrine in synodal implementation note” Pope Francis urged we apply the doctrines layed out in Amoris Laetitia. Those doctrines are primarily the primacy of conscience and mitigation theory. Amoris does not replace the Gospels.
“Alice: Would you tell me, please, which way I ought to go from here?
The Cheshire Cat: That depends a good deal on where you want to get to.
Alice: I don’t much care where.
The Cheshire Cat: Then it doesn’t much matter which way you go.
Alice: …So long as I get somewhere.
The Cheshire Cat: Oh, you’re sure to do that, if only you walk long enough.”
“Each country or region, moreover, can seek solutions better suited to its culture and sensitive to its traditions and local needs,”
Unless those traditions and local needs involve attending the TLM, then sorry, no synoding for you.
Also can’t wait for the local LGBTQ crowd to suddenly start demanding changes to the mass to suit their needs.
Looks like “synodality” is synonymous to “Realpolitik”.
DOA as far as I’m concerned.
“[The final document] participates in the ordinary magisterium of the successor of Peter, and as such, I ask that it be accepted,” Francis wrote…”
There is a definition of the ordinary magisterium in the CCC (#891 and some other paragraphs). Also I believe in the documents of Vatican II. The teaching magisterium consists of the bishops with the pope. This synod document that the pope signed is not from the bishops, but from a group consisting of bishops, priests, nuns and laity. How could this be part of the magisterium? I don’t believe it can.
Also, the pope asks that it be accepted. If it truly was part of the magisterium I would think that he would state that it must be accepted.
What’s the rush?
The Pachamama Apostasy Cult: “Implement the authoritative indications of the Synod on Synodality document now.”
The Son of the Living God: “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Get thee behind me….”
The “Synod on Synodality document is part of the authentic teaching of the Bishop of Rome.”
The crowning achievement of the career of the Pontiff Francis is that he has communicated that he is a monumental fraud, and as such he adds something without authenticity to library which likewise is devoid of authenticity.
Zero plus Zero = Zero.
And as a reminder about the shelf life of this man’s “teaching,” Archbishop Scicluna of Malta, sycophant of Pontiff Francis, has established that this particular Pontiff’s teaching apparently gets buried with him, since by the rule-of-Scicluna, his cult only regards the teaching of “this current pope, not previous popes.” But I may be mistaken about Scicluna, he may regard the Pontiff Francis as an oracle, in which case, for Scicluna, and other such sycophants, the Pontiff Francis remains pope forever, even in death, and to him they pledge their loyalty…forever and ever.
It matters not at all what a man proclaims regarding his belief about the existence of God and how he tries to convince himself in some abstract way that he does believe in God.
If a man denies the immutability of truth, he is an atheist, even if he denies the implications of his beliefs to himself.
How much dire can the state of the Church be than to have an atheist for a pope and a prevailing episcopate too spineless to challenge him?
True Edward. Unless our faith is in God, whose existence is perfect and unchanging, pure dynamic, our belief is instead conceptual, imperfect, always subject to revision.
And, yet, about “always subject to revision” is not to be misunderstood as by some synodalers:
“The faithful therefore must shun the opinion, first, that dogmatic formulas (or some categories of them) cannot signify truth in a determinate way, but can only offer changeable approximations to it, which to a certain extent distort or alter it; secondly, that these formulas signify truth only in an indeterminate way, this truth being like a goal that is constantly being sought by means of such approximations. Those who hold such an opinion do not avoid dogmatic relativism and they corrupt the concept of the Church’s infallibility relative to the truth to be taught or held in a determinate way” (“Mysterium Ecclesia: Declaration in Defense of the Catholic Doctrine on the Church Against Certain Errors of the Day,” Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, June 24, 1973).
With St. Augustine: “We can say things differently, but we can’t say different things.”
As was the case of what was “believed” by Mary reported at Lk 1:45 as in uncertainty (cf. Lk 1:29, 34).
What do you call a shepherd with no place guide his sheep? Or, put another way, with no clear preference where his sheep end up?
Lately I have been studying Henri de Lubac and how he navigated the period where his theology was scrutinized by the Pope Pius XII. One of my questions is were Jesuits more learned then? Jesuits of today seem to “clot up” on major points of Tradition/Doctrine, if not create new doctrine out of whole cloth.
I want to be loyal to Mother Church and never found to be throwing a rock at the artwork – even when it belongs to Rupnik.
Every time I turn around this trial becomes more challenging, more difficult, if not impossible.
Fuzziness, that is also the Anglican solution to things; and just look where they are!
Ornery wideloopers I’ll say!
Here for once we are not speaking of orientation, but disorientation.
In Francis’ Magisterially Synodal Church: The synodally dialogic church will participate in pagan tradition, and pagan tradition will participate in Francis’ church.
Roman Catholics will continue in the unity of such a church under such a pontiff, but Christ will remain as the Triumphally Suffering Head. Roman Catholics will continue to hold the faith and hope of knowing that Christ our Head lives through, survives, and overcomes death.
Let us make jest of the lazy, ridiculous, the glaringly sad stupidity of any vatican-led holes to hell.
If you do not feel righteous anger over the reign of Jorge Bergoglio, your love for Mother Church is seriously deficient.
Please speak with accurate language. We’re told the document comes from the magisterium of the Bishop of Rome, then Francis tells us it’s of a pontifical magisterium, your commentary says it’s from the magisterium of the Church. What level will the next commentator reach? Will he consider the document as divinely revealed?
I know that a good writer always tries to avoid repetition when writing, but inasmuch as in temporal affairs you can use equivalent terms such as “Biden has decided X” , “Washington has decided X”, and “the United States has decided X”, that’s not how it works in ecclesiastical affairs. The qualifiers of magisterium between the Bishopric of Rome, the Papal office and the Church are not interchangeable just like that. This sort of spurious and deceptive language paves the way for novel doctrines on papal infallibility, and ought to thus utterly be rejected.
The directives are sufficiently vague, and thus can be safely ignored, given that most parishes already have healthy lay participation and are already in obedience to the *magisterial* intent of the document. The intent of the malcontents who were trying to use the synod as a way to democratize the Church is another question, but thankfully their intent doesn’t have to be considered.
Left-leaning bishops will use this as an excuse to make their untenable parishes even more untenable, but overall the effect will be negligible. Carry on.
The Synod was simply a thin cover for normalizing more garbage into the church. I cannot see myself cooperating with a woman deacon nor will I be interacting in a church setting with anyone who is “trans”. Ever. No thanks. I will quit my church ministry first.This Pope has been a complete disaster.
Your report misrepresents the Synodal document on the subject of sexuality when it says: “It also condemns exclusion based on a person’s “marital situation, identity, or sexuality.” The Synodal document does not do that. It only uses the word “sexuality” once, when it says: “Many participants were delighted and surprised to be asked to share their thoughts and to be given the opportunity to have their voices heard in the community. Others continued to express the pain of feeling excluded or judged because of their marital status, identity or sexuality.” That is not a condemnation of exclusion on the basis of “sexuality”. A homosexual, for example, may feel excluded because the Church treats the acts involved in any active homosexual relationship as sinful and does not accord their relationship the same status as a heterosexual relationship. That will and must, of course, continue.
Stephen, given that “ecumenical new church” has ordered the Catholic world to bless gay couples – in the style of James Martin – your final statement only holds true for disobedient Traditionalists whom Bergolio labels “rigid” and is actively persecuting from underground China to downtown Chicago.
“A homosexual, for example, may feel excluded because the Church treats the acts involved in any active homosexual relationship as sinful and does not accord their relationship the same status as a heterosexual relationship. That will and must, of course, continue.”
This is because these demeaning sexual acts, deny the Sanctity of the marital act, within The Sacrament of Holy Matrimony, which is Life-affirming and Life-sustaining and can only be consummated between a man and woman united in marriage as husband and wife. While it is true that some marriages deny the Sanctity of the marital act within The Sacrament of Holy Matrimony, resulting in the engaging in of demeaning sexual acts which are sinful because they deny the inherent Dignity of the human person, all same-sex sexual relationships deny the Sanctity of the marital act within The Sacrament Of Holy Matrimony, and thus demean the inherent Dignity of the human person, and are thus sinful.
I pray that the next Pope will take this document, and along with Amoral Leticia, Traditiones Custodes and Tutti Frutti, toss it on the bonfire. I’m sick and tired of this Synodal garbage which has obsessed this Pontificate even though it’s a colossal waste of time, especially since there are more urgent matters for the Church to be concerned with, like persecution of Christians in China, Nicaragua and Africa, Gender Ideology in the West, and the war in Ukraine.
👉👈
We are all Protestants now PF
In the Church of What’s Happening Now
I reject that PF.
I repeat with apology:
PF is obviously a disciple of the Jesuit hairy tick Teihard de Chardin.
See excellent new book “Theistic Evolution” in which Wolfgang Smith disembowels his multiple anti Christian fantasies. This is what infects our Jesuit pontiff.
Listen to the advice given to St Augustine “ Take and read”.
Hat tip to William Briggs.
“…Jesuit hairy tick…”
Delightful!
A hearty and Happy Thanksgiving to all my fellow Catholic Americans!
Last Saturday, November 23, Gerhard Cardinal Muller provided his personal rejection of the Francis’ Synodal Church Model. His rejection was printed in the First Things Catholic website and is entitled, “The 7 Sins Against the Holy Spirit; A Synodal Tragedy.” That’s right, finally a true “Catholic” Prince of the Church has condemned Francis’ Synod in simple and powerful TRUTHS of the One True Catholic Apostolic Tradition. Cardinal Muller, the former Head of the Congregation of the Faith in Rome, demolishes this new false model with great words of wisdom. He does so in a way that is incisive, precise, and Heavenly! And now that he has officially and publicly pointed out the fact that serious apostasy is at the doorstep of Francis’ Pontificate, then how soon will this heroic and holy prelate suffer white martyrdom, just as Vigano, Strickland and many other holy priest have been. Yes, in a sense it can be said that these souls, orthodox Catholic souls, are now living martyrs for the Catholic Faith.
I strongly encourage Mr. Olson, CWR Editor, an all on this site to read what the Cardinal writes in a five minute read. I can assure you that you will be very hopeful after having read what this saintly man of Christ writes as he truly speaks TRUTH to evil power.
Viva La Christo! and JCALAS Forever!
Presto, Change-O!
Come quickly, Lord Jesus!