What is clear is that many police feel unloved and undervalued, and are lashing out at those who fail to show due deference. Chief among those are the police unions.
The Police Association of Victoria, for example, posted a picture of me on their Facebook page with the caption, "They [police] can lie on the side of the road and bleed to death". There was no link to the source, the rest of the statement, or any other attempt to provide context.
Responding to my NSW comments, the Police Association of NSW called for the abolition of the Senate and my removal from a parliamentary committee on law enforcement. It also described fans of the Western Sydney Wanderers FC, whose complaints the inquiry had been examining, as "grubs" and "thugs".
Advertisement
To libertarians like me, the police and criminal justice system are among the few areas of government that we would not seek to privatise. Notwithstanding constant lies about "keeping us safe", we acknowledge the police have a key role in the protection of life, liberty and property.
However, to perform this role successfully they must have public support. Sir Robert Peel's famous principles of law enforcement, written in 1829 upon the establishment of the London Metropolitan Police, are just as valid today as they were at the time. Key among these is the need for "public approval of police existence, actions, behaviour and the ability of the police to secure and maintain public respect" and, "the police are the public and the public are the police".
Fairly obviously, respect and approval can only be won, not demanded. Moreover, bashing people in Queanbeyan police station in NSW, or Ballarat police station in Victoria, does not contribute to that. In my view, neither does the behaviour of the police when enforcing the Queensland VLAD law, or dealing with WSW football fans in NSW. The police responsible for such conduct are not entitled to public support or the support of decent, honest police. Fairly obviously, they don't have my support.
Perhaps the most troubling aspect of the outrage is the implication that unless I speak positively about the police, I should not expect their assistance in the event I am involved in an accident or other misfortune. Indeed, there were suggestions by some that individual police would go further and retaliate against me. Not only is this characteristic of a police state, it reminds me of the days of the Bjelke-Peterson government in Queensland when the police were seriously corrupt, ignored criminal activity and use their power to abuse their critics.
The outrage inevitably moves on to another subject, but the issues raised in this instance remain. The police must earn our respect, on an on-going basis, and are not entitled to demand it or retaliate against those who question them.
And they must absolutely not protect those who bring policing into disrepute.
Discuss in our Forums
See what other readers are saying about this article!
Click here to read & post comments.
6 posts so far.