Police Brutality Pros And Cons

1230 Words3 Pages

For the last several decades, police brutality has been an issue of high tension and debate. Police Officers have become a symbol not of protection, but of a corrupt system that imposes its own methods of tainted justice. Patrol officers are allowed an extreme level of discretion that essentially permits them to act completely on their own accord with very little supervision or repercussions for their actions. In light of recent events, the Federal government has received pressure from lobbyists to increase funding to activist groups and take local police under revision from the Justice Department. As of today, no major steps have been taken to end this brutality. In this neglect, the Federal government is not fulfilling its responsibility to insure domestic tranquility and is subsequently causing civil dissent by allowing the violation of the civil rights of the constituents. The Constitution of 1787 was written directly following Shays Rebellion. A period in which a violent uprising threatened the peace, and everything the revolutionaries had fought so hard to attain. This caused paranoia …show more content…

“In recent years, the Supreme Court has made it very difficult and often impossible, to hold police officers and the governments who employ them accountable for civil rights violations.” The Federal government is intervening with the insurance of domestic tranquility by placing the reputation of local and state governments, over the needs of the people. An example of this negligence to the rights of the constituents manifests in the case Plumhoff v. Rickard(2013), which affirmed that “ if officers are justified in firing at a suspect in order to end a severe threat to public safety, they need not stop shooting until the threat has ended” essentially giving them the right to use excessive forth at their

Open Document