Tuesday, October 27, 2015

President Obama's Belief on Police Being "Scapegoated" for Society's Failures

Barack Obama defends law enforcement and their effort to help the community. He does think they don't get enough credit for the good they do, rather only get attention for the bad things they do. Obama believes the police are "scapegoated" for all the problems in society. Even with there being a tendency of racial bias in how police act towards a certain person, Obama believes it's not all up to the police to eliminate. In addition, more gun safety laws in the United States has been a major goal to Obama. He believes that if less people own guns, it will ultimately eliminate a lot of problems; there will be less deaths, and there will be a safer environment for the people. Do you agree or disagree with Obama's views on the law enforcement? Explain. Is there true validity to use the police as scapegoats? How do you think the police respond to being scapegoats? Additionally, do you think Obama has the right to take away our right to the Second Amendment (the right to bare arms)? Do you agree with Obama's belief on gun safety in this country? Why or why not?

17 comments:

  1. I don't think that police are "scapegoated" necessarily, but instead are in a position in which important social issues, like racism, are ever-present, and a simple mistake can highlight these issues on a much broader scale. It's not always the fault of the officers, however the position that they are in brings to light any social issues that are reflective of wider issues that exist in society.
    While I don't think that any president has the right to overturn a constitutional amendment, it may be necessary in the case of the right to bear arms. The amendment made a lot more sense when it was written in the eighteenth century, when some people essentially lived out on the frontier and needed guns in order to survive. At that time, a governmental restriction or ban on weapons would have been absolutely outrageous, but in modern times, guns have proved to cause more harm than good. The key difference between then and now is that guns are used more to kill other people rather than hunting (out of necessity) or self-protection. Furthermore, the founding fathers even took into account this type of change in times, as they proposed having a constitutional convention every twenty years (this obviously never happened) so as to change or get rid of laws which are no longer relevant or necessary, which at this time, the second amendment certainly appears to be.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I agree that it is not entirely up to law enforcement to eliminate racial bias. After all, how would they even go about doing that? Arresting everyone who has ever said a racist comment? I don't think the police are being used as a scapegoat, but that they are being treated and portrayed unfairly. I do agree with Obama in that you only ever hear about the bad incidents with law enforcement, and never the good things. Therefore, the public has a negative view of the law enforcement.
    As for Obama and his view on gun control, I do agree with him there. I do agree that there needs to be a major decrease in guns distributed and allowed to be used. People argue that they feel safer with a gun, but if no one has a gun.... then how would anyone get shot? There was a study done by CNN on the number of deaths from guns in America vs. the number of deaths from terrorism. There were many more deaths from guns (including homicide, suicide and accident), which is not surprising as nearly every day there is at least one news story about a shooting at a university or college. (Here is the link for the graph if you are interested: http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/02/us/oregon-shooting-terrorism-gun-violence/ ) I don't think that the President has the right to remove the Second Amendment, but perhaps he could get the idea going and have it taken to the Supreme Court.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I agree with Obama. Just as there is racial bias in potential criminals, arrest, and handling of them, there is just as much bias towards police officers. Even if one person of a certain ethnic background commits a crime, that doesn't mean everyone in that ethnic group is a criminal. It goes the other way too. Just because a police officer shows unnecessary brutality in arrests does not mean all police officers do. Another point to accusation towards the media that Obama states (and I agree with) is that the media feeds these stories of brutality to the public. Never do we here about police officers' good deeds. Technology is a huge influence too, and I think sometimes it doesn't give the full story.

    I'm sure police officers are much more watchful and probably scared with the increasing public scrutiny and outrage. I do agree with Obama's gun control. I don't think Obama is taking away our second amendment right, he's more specializing it. I think we do need stricter restrictions on who can own guns. With all the campus shootings, elementary school shootings, and public shootings, how anyone could still adamantly protest against restrictions on that baffles me. If we allow crazy people access to guns and they kill more innocent people, shouldn't we do something to stop that?

    ReplyDelete
  4. I agree with Obama that law enforcement is used as a scapegoat for problems in society. With technology these days, police officers are always being caught doing bad things on video, and it gives them a bad reputation. However, no one is going to take out their phone and record a police officer every time they do a good deed. So, police aren't actually scapegoats because most of them are doing good things. Besides, in every profession there is always going to be a few rotten apples, and nothing can really be done about that. I think the other article posted this week about the "Ferguson effect" shows how police react to being scapegoats. They tend to be less aggressive because they fear that being caught on tape doing something they should be doing will get twisted into something out of proportion and end up being detrimental to their career. I think Obama should have the right to take away the 2nd amendment from certain people only, even if this is unconstitutional, and I do agree with him wanting stricter gun laws. I think only people should have to pass requirements to obtain a gun. Too many people obtain guns too easily. All these school shootings happen because crazy people are somehow allowed access to guns, and that should never happen. In addition, larger guns should be banned. There is no reason someone needs to keep a rifle in their house to defend themselves against a home invasion, a pistol would suffice. A lot of other countries have very strict gun laws, and they also have very few, if any, school shooting. That correlation doesn't happen by coincidence. Perhaps the United States should learn from other countries and also tighten their own gun laws.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I believe that the police are certainly portrayed in a very negative manner because yes, we do tend to focus on the few negative incidents rather than the majority of positive incidents. As I said in a comment earlier this week, these people risk their lives for us on a daily basis and we as a whole do not show them enough respect. This could cause the police to be more tentative, and then they will be blamed for not stopping crime.
    I do believe that we should not have the right to own a firearm unless we have a very specific reason. Whatever people say, we would be safer without guns. Instead of everyone having the ability the kill everyone, no one (figuratively speaking) would have that ability. Just look at Australia. When they collected all of the guns, they experienced a HUGE decrease in crime! I don't understand why people don't see that. The second amendment is too vague anyways; we should make it more specific or eliminate it all together. Rules aren't worth following just because they are rules. They need to have a purpose and I don't think this one really does any more.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I most certainly agree with Obama's assertion in the article that the news only reports on the police officers who abuse their power or demonstrate racial bias. This can result in police "scapegoating" which in turn results in a police force that feels threatened and is therefore more likely to respond in an inapropriate manner to a crime. However, there have been too many cases of police misconduct to blame these tragedies on a few bad apples. The system clearly is biased in many cases; one only has to look to "stop and frisk" and how it targets minorities to see an example of this. I agree with Obama that gun control is very important and that we should have less guns on the street (as our gun violence is disproportionately high), but I don't believe we can eliminate the second amendment entirely.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I most certainly agree with Obama's assertion in the article that the news only reports on the police officers who abuse their power or demonstrate racial bias. This can result in police "scapegoating" which in turn results in a police force that feels threatened and is therefore more likely to respond in an inapropriate manner to a crime. However, there have been too many cases of police misconduct to blame these tragedies on a few bad apples. The system clearly is biased in many cases; one only has to look to "stop and frisk" and how it targets minorities to see an example of this. I agree with Obama that gun control is very important and that we should have less guns on the street (as our gun violence is disproportionately high), but I don't believe we can eliminate the second amendment entirely.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I agree that the police are scapegoated and are often criticized for the bad things rather than praised for the good things they do. However, the number of minorities who are stopped by police for doing nothing shows that there is racial bias. The video we watched in class showed that many minorities avoid the police because they fear being stopped and frisked, which creates a greater divide between the police and the citizens. I also agree that the media adds to this problem because they never seem to highlight the positive things that police do.

    The president doesn’t have the right to eliminate the 2nd amendment, but I believe that there should be stricter gun laws. With the number of mass shootings we’ve had recently, it shouldn’t be as easy as it is for people to go out and buy a gun. I understand that people who hunt need to buy guns, but people shouldn’t be able to buy a gun without a specific reason for it.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I disagree with obama's views on law enforcement. I don't think the police are being "scapegoated" in any way. I think he is trying to blame the public for the problems within the law enforcement agencies. Many people are very anti-police, and it's not like they are agianst police for no reason. As for gun control, I also don't agree with Obama. More laws restricting guns will have the opposite effect intended. Most criminals get their guns from the black-market and weapons dealers. More restrictions on guns will just make it harder for people who abide by the laws to get guns. More criminals will have guns than law abiding citizens. Plus, we all forget the real purpose to the second amendment. The second amendment gives us the right to bear arms so we can effectivly resist a tyranical government violently if absolutley nessesary. Not to fight of criminals like the average person thinks. This is why the right to bear arms must be protected at all costs.

    ReplyDelete
  10. To an extent, I agree with Obama's point that police officers are sometimes held responsible for societal issues which are not necessarily the result of bad policing. However, I don't think it's such a bad thing that police are held up to a high standard. Policemen and policewomen are more than just people in uniforms, they are symbols. They represent the best our country has to offer. So when a single officer conducts his duties in a way that doesn't reflect the values of his badge, he is destroying not just his reputation or the reputation of officers in general, but he is jeopardizing a symbol which people put faith into. I don't think it's so unreasonable, therefore, to expect officers to be, for all intents and purposes, "perfect". You're not going to get that, obviously, as police are people and people are subject to human flaws, but they should strive to be worthy of the badge they wear and what they represent while they are on duty. In addition, police are meant to make people feel safe, and if innocent people are instead being made to be afraid of the police, as a whole, they're clearly not doing what they were hired to do.

    Regarding guns, I think the issue surrounding mass shootings and gun violence needs to be addressed from all sides - the mental health aspect, more secure background checks, and of course, stricter gun laws. The Constitution should be treated as an evolving document, one that changes as the era changes. Today, it would be unheard of for a private citizen to walk around carrying a rifle. So our gun laws should reflect this new way of thinking.

    ReplyDelete
  11. The police have a very hard and very important job and it only keeps getting more and more complex. I agree with Obama that they often blamed for many societal problems and although I agree that that's not good I think it also comes with the job. Yes they do so much good for our country and our communities and we must recognize that. It is so important for us to have good cops benefiting our communities. We also have to address and stop corrupt cops because they do exist. As fore gun laws I think that they have to be more strict and we have to do something. Obviously our current laws aren't working since there is so much gun violence in our country. I'm with Obama and I hope that he is able to change gun laws for the better by the end of his presidency.

    ReplyDelete
  12. In current events there has been a lot of focus on authority and its role in society. Recent conflicts have only added to the magnitude of the situation. Events like Fergusson and Baltimore are major talking points and have only made the situation and discussions tenser. The arguments are all involved with gun control, corrupt authority, and government action. I do believe that the police are being used as scape goats and that in most cases it is unfair. The media is using this view of the police to generate interest and stir emotions among the public. On the other side some are using the supposedly increasing gun violence to advocate for more rigged gun control. Finally Obama’s stance on both of these issues are being brought to question as the government is the top most governing body. His stance on supporting law enforcement is critical to developing societies opinions back towards trusting law enforcement rather than fearing and resenting them.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Personally, I tend to both agree and disagree that the police are being "scapegoated", even if that isn't the term I would use normally. I think that people are tending anymore to generalize police officers by the actions of a few who do not represent the whole, or even a majority. This, to me, is wrong, because many of the police officers in this country do this job to help bring about good in this world, and it is a very respectable job. However, that being said, I don't think that there is no issue at all. In fact, there is very clearly statistical proof of a racial bias, as the president referred to. Therefore, I wouldn't tend to use the word scapegoated, but instead perhaps generalized or stereotyped, as there definitely is a problem, it just does not affect even a majority of the police officers in the country. In any case, the way that police are responding to this is by becoming much more scared to act on something that they otherwise would act on, for fear of being portrayed poorly on social media and subsequently having their lives made much more difficult. That of course is a very negative outcome of this, as it would lead to lowered police action and therefore possibly more crime, however I think that this is also not a pervasive occurrence throughout police officers, at least not a majority as of now.
    In regards to 2nd Amendment rights, I personally think that yes, the president does have the right to restrict those rights, just as any other amendment can be made with proper backing and support. As to whether he will get that support and therefore the right to do it, I don't believe he will anytime soon, and he doesn't have too long left in office. Therefore, I don't think we will see any of the large scale reforms he was looking for, at least not with the consent of Congress. Personally, I think that the passage of legislation restricting access to guns is not unconstitutional, and is in fact within the better interests of this country. I think that a restriction of access could only help to lower crime rates in this country, which are far too high. I for one am all for a legislative action which has the possibility to save many lives, and therefore yes I agree with president Obama's stance.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I understand that police are usually held responsible for issues in today’s society, but I would not necessarily say that they are being used as “scapegoats.” Police officers need to be held to a high standard of doing what is right and just. So if a few officers do something they should not have done, a negative light will most certainly be cast on police officers as a whole; if one falls, they will all fall. However, just because some officers may not do things correctly, that does not mean that all police officers are bad people. American people need to realize this, but police officers also need to realize how highly they are placed in our society and how they should always be doing only what is just.
    As for gun control, stricter laws need to be made immediately. The Second Amendment should not apply in today’s world, and Obama definitely has the right to change this. I completely agree that something needs to be done about guns in our country. With all of the mass shootings that have taken place recently, the only way to prevent more from occurring is to take people’s guns away. Not only would this prevent more mass shootings, but it would also help reduce the rates of homicides, suicides, smaller crimes (robbery and theft), and incarceration. Unfortunately, Obama is not getting support for his beliefs on gun control, and I do not think he will get support any time soon. People need to realize that the only way to fix problems involving guns is to take them away, not obtain more.

    ReplyDelete
  15. A lot of the time, we see what is bad. There are plenty of policemen who are doing the right thing. Just as there are plenty of gun owners who are doing the right thing. But, changes need to be enacted to correct the bad. Australia had a single mass shooting before they changed gun laws. One. Why do we have so many mass shootings? Why do we have so many cases of police brutality? The issue has nothing to do with whether or not police are scapegoats. The issue is that nothing is being done about it. Police need to be monitored and reformed in order to prevent this from happening. Will it make it harder to a cop? Yes, but it will weed out the weaker cops or racist cops. There shouldn’t be a need for anyone to be considered a scapegoat. Our justice system needs a swift reform in order for there to be any change in that.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Police are absolutely scapegoated in today's society, especially by our generation. We went on our phones and saw rioters posting videos in Ferguson and Baltimore; we saw the protests with the "I can't breath" shirts in New York, there's even a website that tracks police brutality across the country! As the saying goes, "It only takes one cockroach to ruin the stew," has certainly been applied to today's policing. The thousands of police officers who have done their job well and proper are not being persecuted because of a few officers making wrong decisions that were made in the heat of the moment and in almost all cases made to keep others safe. Our generation has lost appreciation for police officers because of the media, and it only hurts society.
    As far as the second amendment is concerned, regulation in guns is almost necessary at this point. The recent mass shootings that have occurred in this country are the only reason that we need. The USA is the only modern country in the world that has such mass shootings consistently. Saying that if everyone had a gun there wouldn't be any shootings (@NRA) is no longer a valid excuse.
    Chris Rock has said that we should make bullets 10,000 a round to end gun violence. That's a better option than anything the NRA has offered out of what has appeared to be drawn out of a hat.

    ReplyDelete
  17. I agree with Obama in that many people in our generation have negative views about police officers. I have always had good experiences with the police in the few times I've interacted with them, but based on what's been going on in the media lately, that might have something to do with the fact that I'm obviously white. There are many police officers who risk their lives and even die to keep us safe and they don't receive enough credit. However, I do think that the police officers who are violating human rights need to be properly punished, so I understand why many people have negative views on police. It also should be mentioned that police are used as pawns by a greater force and generally should not be blame.
    Restricting gun rights violates basic human rights. It was guaranteed to us via the Second Amendment (yes, I'm one of THOSE people). A government that disarms its citizens is one that kills them... we can look in history at genocides like the Holocaust and the Armenian Genocide and see the oppressed groups were denied gun rights before they were massacred so they could not protest. However, I do agree that people who purchase guns should be checked and cleared for mental illness and criminal background.

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.