In the wake of the brutal murder of George Floyd in May, public criticism against police brutality has exploded online and in the streets of American towns and cities. Outrage over the coldbloodedness and complacency of Minneapolis police officers in the recorded footage of Floyd’s death has led many activists to promote police reform in America. One popular campaign for reform is known as #8cantwait, a series of eight policy changes created by DeRay Mckesson and Campaign Zero, that claims to be able to reduce police violence by 72 percent. However, this type of policy reform isn’t a good idea in any city, including Chapel Hill. The end result will only be superficial, handbook-level change that won’t address the deeper, systemic roots of the issue.
The eight policies themselves are: ban chokeholds and strangleholds, require de-escalation, require warning before shooting, exhaust all alternatives prior to shooting, duty to intervene, ban shooting at moving vehicles, establish use of force continuum, and require all force to be reported.
From a pure policy standpoint, there are flaws in many of the suggestions. Many are based on the idea that officers will suddenly all hold themselves accountable following the policies, but that is simply not realistic.
Firstly, every policy that requires de-escalation before using force also has exceptional clauses where officers can escalate force if they fear for their lives. For instance, according to the policy manual of the Seattle Police Department, “de-escalation techniques…should still be used unless doing so would create undue risk of harm to any person due to the exigency/threat of a situation.” Similarly, exhausting all other means before shooting is also a policy that is loopholed by such exceptions. Essentially, these requirements could be easily dodged, because the premise of the policy is based on the subjectivity of the officer. In Chapel Hill, there is no explicit de-escalation policy, although they are supposed to “use only as much force as is necessary,” which is quite a general guideline.
Second, the idea of requiring warnings prior to shooting seems very flimsy. What would that really change? According to the campaign itself, not much, as already 62 percent of America’s largest cities have this policy in place, yet police shootings have still occurred in many of those cities, such as in Cincinnati.
Third, the duty to intervene is proven by George Floyd’s death to be ineffective. Minneapolis already requires officers to intervene to stop another officer from using excessive force, yet the three other officers did not stop Derek Chauvin from killing Floyd.
Lastly, requiring all force to be reported just won’t happen. Why would police voluntarily begin turning themselves in? And even in the case they do, the force would still have already occurred. It does not entail further action.
In sum, the Chapel Hill Police Department already does require the majority of these reforms (five out of eight). The danger here is that when presented with the list of policy changes, the town council will simply adjust the wording of the CHPD policy manual to align with the campaign instead of making any real change. Signs of this are already occurring.
In a June 5 email to concerned citizens, Mayor Pam Hemminger wrote, “While we are confident that Chapel Hill Police Department’s operational policies reflect the philosophies that are found in the #8cantwait project, the Department is looking at its policy manual to see if there are opportunities to make the language more explicitly aligned with the recommendations.”
More broadly speaking, the wording of the campaign is also a bit tricky. It suggests that upon following these eight reforms, 72 percent of police violence will decrease. However, that is based on the assumption that police departments are going from none of these policies to all eight. The majority of the policies, as claimed by the campaign itself, are already instituted in many major American cities.
Following that logic, if these policies are already common in many cities, then they have proven themselves to be ineffective. They have not touched the deeper and systemic roots of police brutality.
Another point made by Sarah Fathallah, a Moroccan social researcher, is that the number 72, albeit tempting, completely disregards the remaining 28 percent. Does it mean that change will stagnate at the level of allowing 28 percent of police killings to continue? And we will be okay with it?
This kind of reformist-minded reform will not end the systemic problems in our justice system. It facilitates local governments to quickly adjust their policy manuals and wipe their hands clean, instead of instituting real change. It disguises the real changes to policing which are necessary to achieve true justice.
We are at a point in the path where the road somewhat diverges. On one side there is the policy change. On the other hand there is abolitionist-minded reform. While the latter appears daunting at first, it is important to remember that these are long-term goals to move towards. If we set the objective high, we will make progress faster.
Reform is not not-necessary. Rather, reform that defunds and reduces police departments is what is necessary. Incremental changes such as not rehiring fired cops, decreasing police militarization, and redirecting police funds to other community interests such as affordable housing or transit programs are quite achievable. These are all reforms with the goal of replacing the police’s role in society with safer and more efficient systems.
Right now, Chapel Hill, along with other municipalities, is making its budget for the next fiscal year. The first change we can realistically institute is decreasing the police budget. At the moment it makes up the largest proportion of the budget’s general fund expenditures at 23 percent, while affordable housing, under housing and community, makes up around one percent.
Slavery wasn’t ended by adjusting the policies or requirements of plantation owners. It wasn’t terminated instantly either. But you wouldn’t deal with a dilapidated house that is falling down by continuing to patch up its wallpaper. Sometimes it is better to clear the land and start over.
Graphic courtesy of 8cantwait.org
