Magic versus Magical Thinking, a Practical Guide (Part 3): One to Rule Them All

 

Vast swaths of the general public (here, there and everywhere) take great stock in the notion of inevitability. 

This is a very interesting fault in human perspective. The “inevitable” whatever can manifest as concretely positive, negative or neutral, or take a positive, negative or neutral tone. The reason I suggest that this is a human fault is because most people will relate the word inevitable to the word fate, and take both words together as an indication that no action is needed, so why bother to take any?

This is a type of magical thinking. Here are examples of abstract notions people take to be inevitable (aside from the punch lines of an old joke from Daniel Defoe’s 1726 play The Political History of the Devil, As Well Ancient as Modern, famously quoted by Benjamin Franklin: death and taxes): progress, world unity, the end of the world, equality, change makes us better, a simple solution to every question, and God’s will.  I’m sure you can think of a few abstract concepts that are linked to the notion of inevitability. Some of these could be categorized as “pipedreams,” others as apocalyptic fears.

When we think or believe that things or situations are inevitable, do we push back on the notion by trying some alternative or do we give up?

We are asked questions and the manner in which we are taught often implies that there are answers to every question and that we should know what those answers are or how to calculate them. We therefore dutifully attempt to find solutions to every question directed toward us. For example, here is an actual word problem that has been given to children in school:

There are 125 sheep and 5 dogs in a flock. 

How old is the shepherd?

Do you know what the answer is? When children are posed this questions, their first thought is likely: I’ve been given this as a math problem, there must be an answer, therefore, I’d better do something to come up with a solution. 

In reality, sometimes, it might be better to question the question. How old is the shepherd? is intended to be an exercise in logic; it is hoped that students will be able to discern that this question is illogically constructed and unanswerable. Hilarious results ensue, to be sure, when students try to compute answers to such a question. But, let’s be honest, this is a dirty trick to play on kids.

It’s a dirty trick to play on adults as well, who, sadly, also fall prey to the illogical question. The search for a fundamental theory of everything, in my humble opinion, is an adult variety entertaining the illogical question, a high-brow version of magical thinking. There is a lot of grant money being given to further abstract theories of everything, but I find questions along these lines a diversion from the kind of innovation we need—innovation that offers practical solutions to diverse daily problems. For example, it may be more practical to explore non-polluting ways of turning wastewater into biogas that can be safely used as fuel. We, as a species, certainly produce plenty of it! Why not recycle it!

The search for “one and done” solutions is another example of magical thinking. A gullible pubic is socially engineered down a pay-to-play rabbit hole that is papered with bright and misleading advertisements. However, as explored in a previous essay in this series, the world of intense diversity flies in the face of “one size fits all” thinking. We really do know better; one size cannot possibly fit all. Every place presents its own set of circumstances that need to be taken into account, and every individual in a place is liable to present a different set of skills and perspectives that may bear on those challenges. Baking bread is completely different at sea level than it is at high altitude.

Politically, we have in real-time reached that tipping point where utopian literature turns to its darker, fully dystopian side. Every single utopia ever conceived empowers a small elite counsel of elders to dictate what is best for the masses. Plato explored this in The Republic and The Laws, followed by a long line of writers, from Thomas More and Francis Bacon, to Margaret Cavendish and Jonathan Swift, on down to Edward Bellamy and William Morris, thence to appear ever darker in scope with Yevgeny Zamyatin, George Orwell and Aldous Huxley, even unto Margaret Attwood. In the most positive examples of this form of literature, the minority band running the program is intelligent and benevolent; on the flip-side, the leadership is always less than well educated, punitive and totalitarian.

In the United States, circumstances beyond the control of the majority plebiscite has put the fate of our foundational liberalism, which for so long seemed to embody “inevitable progress,” into the hands of a conservative majority of the Supreme Court. This same court seems poised to undo all that has been traditionally (in my lifetime) regarded as “inevitable progress” toward equal recognition and rights for unique personhood, poised instead to enshrine “christian values,” retreat from founding Enlightenment principles to medieval standards of law, promote permissible armed violence, and put certain men in charge of institutions and bodies.

It is highly ironic that this small, ultra-conservative group (or members thereof) proclaims a literal orthodoxy exists within the text of our constitution, where two centuries of jurisprudence has seemingly seen the text through a lens more flexible and moving with the times. It seems that this portion of the Supreme Court group is throwing modern America back to the time Cotton Mather and the Salem Witch Trials. Note, however: Less well known than his discussion of devils inhabiting the invisible world, Cotton Mather was also a scientist; he was an advocate for inoculation against smallpox, and he wrote a book proclaiming harmony between Newtonian physics and religion. Fact!

Any claims of original this, orthodox that are illogical excuses to proclaim a modern paterfamilias--which is what? This could only mean a totalitarian autocracy the likes of Stalinism. But who would the pater be? Certainly not Jesus, who used parables to teach illiterate people how to navigate oppression while maintaining cultural ethos and personal integrity. The words of Jesus don’t seem to matter at all to “christians" who call for the death of liberal secularism, control of the womb and the right of armed, white hooligans to menace and kill—what resonates more are texts from Deuteronomy and Leviticus.

Meanwhile, the average person, having been rendered inert by false notions of inevitability that are accompanied by a blizzard of disinformation, is thrown down a socially engineered rabbit hole. When and where will we land? Shall the landing be hard or soft?

There are 330 million sheeple and 6 dogs in a flock.

Who is the shepherd?

Watch and Pray: When the Police Action Comes to Your Neighborhood

I returned home from a very moving Good Friday service, organized my music for Easter, and turned in for the night.

Somewhere around two o’clock in the morning, I was awakened by the sound of yelling from the park kitty-corner from our corner house.

“Dang rowdy teens,” I thought, actually smiling to myself, and ventured to the window to take a peek out.

A glare of headlights was coming up my street, and there were police calling orders to a man who was standing in the shadow of an oak tree beloved by every kid in the neighborhood. The man seemed to be trying to melt into the bark of the tree and become invisible.

This was not a dream, folks; this was an unexpected drama. No more smile for me.

Officers called out to the man. “We’re police. We’re here to help. If you can hear us, please answer or put your hands up.”

The man did not respond, for whatever reason. I could not actually see him, as he was behind the tree, and there was an SUV partially blocking my view.

Suddenly, the words of the Taizé chant, which I had been singing only hours before, played through my mind:

Stay with me; remain here with me. Watch and pray. Watch and pray.

So, that’s what I did.

***

This is the kind of scene we have all too frequently read about in the news paper or in electronic media – mainly because the results have been horrific. True confession: I am a contract transcriptionist for a major police department in the area, but not for the town in which I live. Because I have transcribed descriptions of scenes just like this many, many times, I thought I would take you, the reader, through this experience with me…

Because, what happened in my real life witnessing, and often what happens in those IAD (Internal Affairs Department) cases that are OIS cases (Officer Involved Shootings), is really textbook, although the outcomes vary. The scenarios are taught in police academies throughout the nation, and are handled in a fairly standard way. These scenarios are drilled endlessly during police academy. And I do not know if this is standard to every police department, but the department for which I transcribe interviews has mandatory extra, bi-annual training in such things as Use of Force, Tactical Training, Robbery Apprehension, Crisis Intervention (for substance abuse, domestic violence, gang violence, etc.) shooting range recertification every six months, and I could go on. I can honestly say that officers are rigorously trained and the training is ongoing throughout the career.

So, in these early morning hours, I was seeing unfold, in three-dimensional reality, the kind of story I’ve been transcribing for years. 

And, at this time, I felt the need to Watch and Pray, to hold space for the best possible outcome.

***

It all begins with a call for service. In this case, someone called 911 and reported seeing a man with a gun near the park. I don't know who that person was, but I heard this fact from one of the officers on scene, the one who was trying to get the suspect to comply with verbal commands.

[Note: Verbal commands are the second level of the commonly understood Use of Force Hierarchy. The first level is Officer Demeanor (open stance, ready stance, defensive stance, calmness, agitation, etc.). The third level is Physical Control (escort holds, pain/pressure compliance, passive counter measures, active counter measures, etc.). The fourth level, Serious Physical Control, is mostly not allowed in our local jurisdictions (such as carotid control holds). The fifth level of control is use of Impact and Less Lethal Weapons (such as pepper spray, baton or even taser). The sixth level of control is, of course, Deadly Force.] 

  

***

“We’re police and we’re here to help. Someone called us and said there was a man with a gun. Please let us know you can hear and understand; put your hands up.”

Still, the man did not answer. Thinking that he might actually have a hearing problem, the officer hit the switch on the patrol car P.A. and repeated the command a second time, followed by a third time.

Then, I heard a male officer yell frantically, “Don’t put your hands to your waistband!!! We need to see your hands!!!! GET DOWN ON THE GROUND!!!!” I could not see what the officers were seeing, but that seemed to me like an escalation, rather than a de-escalation. Observation 1: I know men who are constantly adjusting their trousers, whether or not they are wearing a belt; this is a habitual and self-conscious action. Observation 2: An officer yelling such a statement might raise the adrenaline level not just of the subject, but of everyone in the area, and possibly falsely cue other officers who have drawn weapons to shoot.

Next, a patrol car silently rolled up on the cross street, and an officer, holding a revolver at low ready (this is with the muzzle pointed downward toward the ground), exited and was soon crawling through my neighbor’s bushes to see if he could get a bead on the subject. Two other officers with long rifles also came into view.

I still heard no word from the suspect, who seemed to be trying to melt into the bark of the oak tree he stood beside.

Eventually, officers from the direction the commands came from deployed riot shields and advanced toward the suspect. Words were exchanged at closer range, and finally, the man who did not appear to move with an aggressive demeanor [in IAD interviews, the subject/suspect’s demeanor is discussed, as well as that of the officers’] was either physically detained or complied with commands and seated himself at the curb. (This seated position is often referred to as a subject detention.)  I did not see whether the subject was handcuffed or not, at that time.

Next, one officer peeled off from the pack. That officer took the role of Primary Officer, conducted an investigation by asking questions of the detainee, such as name, date of birth, address, etc. Other officers advanced into the fenced park and, shining their flashlights all around, did a sweep of the entire area, to make sure there were no other subjects hiding in the park. They might also have made a cursory examination of the garbage cans and public restrooms. This is all standard procedure.

After an all clear is given on an area that has been sweeped in this manner, the officers come move back and form a tighter perimeter around the subject, while the subject is being questioned. The partner of the primary officer usually runs information about the subject through dispatch to see if there are any wants or warrants for the individual. If there are, that is the “Go Directly To Jail” card. The detainee is then cuffed and formally taken into custody, is now under arrest, and is taken to the nearest police station for formal booking. It will fall to the primary officer on scene to write an incident report, and the subject may be transported to a temporary holding cell or directly to county jail.

***

In the case I was witnessing live, the perimeter around this one man, who the beam of a street light revealed to be a man of color, was quite large, owing to the large number of officers (I counted nine, but there must have been more. One of my neighbors, who lives with a more direct line of sight on the area in question, counted eight patrol cars), and I was struck suddenly by the fact that all of these officers were white. It took this incident to make me aware that, although I live in a place that is highly diverse, where over twenty languages are represented in our public schools, our police department does not represent that diversity beyond the inclusion of a small percentage of women.

So, here is this non-white male subject, surrounded by a sea of white, armed to the teeth law enforcement personnel. I can only imagine the reason why he did not move or speak during the early part of this episode is because he thought his life might be over in the next few minutes, so why bother protesting or speaking or moving or not moving or, really, doing anything at all?

***

Now that there was a “secured perimeter” all officers present at the scene who were not the primary officers were just standing around. Their vehicles were all idling, sending up noxious fumes.

I had the sense that this was a weird sort of law enforcement version of “piling on.” I mean, how many police officers does it take to subdue and take into custody one unarmed man? The neighbor I contacted conveyed to me an opinion that surely all officers on the duty roster for this night must have rolled to this scene. Why were so many officers there?

Were they there to police one another? Or were they there to “get a piece of the action”?

The primary officer continued to interview the subject. From where I was, I could not hear much. I think I heard the man say he had a knife among his belongings. I can not be sure of anything else I heard.

***

Finally, the interviewing of the subject was over. The police were probably unaware that there were at least a few witnesses monitoring this situation.

The conclusion arrived in the form of two fire trucks, both superfluous (one appeared to be a gigantic tractor-drawn arial ladder truck – why? What purpose would that serve in this situation?) and the last vehicle to appear on scene was a paramedic unit.

Evidently, the subject was considered a candidate for medical and or psychiatric observation and/or treatment. The subject was, therefore, released from police custody into the care of the paramedic unit. A paramedic in a white shirt looked, to me, embarrassed to be parting this sea of police presence with his colleagues.

In the jurisdiction for which I do transcription, when a subject is released from police custody, no incident report is made. Why is that? Because no arrest was made. I do not know if that procedure is the same in this jurisdiction where I live. There will be a record of the call for service, and that information is often made public in the local newspaper or on-line. This is done both in the name of transparency, but also as a public relations measure; “we’re working hard for you so you'll fund us.”

The subject was given a cursory evaluation by the paramedics, on scene, then strapped to a gurney. The gurney was loaded into the unit, which was the first vehicle to depart the scene.

Eventually, all the loud, noxious vehicles and their operators went away.

I returned to bed, physically and emotionally drained by this strange event.

***

I can appreciate that an abundance of caution and care was being taken, but I wonder at what I consider to be an over-abundance, and how easily abundance of caution could have become (and I hesitate to use the word, but it is so apt) overkill.

This experience was, to me, a macabre spectacle, bordering on theater of the absurd.

I am extremely grateful that the subject was driven away, alive, to receive, I hope, a new lease on life, rather than to a morgue. I pray that this person will receive the care and real help that can make the difference and light a path of future for this individual.

Questions I would ask of my local police chief and mayor:

·      Why were so many officers deployed to this scene?

·      Why were so many fire vehicles deployed to this non-fire, non-emergency?

·      What would the tipping point have been to change this possible felony stop from an organized, by the book procedure, into a chaotic shoot-out? There were too many law enforcement personnel present. When one officer screamed, “Don’t put go for your waistband,” that could have well have cued  a hail of bullets.

·      What is the point of deploying two fire trucks and a paramedic unit when the later is all that was necessary? This is a waste of resources and personnel that probably should have been patrolling elsewhere. Surely, there can be better dispatch and scene coordination.

Perhaps more questions will occur to me later.

***

On December 1, 2017, officers of the San Francisco Police Department were dispatched in pursuit of a carjacking suspect, allegedly driving a stolen California State Lottery van in the Bayview District. The suspect drove into dead end, exited the vehicle and appear to rush at the stopping primary pursuit vehicle. One of the officers in that car fired a single shot with his service revolver. The suspect was killed instantly.

I relate this story, which I remember reading about in the newspaper and is a matter of public record, because it is the story of a single officer firing a single bullet at a single suspect. Point number 1: It only takes one bullet to kill someone.  Point number 2: It took a great deal of self-control on the part of the officer to fire only a single shot; the trigger on the typical SIG Sauer service revolver is a DAK (double action) trigger system, based on weight of the pull on the trigger.

When police deploy their weapons in deadly force, they are trained to aim and shoot at only one location, the rectangle that represents your central body mass. If they shoot, it will not be at your foot, your leg, your arm or your shoulder. It will be at your body mass.

***

This thing happened in my neighborhood.  This thing could happen in your neighborhood.

If it does, what will you do?

I hope you will Watch and Pray for the best possible outcome.

I also hope you will question anything that looks wrong, and report anything that seems really out of whack to an appropriate agency, perhaps your local District Attorney’s office. 

DO NOT insert yourself into a danger zone, and DO NOT EVER interfere in a police action. I realized later that being an observer was taking somewhat of a risk; a barrage of gunfire could easily have sent bullets into nearby homes. If you can observe safely, and feel okay doing so, fine. Otherwise RETREAT to as SAFE A POSITION AS YOU CAN.

___
1. 23 Police Officers Fire 377 Bullets at Two Men With Zero Guns
http://blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=1462246167395686511#allposts

2. Why Do Police Shoot So Many Times?
http://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/2016/03/police_shootings_nopd_jpso_eri.html