Bills to Combat Extremism in Law Enforcement Stall Across the Country

My general feeling on the matter is that if your job involves a gun, you should be held to a higher standard than everyone else. When it comes to the military, soldiers have limitations placed on what they can and can’t say for matters of combat readiness and unit cohesion. “Some of our rights are abridged because of the nature of the military organization and the importance of cohesion and combat readiness,” John Altenberg, a retired deputy judge advocate general of the Army, told NBC News when discussing extremism in the military. “We can’t just say anything we want.”

It only makes sense that that same principal should be carried over to people who are in charge of public safety. If you hate a large swath of the public, you probably shouldn’t be allowed to have a job where you can hurt those people. I don’t understand why this is a complicated issue. I mean I do—white supremacy will always try to intellectualize the brutality needed to maintain it—but still.

The result of all this hemming and hawing is that momentum on many of the bills introduced in these states has stalled. The bill in Portland is limited to just pre-screenings of potential officers, and the bill in California essentially boils down to a piece of text that says, “No member of a hate group should be in law enforcement and if you are a member of one of these groups don’t apply, you have no place in our profession.”

Source: Bills to Combat Extremism in Law Enforcement Stall Across the Country