The media's effect on perceptions of Law Enforcment

      This is a lighter topic then the ones I have covered previously on this blog, but it’s still a topic that I care a lot about. Growing up I loved old cop movies like Die Hard and Lethal Weapon. These movies and others like it are cult classics and for good reason. It’s fun watching the highspeed super cop over coming impossible odds, beating the bad guy, and getting the girl. Even today we have cop movies and shows that are grittier and more “realistic”, but they still follow the same essential formula as these older films. these movies are fun and harmless for the most part. The issue arises though when these movies begin to influence people’s perceptions of how police work is done. Now obviously everyone knows these are movies. I’m not say that anyone believes that something like Die Hard could really happen. I do believe that these movies create a lot of misconceptions about things like how tasers really work, and what an appropriate use of force is for situations involving knives or blunt objects such as harmers. These misconceptions can have a real impact on the world when people criticize their local police officers for not handling a situation like John Wick would. These criticisms can erode the public’s trust in their police system when what they’re asking their officers to do simply isn’t physically possible. So today I want to address what I believe are the three main misconceptions that people have when it comes to police work.

1.      1. Police in movies put themselves in unnecessarily dangerous situations.

     Obviously, movies like Die Hard are extreme, but you still see this a lot in movies like Silence of the Lambs and in shows like The Wire or the Rookie. The brave cop who, despite being in some of the biggest cities in the U.S. must take on an entire group of thugs by themselves, or they holster their weapon and fight some guy with a knife with their bare hands because “they didn’t need to die.” Now of course there are going to be bad situations where you can’t afford to wait for backup. I have personally had to respond to calls involving people with deadly weapons all by myself, so it happens. In movies thought the hero is often in a situation where they can definitely afford to take it slow and wait for backup. Silence of the Lambs is one movie that comes to mind. If I was the FBI Agent in that movie there is no way I would follow that serial killer down into his basement all alone without at least calling for backup first. In any potentially deadly situation, you typically want to have at least 3 to 1 odd, meaning there is at least 3 of us for every 1 of them. Think about it, if you go after a suspect alone and you die or get injured that bad guy is potentially going to get away and continue hurting people, so it usually pays to wait for backup. Secondly there is no way I am going hands on with a guy with a knife or a hammer. Knife fights can be incredibly brutal, and I believe movies rarely portray this accurately. Once again, if I try to wrestle some guy with a knife to the ground and he stabs me then there a chance he could get away. I think most people know this is they actually stop and think about it for a minute. The issue arises though when people criticize people when they have to tase or shoot someone with a knife and ask, “why didn’t they just tackle him?” obviously, police work can be dangerous, and every cop knew that when they joined but that doesn’t mean you have to put yourself in an unnecessarily dangerous situation.  

2.      2. Tasers are not as affective in really life as they are in movies.

This one really annoys me because taser are rarely portrayed accurately in movies or Tv shows. I feel like every week I see a tv cop shoot someone with a taser and that person completely locks up and then they pass out for a few hours and that is not how tasers work. First thing I want to point out is drive stunning. Drive stunning is when you remove the taser cartridge and just touch the person you’re tasing with the bare prongs. In movies this always causes the person to completely lock up and then pass out. First of all, drive stunning does not actually stun you it just hurts (a lot). Police us it as a form of pain compliance. So, all it does is hurt you until that you follow instructions. I have personally been drive stunned probably a dozen times and while your muscles might tense up like they would in any painful situation you are not actually stunned. Second thing I want to talk about is getting shot with a taser. Because of Tv a lot of people view the taser like it’s a blaster from Star Wars which leads people to frequently ask “why didn’t they just tase him?” First of all, in movies tasers seem to work like 99% of the time. In reality they probably about 50% of the time. Tasers are by nature not the most reliable weapons. You’re basically firing two darts at someone at the same time and hoping that both of them it the target and drive deep enough in the person's skin so that the electricity actually stuns them. It’s still a great tool it’s just not as reliable as people think. Especially in high stress and fast-moving situations. Lastly, tasers don’t knock people out. I have been tased and I have personally witnessed well over a hundred people get tased and I have never seen anyone lose consciousness. If anything, it wakes you up. I could maybe see someone getting knocked out if they have a medical condition, but there is no reason for a healthy adult, like the bad guys you see in movies, would get knocked out. In reality you only have 5 seconds after you tase someone to get them into handcuffs before they start fighting again.

3.      3. Underestimating and overestimating the effectiveness of bullets.

Why didn’t they just shoot them in the lag? I hate this question more than any other question I have put in this post. When people get shot in the leg or the arm in a movie they respond as if they have just stubbed their toe and they’re always fine in the end despite not treating the wound for long periods of time. while leg wounds can be minor flesh wounds that you can totally fight through for short periods of time they can also be as fatal as getting shot in the heart. So, with that in mind, why not shoot someone in the leg? First of all, it can be incredibly difficult to shoot someone in the leg or arm, especially if they are running at you or someone else. Second if their running at you with a knife or something similar and you shoot them in the leg it may not be effective enough to stop them or they may have enough momentum built up that they can still reach you. Second in slower situations when you do have time to aim and fire you can still potentially hit an artery and cause the suspect to bleed out in a matter of seconds. There are a lot of arteries in your legs and all it takes is a bullet or a bone fragment to nick it and you’re going to die unless you can somehow stop the bleeding in a few seconds. Even if you don’t die the bullet can still do severe damage to your bones and muscles and some people never walk again after getting shot in the leg. So, you never know for sure how much damage you’re going to do to someone before you shoot them, which is why there is no such thing as shooting to wound. You should never take something like potentially shooting someone lightly, and you should never point a gun a someone unless you are ready to kill them. Then if you do need to shoot someone you should always aim for the center of the chest. This what cops and soldiers are trained to do, and it isn’t something we take lightly.