Denver’s police union is coming across as if it is trying to stir up more controversy than is occurring in protests being held around the city over police brutality cases elsewhere.
Surely, union officials are not spoiling for conflict with protesters, but how else to explain some of their comments?
So far, the protests have been relatively tame affairs with young people simply exercising their First Amendment rights.
Unfortunately, one protest ended in tragedy when a car critically injuring one of them. Police say the driver had a medical issue and the loss of control of his vehicle was unrelated to the march.
The union issued a press release when the officer was hit and chanted, “Hit him again.” Yet it was hard to find anyone to confirm that account — not reporters, the school district, students or the police department.
Now, the Denver Police Protective Association is chafing to the protests, saying that puts officers at risk of injury.
A letter to city officials said officers were told to leave such gear behind “for fear that the officers will look intimidating and perhaps unwittingly escalate the intensity of the protests.”
It stands to reason that wearing riot gear to something that is not a riot could invite violence.
But there also is some validity to the union’s concerns. Police should be able to protect themselves if violence starts. And we have no doubt police would be able to quickly armor up.
Thus far, Denver’s police department has been a model for its level-headed handling of the rallies. Officers have put themselves in harm’s way to protect protesters even as they marched to decry police actions elsewhere.
Certainly, if protests escalate into violence, officers must protect themselves. But there is no need to provoke discord through false reports of misbehavior or showing up ready for a fight.
To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit or check out our for how to submit by e-mail or mail.
