LAPD’s Problem Is Not Reform, but Funding to Fill the Ranks

We’re weary of misleading phrases and terms, and high on our list this week is the word aggressive. It is most often used to refer to the Los Angeles Police Department, which, in the so-called good old days, conducted aggressive policing and was very effective.

A popular refrain these days is that the post-Rodney King, post-Christopher Commission, tie- one- hand- behind- their- backs- and- arm- them- with- flowers- rather- than- batons LAPD is no longer allowed to be, well, aggressive. There’s just too much time being spent on hiring minorities and women. And, the line goes, all the “real” cops out there are just backing off, muzzled and reined in at the expense of an unwitting public.

You read a lot of that sort of thing in the recent Times Valley Edition series “Behind the Badge: Three Months With the LAPD.”

The problem with all this is that the word aggressive has become a scare tactic aimed at citizens. The real word, and the real definition of what had to be eliminated from the LAPD, was excessive , as in use of force, among other things. No one ever talked about going any further than that. You ought to know the type of unacceptable behavior we are talking about, the kind that required the city of Los Angeles to cough up $19.2 million over a recent two-year period to settle brutality complaints against officers who were tending toward, well, excess.

Some members of the force would have us believe that we are drifting toward a real-life version of the emasculated police force in the movie “Demolition Man.” In it, a member of the mythical San Angeles Police Department responds with the statement “We’re not equipped to deal with this kind of violence” after a murder suspect escapes by beating up several officers. That farcical scenario simply isn’t being played out here, and the police reforms that have been called for won’t push us there.

There are other misleading beliefs as well, as the series by staff writer John Johnson and photographer Joel Lugavere noted. We hear that the “disproportionate share of crime committed by minorities presents law enforcement with a problem. But using that as justification to go after anyone who looks different is no longer acceptable.” Well, it was never justified by the numbers, and it never should have been acceptable.

Police statistics, for example, note that there were 1,227 robbery suspects in the LAPD’s Van Nuys Division during a four-month period in 1994. Of that total, 46% were Latino, 43% were African American. The umbers are then juxtaposed with the fact that Van Nuys is only 34% Latino and 5% African American. The fact remains that there are approximately 15,000 African American residents in Van Nuys, and about 100,000 Latinos.

Assume the worst. Assume that all of those robbery suspects live in Van Nuys (and you shouldn’t); assume that the four months were typical and multiply by three to get a yearlong estimate of suspects (and you shouldn’t); assume that none of those suspects are repeat offenders (and you shouldn’t); assume that all of the suspects are guilty (and you shouldn’t) and you are left with three mathematical facts.

Less than one out of every 10 Van Nuys Anglos are robbers. Less than one of 10 Latinos are robbers. Less than one out of every 10 African Americans in Van Nuys are robbers.

Another distraction: diversifying the police force, and the lament of a decorated LAPD officer who strikes a chord with some when he says, “As a white male, I am worthless.” Well, those are pretty strange words for a fellow who can count on the fact that eight out of 10 of all of his potential LAPD bosses are white, and more than likely male.

It is the focus on the so-called good old days that detracts from the LAPD’s very real problems.

Primary among those is staffing. The related problem is equipment, such as computers so old they can’t download simple files. The problem is a helicopter fleet so old that some choppers have had to be grounded. The problem is infrastructure: police divisions so crowded that officers dress in cars and hallways.

Ours is the most understaffed and ill-equipped big-city police force in the nation. Who can blame LAPD officers for job-hopping to a lighter workload, better equipment and higher pay?

The staff shortfall is also the reason that successful specialized teams, such as the Major Assault Crimes Unit to combat domestic violence and the Abused Child Unit, aren’t able to do even more. Such units are the first to suffer losses in the attempt to squeeze more patrol units out of a relatively small department.

Reforms are not the problem. This city must figure out how to pay for the officers, equipment and infrastructure that will give Los Angeles the police department it deserves.