A Rochester police captain takes the usual tired questions about "more gun laws," and expresses his own theories about what's causing the problem: a removal of social consequences that starts with irresponsible child-rearing and continues with "bail reform"--basically treating grownups as children and being being bad parents to them. He talks mostly about enforcing the gun laws that already are on the books, but I hear a different message: what concerns us is not the guns but the actions of people with guns. He points out that he can't think of a case of gun violence committed by a registered owner that wasn't justified. The problem is that the gun violence committed by unregistered owners isn't justified, and isn't effectively punished or deterred. The problem isn't that we're not punishing illegal gun ownership, it's that we aren't distinguishing between crime and self-defense, and are if anything obsessing on gun ownership instead of on whether a crime is occurring along with the gun ownership. On top of that, we keep excusing the crime, on the basis of some kind of half-baked political theory about roots causes of robbery and murder, and distracting ourselves with the problem of the weaponry--no matter how clear the evidence is of how weapons are used differently by criminals and non-criminals. It's as if we thought social nirvana were achieved by making people weaker and weaker until they lack tools to do any more harm.
The police captain's message throughout is that we can't solve problems if we keep lying to ourselves and each other about what's happening right in front of us.
The video link doesn't say, but the captain is Frank Umbrino. He was involved in early decisions not to release information about the death of Daniel Prude, video of whose arrest sparked riots when it finally came out months later. He's still standing after the decapitation of the police department leadership and the indictment of Mayor Lovely Warren on campaign fraud charges. Was Umbirno wrong? He accurately predicted the effects of the video, and it's easy to understand his decision, but it was futile. You can't keep a lid on in-custody deaths, and shouldn't, no matter how clearly you see the consequences in a tinderbox like the present one.








