Without a shred of hard evidence, first FBI chief Jim Comey and now the head of the Drug Enforcement Administration are publicly claiming increased scrutiny of police officers from the public – essentially Black Lives Matter and other protesters – are the cause of a fictitious crime wave in the United States. Not only are their comments insulting and ignorant, the entire premise of their argument is false.

The DEA chief Chuck Rosenberg said on Wednesday he thinks Comey “is spot on” in remarks the FBI director made on 23 October, when he said “viral videos” and criticism of police officers are creating a “chilling effect” on police work and leading to more crime – what some have dubiously called the “Ferguson effect”.

Even though Comey admitted the next day that he didn’t have any hard evidence to back his statements up, that didn’t stop Rosenberg from wholeheartedly agreeing. The Washington Post reported: “Rosenberg said he believed the Ferguson effect could cause police to become reluctant to engage with criminals because of ‘the concern, rightly or wrongly, that you become the next viral video.’”

Obama warns police officers against 'cherry-picking' crime data Read more

As the Post noted, the theory has been disputed by everyone from Barack Obama and former attorney general Eric Holder to the National Fraternal Order of Police, “all of whom have said it is offensive to suggest that police officers aren’t doing their jobs”. It is actually offensive on multiple fronts – and not just to police officers.

The idea that there is some sort of expansive crime wave is a huge myth, and the media has, by and large, done a terrible job at giving people perspective on a couple percentage points change in violent crime seen in some cities over a one year time frame – where crime has been at record lows. Crime is actually way down across the board when you look at statistics over the past two decades. The Washington Post’s Max Ehrenfreund is one of the very few reporters to comprehensively look at crime statistics across the country. Here’s what he found:

“Overall, though, things haven’t changed much from the past several years, at least judging by the number of homicides committed in major cities. While the number of homicides has increased in many big cities, the increases are moderate, not more than they were a few years ago. Meanwhile, crime has declined in other cities”.

FBI director concedes he has little evidence to support 'Ferguson effect' Read more

But let’s pretend for a minute that Comey and the DEA chief are right, and that police are “refusing to engage with criminals” and “pulling back” from their job that our tax dollars are paying them to do because they’re receiving a little extra scrutiny. Here’s where it gets even worse.

What Comey refers to as “viral videos” are recordings of police officers by citizens who have the first amendment right to record law enforcement activities in public – just as Black Lives Matter protesters have the first amendment right to protest police brutality. So what the two top law enforcement officers are complaining about is Americans increasingly exercising their constitutional rights.



And then there’s the preposterous idea that “viral videos” should be a concern at all. Unless you are choking an unarmed man to death who is not resisting, shooting an unarmed man in the back as he is running away or body slamming a calm teenage girl to the floor in front of her classmates, you shouldn’t have anything to worry about. No one’s career is going to get ruined by a “viral video” of you doing your job professionally (as countless police officers do every day).

Don't believe the fictitious crime trends used to undermine police reform | Bernard Harcourt Read more

In virtually all cases, the “viral videos” are recordings of abhorrent and criminal behavior committed by police officers who are violating the law. If that is making police chiefs nervous, it’s not the fault of protesters, or citizen journalists, but the police forces themselves.

If cops cannot handle a mere modicum of oversight from the public, if they cannot adjust to the prevalence of technology (which, by the way, they use to surveil citizens far more than it is used on them), if they cannot handle a little bit of accountability (after years of virtually none), then the problem is much larger than a few violent cops giving a bad name to the rest. It means that police commissioners across the country should be disciplined or fired since their forces are refusing to do their jobs just because of a little criticism from the people who pay their salaries.



To be fair, there are many police chiefs who embrace the added scrutiny and clearly disagree with Comey and Rosenberg’s remarks. But to those who don’t: yes, police do risk their lives to protect others. However, they are also given extraordinary powers not afforded to regular citizens, and for the past decades they’ve largely been handed virtual immunity in all but the most egregious cases of abuse – and many times, even then, they get off. If the police can’t handle being held more accountable, then we need new police.