I've always been fascinated by the response of people in the midst of a rally or protest when police are involved. This dates back to my first really contentious gathering involving members of Calgary's Aryan Guard at City Hall. If memory serves me right, it would have gone relatively unnoticed had it not been for a bunch of flyers that were circulated. That led to a couple of hundred people showing up, both neo-Nazis and anti-racists. To say it got "pretty heated" would be an understatement.
But that's where things got kind of interesting. Police were there when they got wind that both sides would be converging on the same spot. I can't remember for sure if any arrests were made in that initial incident, but I do remember the differences in opinion over whether police should have even been there in the first place. Or in some eyes: why wasn't there more police presence?
Those same questions have popped back up recently with the Israeli/Palestinian protests in Calgary. Last week, a clash between the two sides led to a melee, leading to criticism of the police service for its lack of presence. Even Police Chief Rick Hanson admitted on News Talk 770 that they "dropped the ball" when it came to communications. That issue was rectified ahead of last night's rallies, and police say the gathering (with somewhere between 700 and 1,000 people in attendance) went off without a hitch.
Now I know some people will think I'm a police apologist here and I'm ready for that criticism. But one has to wonder what the "right response" is to these rallies and protests. Or maybe there isn't one and you simply have to be okay with the idea that not everyone is going to be happy with what you do.
On one hand, there's the idea that police shouldn't be there. You want to have faith in people that they will be well-behaved on their own and don't need to be "babysat" on the off-chance that something bad might happen. Some will say police should have "better things to do" and "our taxpayer dollars are better spent elsewhere."
On the other hand, there's the idea that police should be there at full attention. Because if ANYTHING bad happens, they should be there to break it up right away without incident. Otherwise, they're "not doing their job" to "serve and protect".
So the reality becomes that the response almost always ends up somewhere in the middle. And when you have those two extremes in hand, someone is going to complain. The answer isn't going to be black or white.
And it's certainly a no-win situation for police, even when it comes to the rights and freedoms issues. In the latest incidents, some people have gone so far as to question police on why they would allow pro-Israeli protesters anywhere near the pro-Palestinian rally. Which isn't a bad point, as the best offense is a good defense so if you can get in the way of a potential conflict, you're being proactive. But there is the right to peaceful demonstration that can't be trampled on. And "innocent until proven guilty" is the way we have to go here as well, so you can't assume the two sides will clash just because they have differing viewpoints. Can you imagine the firestorm that would ensue if police "intercepted" someone if they were only working on assumptions and it turned out to be completely unfounded?
What was nice to see was that despite having both sides at last night's rally and despite it getting very vocal, there were no physical incidents reported and police actually applauded both sides for keeping it civil.
We can only hope it stays that way.
No comments:
Post a Comment