Arguments On Police Brutality

1319 Words null Page
The words “police brutality” have been thrown around quite constantly lately. You will hear such words when watching the news, on social media outlets, and through people’s conversations. So what is police brutality?, it 's when a police officer uses excessive force to detain a suspect or a criminal (sometimes even killing the person or seriously injuring them). There are many different viewpoints on the matter , but two have come up with their own arguments ( Michael P. Auerbach and Tracey M. DiLascio). The main points covered were; agreeing that police are put in instantaneous, decisive positions and that some police officers take it too far, and disagreeing about how widespread it is and the way of apprehending an individual. Although …show more content…
Be that as it may, both writers have a contradiction on police brutality which involves on how widespread the issue is (if any). Michael P Auerbach has a strong belief that, “Police brutality, however, is not as widespread a problem as such activists allege.” (Ezproxy.Mvc) in contrast to what Tracey M.Dilascio who states,”Certainly when there is an allegation of widespread and consistent abuse of power. . .”(Ezproxy.Mvc). What Michael is saying, is that many groups and activist everywhere take a couple of incidents where police are using strong force to detain a suspect and are quick to broadcast it everywhere stating “police brutality”. While Tracey believes that there is a problem and that it is seen every where. What Michael shows to back his statement is that when videos are shown, the whole incident isn 't caught on tape. rather what 's shown is just the police part using force and not what suspect did. His exact words were, “Even videos do not often tell a complete story since, in many cases, what is not "caught on film" are the actions of the suspect, whose uncooperative and even violent behavior may have warranted a strong response from the police. In fact, some "police brutality" incidents are examples of police defending …show more content…
One major flaw for Tracey was when she brought forth the statement on biased police arrests. Tracey brings up how the major cities have the highest crime and as well as largest quantities of reported police brutality. She contradicts herself since those cities have a substantial number of violent people (referring to gang members) who will not think twice of harming police. Police officers will then need to use strong force to detain suspects. As far being biased, major cities are full of diverse people showing that of course there will various minority racial groups being arrested. Like Michael states, “Many of the allegations of police brutality are made by suspects who seek to avoid prosecution by claiming that the arresting officer or officers used excessive force in their capture.” (). Just because the arresting officer is white, doesn 't mean he is being biased. This shows the ignorance being shown by Tracey for just simply dodging all the points being said by Michael. Another aspect of having a stronger argument are the numerous back up information from outside sources Michael uses in which he clarifies of so called police brutality. Tracey tries to persuade us by using a appeal to motion framework in her argument, but by doing so adds logical fallacy into play. This logical fallacy is shown when contradicts herself when showing the high violence rate in

Related Documents