Trending Topics

Why hate crime legislation isn’t the priority for law enforcement

There are areas where legislation could really make an impact on police officers; hate crime legislation isn’t one of them

blm-2.jpg

Two boys hold signs that say “Blue Lives Matter,” before the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund’s Annual Candlelight Vigil, Wednesday, May 13, 2015 in Washington.

AP Photo/Alex Brandon

Several states, including Washington, Mississippi, New York, Louisiana and Kentucky, have or are considering putting police officers as a protected class in hate crime legislation. Hate crime legislation is now under consideration on the federal level. The Protect and Serve Act of 2018 was introduced by Senators Heidi Heitkamp and Orrin Hatch. The measure aims to make it a federal crime to knowingly cause or attempt injury because of the “actual or perceived status” that the person is a law enforcement officer.

Opponents of hate crime laws in general, and the extension of these laws to protect police officers, assert that the laws conflict with our legal history of punishing only behavior and not thoughts, inhibit free speech and public protest, are political statements with selective enforcement, and are redundant since they seek to punish behavior already unlawful with inherent contempt for any victim. Additionally, the increase in federalizing criminal justice issues may infringe on state’s rights.

It would be hard not to support any sign that lawmakers are supporting police officers, but the net effect of hate crime laws on the lives of police officers is not likely to be significant. Here are some areas where legislation could really make an impact:

Victims’ Rights for Police Officers

A survey of several hundred police officers revealed that nearly 70% of police officers involved in assaults on officers and resisting arrest cases were not consulted by prosecutors on case dispositions. Another 60% reported that those charges are the first to be dropped in plea bargains where the offender faces multiple charges. Only 11% reported being offered victim services such as compensation or counseling.

There is no reason that police officers who have been victims of crime should be excluded from existing victims’ rights laws. A common attitude among prosecutors and the public is that officers should accept assault and injury as part of the job. The reality is that compliance with an arrest is also the law and being assaulted is not acceptable.

Employment Rights for Injured Officers

Police officers often assume that if they are injured they will be supported by their peers and their employers. No officer should make that assumption.

In Colorado, an officer injured in a crash while responding to a burglary call was notified by his chief that his job was gone. In a communication, Officer Robert Chamberlain was told, “it is imperative that we remain at full staff in the police department as much as possible. The absence of a full-time police officer for eight months’ time has resulted in the department being short staffed on shifts, which creates safety concerns for our other officers. We can no longer hold your position vacant”

In Houston, Officer Michael Bozeman suffered complications from being shot multiple times, but was denied workers’ compensation benefits. Almost any injured officer can recount exhausting legal battles with employers and insurers. Officers can easily run out of sick leave, unpaid family medical leave and vacation days before recovering to duty status from an injury. Most of these officers want to return to work, but aren’t given the recovery time needed.

Catastrophic Injury and Health Care

An officer with a career-ending injury, including PTSD, has no guarantee of a livelihood under current rules that differ from agency to agency and state to state.

“There is a huge need for a federal minimum standard protocol for officers who are catastrophically injured serving and protecting their communities,” according to Heidi Paulson, vice-president of the disabled officers division of How2LoveYourCop, a police family advocacy group. “Most of the officers we have worked with have been given absolutely no information by their department to help navigate disability retirement hurdles.”

During National Police Week, Paulson will be advocating for the Putting First Responders First bill, which may be introduced to the U.S. House of Representatives by Congressman Ralph Norman of South Carolina. Expected to be carried in the U.S. Senate by Senator Steve Daines of Montana, the bill addresses the need for a federal minimum standard protocol for officers who are catastrophically injured.

With many police departments opting out of social security, there is no way officers can qualify for SSDI when their departments do not participate in FICA, and they have not been significantly employed by a participating company/entity within the 10 years prior to disability. Private disability insurance is prohibitively expensive for the high risk occupation of police work, leaving many permanently disabled officers without help.

According to Paulson, “Although federal law requires agencies to continue health insurance benefits at whatever level the officer had prior to being injured, the penalty for non-compliance is loss of 10% of federal Law Enforcement Block Grant Funding. All an agency has to do to avoid making a plan (written procedures) for reviewing line of duty injuries and continuing health insurance coverage for the injured is to accept only 90% of available funding. The current legislation is really just lip service that leaves injured officers stuck without insurance when they are critically injured and their families are already facing hardship.”

PTSD

Florida has specifically included PTSD as a condition for which expanded benefits are allowed under workers’ compensation. Other states have or are considering similar measures. Laws designed to protect injured workers may specifically exclude mental disorders when they are not accompanied by physical disorders. The science of PTSD is clarifying that these injuries are physiological and not merely emotional and can occur without any visible wounds. These medical facts must be a part of existing programs designed to assist injured officers and other first responders.

Activism Needed

While law enforcement advocates can appreciate the sentiment from the high-profile introduction of hate crime legislation to protect police in the performance of their duties, the real need is to alleviate the suffering of thousands of injured officers struggling to get through the day and pay their bills. A letter, email, or phone call to your congressman can make the difference.

Joel Shults operates Street Smart Training and is the founder of the National Center for Police Advocacy. He retired as Chief of Police in Colorado. Over his 30-year career in uniformed law enforcement and criminal justice education, Joel served in a variety of roles: academy instructor, police chaplain, deputy coroner, investigator, community relations officer, college professor and police chief, among others. Shults earned his doctorate in Educational Leadership and Policy Analysis from the University of Missouri, with a graduate degree in Public Services Administration and a bachelor degree in Criminal Justice Administration from the University of Central Missouri. In addition to service with the U.S. Army military police and CID, Shults has done observational studies with over 50 police agencies across the country. He has served on a number of advisory and advocacy boards, including the Colorado POST curriculum committee, as a subject matter expert.

His latest book The Badge and the Brain is available at www.joelshults.com.
RECOMMENDED FOR YOU