Teasing the public opinion

Few days ago I was going through old advertisements from the heydays of marketing when, apparently, nobody bothered to check the alleged studies and experts’ opinions that were supposed to back up claims of the advertiser. Or use common sense for that matter. A 12-year old boy was beaming with pride and praise to his dad who got him a winchester rifle for Christmas. A soda giant advertised its caffeine and sugar-rich drink as good for the kids and babies telling mums across the US of A that the earlier they start pouring the beverage down their kids’ tiny little throats the better; for the kids and mums alike. Nowadays, the technique is called “pushing” and what’s grown up from the decaffeinated kids is called a “stereotyped American”. OK, a caricature of the concept. I also learned that, in the 1950s, more doctors smoked a particular brand of cigarettes.

Building on that great tradition of industry backed expert’s opinions, Taser International sponsored studies showed that their stun guns are safe from medical point of view. That would be normal, in a very specific way. What’s not normal by any stretch of imagination is that after several hundred Taser related death and independent expert opinionsns law enforcement agencies still refer to Taser International’s studies in defence of the controversial stun guns use.

Public opinion was teased again this week when an cardiology expert who happens to be on the Taser International’s payroll testified in the Braidwood inquiry into the death of Polish immigrant Robert Dziekanski. Predictably, Dr. Charles Swerdlow said he didn’t think Dziekanski’s death was at all related to the use of a taser. It’s not necessary to go into medical details, that’s for the experts to decide. On the other hand, to base the opinion on the testimony alleging that Dziekanski had a pulse after being tasered 5 times, appears to be a little suspicious because A) it’s a matter of minutes and B) people in coma have a pulse too.

The issue here is that the taser was deployed in a way that contradicted RCMP’s own guidelines and, in an indirect way, to the Taser International lab tests since these involved neither a multiple use nor an police officer kneeling on the tasered person in a way that restrained breathing.

Swerdlow has an obvious conflict of interests but his testimony should stand. It is a great evidence of reluctance on part of both the manufacturer and the RCMP to provide independent tests’ results and to accept independent experts. I just wonder what Dr. Swerdlow smokes.

Unions for the RCMP? Good idea.

Most of those who dismiss the very idea of unionized workforce usually do not fail to utter word communism in the same sentence. Some of those who didn’t forget to grow up mentally tend to associate unions with strikes capable of polarizing and paralyzing if not whole countries then certainly at least cities or industries. And even those who realize the importance of properly run unions often disregard the notion of unions being established within law-enforcement agencies where regulations and ranks are orders and orders are no supposed to be questioned.

But police unions do make sense. It always makes sense where power and politics often mix up. That’s why even Formula 1 drivers form their own unions. The Royal Canadian Mounted Police’s court victory has given the officers the right to form their unions, as judge deemed the restriction unconstitutional opposing generations of RCMP commissioners who, as The Globe & Mail kindly reminds, were afraid that “police unions would expose Canada to everything from creeping Bolshevism to politicized police”.

Paranoia crept in long ago, surely, the question is where does it originate now. Of course, Cold War thinking is alive and well within certain demographic defined more by mentality than sociological stratification. Even strikes are not a problem. The modern-day reasons for opposing unions in the RCMP stem from different soil.

There’s nothing wrong with the command chain within the RCMP, or any other police force for that matter, on the contrary, it’s perfectly logical within the scope of tasks and the nature of law enforcement or military organizations. But the very nature of a command chain makes it very difficult to raise valid objections even outside the immediate line of duty, such where safety, security, administration or filing and reporting are concerned. What can be even more disturbing, any otherwise sensible command chain can quickly turn into a very effective mechanism protecting higher and/or highest ranks at any given stage on any given level.

It’s not only about whistleblowers or scapegoats. The ongoing British Columbia inquiry into the death of Robert Dziekanski revealed several instances of RCMP’s own regulations being sidestepped or violated. RCMP unions will not only serve to protect the force’s officers but will also bring more transparency and public control of Canada’s most iconic and internationally recognized police force.