Is America ready for a conversation about policing in the real world? Or are some wanting nothing more than a monologue and the issuing of ultimata? One police officer in Duluth, Minnesota wants people to “read what it is truly like out here in the real world” before taking positions on police reform and funding changes. On the union’s Facebook page, Sgt. Matt McShane described an incident last week that nearly ended up in a shooting — one which McShane is convinced would have been reported falsely as an attack on an “unarmed Black man”:

Last night my world and my entire family’s world almost changed forever. I almost shot an “unarmed black man.” My partner got on the radio and told us a shooting was happening right in front of her very eyes. Shot after shot rang out in our community we have sworn to protect. 17 shots in all were fired and now people were fleeing everywhere. My partners all went towards the gun shots, no race was said, no thought of our own safety was contemplated. We went because that is what we are called to do. We must help our community no matter who is in danger and no matter the risk. My partners found two of the suspects, and I rushed to help them as they are yelling they are not complying and now they are fighting. Where are the guns used? Do they have them? Are they going to try and kill my partners? All thoughts as I pull up and see my partners on the ground fighting with one male, a black man. Another black man is near them and turns to run as i approach. My partners yell “stop him.”

I yell for him to stop and he turns and runs. Where is the gun? Does he still have it? Is he going to shoot me? My partners? Is he and innocent person just out for a walk? I give chase, he continues to run around a corner. Is he going to ambush me when I turn the corner? Where is the gun? My partners are yelling for more officers. The male keeps running until I and my partner gain ground on him and he stops. “Get your hands in the air!” He does not. “Get on the ground!” He does not. Where is the gun?!!!!! He turns his back hiding his hands from us, still not listening to commands. Where is the gun?!!!! I level my pistol at him. I put my finger on the trigger. Is this it? Is he going to shoot us? Am i going to have to shoot this man to save myself and others??? Will my wife wake up a widow, will my children no longer have their father? Is our community going to change forever because of me? Will everything burn only because we want to help? Because we want to live and not die? Because we don’t want to see innocent people in our community die. All of this in about 1/2 a second… My partner attempts to tackle him and now we fight because he is still not listening. I almost shot an “unarmed black man.” Why was he unarmed? Because (unknown to me at the time) when he ran and turned the corner in front of me, he threw the stolen gun he was carrying in the bushes.

When the dust settled officers had cuts and bruises and two multi convicted felons went to jail unharmed, but it was only 1/16 of a squeeze from changing our world forever.

It took a couple of days for this to gain traction, but it eventually sparked controversy both in and out of Duluth, where calls had already been heard for defunding the police. The Star Tribune picked up the story this morning and noted the debate that McShane’s post had generated:

McShane’s defense of his profession and “take a day in our shoes” monologue has put Duluth in the middle of a worldwide reckoning over police accountability following the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis police custody. His post, in which he stated “I almost shot an ‘unarmed Black man’ last night,” had been shared about 150,000 times as of Monday and has garnered over 13,000 comments — many of them in support of the department.

Police Chief Mike Tusken shared the union’s post, credited only to “a Duluth police sergeant,” but later took it down and replaced it with an apology: “It was not my intention to cause further hurt and traumatize community members and I am deeply sorry my actions were insensitive and hurtful.”

Tusken sympathized with his sergeant’s message, however.

“Officers are experiencing disrespect and anger from community members who are frustrated at the institution of policing,” he wrote. “I have witnessed more tears from officers this year than from all my years past.”

One activist is less than impressed, however:

Longtime Duluth community organizer Jordon Moses said the Duluth Police Department has a “culture of not wanting to dive deep on these issues.”

“When communities and citizens push, institutions push back,” said Moses, who is Black. “We’re supposed to be grateful the cop didn’t pull the trigger. That’s kind of your job. You have tools, you have training.” …

Moses, who now lives in St. Paul, said that kind of language is endemic to “this kind of culture that an officer can think this way, feel this way then not be challenged by members of his own institution on why that ideology might be problematic.”

Moses isn’t entirely off base about a plea for gratitude, but he misses the point on that. McShane isn’t asking for gratitude for not shooting the suspect; Moses is correct that McShane’s training and professionalism are expected on that score. McShane is asking for gratitude, or at least recognition, for putting his life on the line in the first place in order to protect his community and keep the peace.

This gets back to my initial question about the “conversation” that activists claim to want. If we are to truly look for opportunities to reform policing and/or make it more effective, why wouldn’t the perspective of police be a crucial part of that process? More to the point, Moses seems unhappy that police are asking to have their perspectives and experiences considered in the debate. Moses complains that McShane doesn’t want to be “challenged,” but it sounds more like Moses is the one avoiding challenges to his own “ideology” and assumptions.

That lack of openness extends to the “defund/abolish the police” protesters as well. Rather than engage in an honest debate, they use ad hominem attacks to delegitimize and shut down anyone who dissents from their agenda — “white supremacy,” “white privilege,” “systemic racism” among them — and demand total surrender to their demands. That may be many things, but “conversation” and “debate” are not among them.

Perhaps those who actually do want a conversation — or at least have more faith in the legitimacy of their demands — should take McShane up on his offer to “get out of your comfort zone and ride with us” for a night or two. That might do wonders for the outcomes of the debate over police reform and law enforcement policy, and not just in Duluth.