In a recent column, Jennifer Vogt-Erickson wrote about shootings involving police officers. I’m not focusing on the specific event in Albert Lea, but in use of force by police officers in general.

Mrs. Vogt-Erickson frequently writes from her very liberal platform of Democrats for more and more government control. The defining characteristic of government, as she even points out, is the state has a monopoly on use of force, and it uses that force to obtain compliance. If you disagree with a law and refuse to comply, the government’s efforts to gain compliance escalates. Most police officers join that profession in order to make their communities safer, not enforce more and more draconian policies.

When it comes to use of force, the public places great trust in our law enforcement officers, and they have earned that trust. The National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial has the names of more than 20,000 men and women who have died in the line of duty protecting our communities. Minnesota has some of the highest standards of any state to become a licensed peace officer, including being required to hold a college degree and passing a law enforcement training program. As a graduate of such a program, I can attest it is rigorous. Officers are well-trained in the use of force and de-escalation techniques. The reason that most investigations into police fatalities are cleared is because the facts support that officers are using good judgment.

When officers make the judgment that it is time for lethal force, it is incumbent upon our communities to support those officers rather than talk about how our trust in the police have diminished. Unless an investigation finds an officer acted outside the law, we owe it to them to support their judgment and accept that the situations they get forced to respond to are unlimited in nature. While the result of some of these calls may not be pretty, we only send officers into these unlimited situations with the limited tools they carry on their belts and expect them to do a lot with those tools. I usually find the defining characteristic of someone that decries use of force is that person has never held a position that requires, or been trained in, use of force.

We must learn from every event and improve our mental health facilities and other resources, but in the end, most police interactions are the result of choices that somebody made. Officers respond using their skills and desire to help. In the moment an officer decides to use lethal force, all other choices leading up to that event become irrelevant for that moment. That officer is not focusing on what resources that person had, skin color, socio-economic status or anything else. In that snapshot in time, they have one mission: The officer must defend their own life and the life of potential victims, based on what they see at that moment in time. Anything but full support for our officers is unfair to all.

Brad Kramer

Albert Lea