Officer Privacy Should Never Be Compromised
Especially at a time when assaults on cops have surged
Police officers have good reason to be protective of their personal information. Without privacy protection, they and their families are at risk of being harmed, intimidated, and harassed. There’s no legitimate reason for any officer’s home address or other sensitive information to ever be made public.
This is true in all cases, but perhaps especially so when officers are working on a sensitive issue, like say, undercover to investigate an organized crime family or a trafficking ring. Not only would revealing the officers’ names compromise the investigation, it would place their lives in jeopardy. The unfortunate truth is that there are psychopaths among us who are capable of just about anything.
Reasonable people understand all of this. Unfortunately, we live at a point in time when reason has become obsolete in some corners.
Case in point. There have been calls for federal immigration officers to be unmasked while performing their work in public. This demand isn’t just originating from civilians, either.
Calls for unmasking officers comes at a time when the Department of Homeland Security is reporting a 413% increase in assaults on U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers.
California legislators have recently introduced the No Secret Police Act (CA SB 627), a bill that would prohibit police officers at the local, state, and even federal level -where they have no jurisdiction- from concealing their faces while interacting in public. Failure to comply could result in a misdemeanor. The exception to this would be wearing masks that protect against airborne diseases and smoke.
Doxxing Officers: Another Act With Serious Implications
There have also been attempts, including by some who hold government positions, to publicly release the names and other identifying information of federal immigration officers. A reasonable person would, again, realize the implications of doing this.
By nature of their work, these officers confront members of gangs like MS-13 and Tren De Aragua, implicated in unspeakable crimes like home invasions, victim intimidation, drug trafficking, and brutal killings. Doxxing places these officers and their families at grave risk of violence, swatting, intimidation, and harassment.
Encouraging: A Bill to Protect the Identities of Federal Officers
Sen. Marsha Blackburn (TN) recently introduced the Protecting Law Enforcement from Doxxing Act (S. 1952), a federal bill that would make it a crime to publish the name of any federal police officer when the intent is to obstruct an immigration operation or criminal investigation.
Yes, there is already a federal law that makes it a crime to publish sensitive personal information about federal officers and other groups like federal jurors and informants, when the act is done with malicious intent. The penalty is a maximum term of five years imprisonment, fines, or both.
The Protecting Law Enforcement from Doxxing Act, which carries the same penalty as current law, specifically criminalizes the publishing of an officer’s personal information if it’s done with the intent to obstruct a criminal investigation or a lawful immigration operation.
This bill comes on the heels of actions by the Nashville mayor, whose office published the names and enforcement activities of ICE and Homeland Security Investigations agents who had arrested 200 illegal immigrants. This mayor took it upon himself to issue an executive order to city departments (including local law enforcement) to report any communications they may have with federal immigration authorities.
Not only do these types of actions place officers and their families at risk. They undermine a legitimate federal mandate and can potentially obstruct a criminal investigation. Thus the impetus for this bill.
I’d love to see similar bills introduced in state legislatures that are designed to protect local law enforcement officers from being doxxed; because, they too, are being targeted in high numbers.
Please contact me if your state has a doxxing law that applies to police officers. I’d love to do more research on this topic.
Truth is Becoming Elusive
Whenever I learn about people in other countries being denied basic rights, I’m reminded of how incredibly blessed we are as Americans.
(I’m currently reading, and can recommend, Sen. Tom Cotton’s new book, Seven Things You Can’t Say About China. Anyone who wants to understand the true meaning of oppression needs to read this book.)
As Americans, we’re free to express our thoughts, provided we do it within the limits of the law. Cross the line, become violent, or infringe on someone else’s rights, and yes, law enforcement has every right to intervene.
Living in a free society also means that we’re subjected to false narratives, dangerous lies, and conspiracy theories.
These days, it’s not just legacy media figures who’ve shown themselves to be contemptible. Random social media influencers with zero expertise on a given issue, some with millions of followers, position themselves as experts and intellectuals.
Some of these accounts aren’t even run by real people. Or they’re foreign disinformation armies trying to sew division in our country.
That’s why it’s never been as important to become adept at parsing information and vetting the people we pay attention to.
Here’s some of what I look for when determining whether or not someone is credible.
What is that person’s credentials? Do they have expertise on a given topic, or are they just someone who hops from issue to issue?
Avoid judging someone’s credibility based solely on their number of social media followers. Popularity isn’t necessarily an indication that someone knows what they’re talking about.
What is their motivation? Are they providing valuable information or do they appear to be moved by profit, fame, or the need to be the center of attention?
Can their identify be verified? Social media is rife with fake personas.
Do their statements even make sense? There’s a difference between putting forth opposing ideas in good faith, and spouting conspiratorial nonsense. If a statement doesn’t align with a known, fully-vetted historical truth, for example, I’m out.
Is the information verifiable? Because anyone can say anything.
I’ve trained myself to question everything, even when the person is credentialed and sincere. Well-intentioned people aren’t immune from error; that includes imperfect me. So, if you ever find something disputable in any of my pieces, please let me know and I will research it.
I’m on this journey to create solutions that strengthen law enforcement and by extension, our country. This can only occur if the information we have, and share, is accurate.
Best. : )
For the Blue is a solutions-based initiative. I’m just an American patriot asking questions. I don’t work with any political party and I answer to nobody. For me, the health of the nation, due process (including for police officers), the rule of law, and respect for individual liberties, will always transcend party affiliation. I welcome your thoughts, even if you disagree; though personal attacks will be ignored. You can reach me at fortheblue@substack.com.