By Jim Glennon
A basic and well-established psychological theory concerning human nature and motivation is the rewarding of positive behavior and the punishing of bad.
Pretty simple, rooted in the most basic level of common sense, this theory has been used for centuries, well before Freud, Jung and the like began their journeys into the human psyche.
The theory, whether recognized formally or not, is used by virtually every parent on the planet, at least to some degree: Reward the good, punish the bad.
And like every theory, there are pros and cons, as well as limitations and variations, when it comes to application in the real world.
Too much discipline and children may grow up to be withdrawn, unjustifiably aggressive, violent, generally anti-social and even criminal.
On the other hand, if parents are overly indulgent when it comes to rewards, well, those children may also grow up with their own set of anti-social proclivities.
Too much focus on a child’s self-esteem, according to some research, “may lead to stunted growth in the child’s areas of emotional reasoning and poor development of competency in anything meaningful.” Therefore, once they gravitate away from their parents and find out that their high self-esteem doesn’t result in performative skill sets and high functioning relationships in the real world, they may lose their way and act out. Those actions may include flouting rules, regulations and even laws.
So, what’s that got to do with law enforcement?
Eventually, It All Falls to the Police
The unrest, protests, and criminal behavior of students, faculty and professional agitators on dozens of college campuses. Rule and law breakers supporting a terrorist group (yes, they are supporting them, using Hamas flags, chanting genocidal slogans, etc.) by taking over buildings, threatening Jewish students and their supporters and generally thumbing their collective privileged noses at university policies and state laws.
Now, finally, after months in some cases, the police are called to handle the unrest.
But why are they even needed? Why do people partake in behavior that is so disruptive and disorderly, police involvement is required in order to reestablish social balance?
Well, it could be that prior to the disturbing, rebellious, disorderly, and/or criminal conduct exhibited by said perpetrators, there were other people that either allowed lowered levels of it to go unchecked, or they fashioned the circumstances that created and emboldened the wrongdoer’s perspective that rules don’t apply to them if their feelings and beliefs run afoul of societal guidelines and established rules.
And when that plays out and impacts society, the police have to deal with it.
Whether it be fatherless boys who grew up with no discipline gravitating to gang life or associating with other rudderless malcontents; violent husbands who perpetuate the anger that was inflicted on them during their formative years; or privileged students who take over college campuses and disrupt the daily lives of thousands, something either caused or allowed such people to act out.
Reward vs Punishment.
Positive vs. Negative.
Pleasure vs. Pain.
No matter what you call it, at least half of the equation, when it comes to human motivation, is consequence needing to be attached to unacceptable behavior.
Bottom line: The lack of consequences will result in problem children who become problem adults and if the societal systems designed to keep adults in check refuse to employ the legislated consequences, what would dissuade the disruptors from escalating their disruptions?
Take Columbia University for example today.
Am I Missing Something?
Expel them.
I’m not trying to be glib here. Seriously, I’m not. But I wonder what I’m missing considering the massive violent protests on dozens of campuses that are seriously disrupting the lives and academic pursuits of uninvolved students.
“Violent? Violent? Come on Jim, show me the violence of which you speak. These are peaceful First Amendment protests with little to no violence at all!”
Yeah, right, I agree, in my world most haven’t been violent. Violence to me is doing damage to property and attacking and injuring human beings.
But in the university system, and I’ve been hearing this for several years, “Words are violence!”
On these campuses it is inarguable that students are being threatened, spit upon, blocked, insulted, subject to racist rants, etc. by not just students and outside agitators, but faculty.
OK, so I think we can agree that the above-mentioned behavior is bad behavior. That those involved are breaking established rules and university regulations.
So, why does it continue?
Simple. There are zero consequences.
Want it to stop? Want to motivate those involved to adhere to established guidelines?
Try this.
Arrest, prosecute and punish law breaking participants.
Expel registered students.
Fire involved professors.
I’m not talking about violating First Amendment rights here. I’m not even suggesting that they can’t protest and scream their vile messages. But on a university campus there are rules on how to do that without disrupting the lives of thousands of others. I’m talking about limiting their ability to violate the rights of others.
It Falls, Again, to the Police
What winds up happening is that the protesters ignore warnings and refuse to listen to authority. The university admins order, negotiate and beg, but too many back down again and again. This emboldens the agitators as there are no real negative consequences and predictably, their antisocial behavior and violations of rules escalates.
Again, Columbia University today. After a month’s worth of negotiations, the protesters have taken over buildings and are openly and brazenly damaging property and blocking students from attending classes and accessing university learning labs.
At other campuses, after long periods of appeasement, finally, without any other recourse, after the situation boils over, who gets the call?
The police.
Who becomes the bad guys?
The police?
Who will get sued?
The police?
Who will, and have been, injured?
The police.
From CNN: “Soon dozens more students protesting the monthslong assault on Gaza were arrested at New York and Yale universities. At the University of Texas at Austin, police in riot gear and on horseback moved to disperse a like-minded demonstration, while nearly 100 at the University of Southern California also got arrested. Then at Emory University in Atlanta, law enforcement deployed pepper balls to break up a pro-Palestinian action, arresting 28, including several professors. And at Boston’s Emerson College, another 108 protesters were arrested, with four officers hurt.”
Riot gear. Horseback. Pepper balls. Hundreds of arrests. Officers hurt.
Again, a serious question.
Was this all preventable?
If these universities, from the outset, made it clear that there would be consequences for the violation of rules, would the rules have been violated to the level that police had to be called in and handle hundreds of noncompliant and angry demonstrators?
Would the police, again, have to take the brunt of criticism? Being portrayed as “jack-booted thugs”?
Conclusion
The truth is that any type of enforcement looks bad, especially to those looking for any reason to hate the police. I’ve written about this numerous times; there is no easy way to control someone who does not want to be controlled!
If someone refuses to be compliant and resists, officers need to physically take control of that person. So, after verbal commands fail, officers are taught to use pain compliance techniques, beginning with the most minimal, if applicable in the moment. But even the most minimal tactics still involve pain, a reaction by the subject and now with the constant presence of video, a reaction by those critiquing the police.
At some point officers have to act and those actions will be used by the anti-police crowd to throw more hate towards law enforcement.
Case in point, check the attached video HERE.
Multiple news outlets have characterized this as a form of brutality. It’s not, but truth doesn’t really matter if you have an agenda.
My point is this: All, or at least most of this could have been avoided if the powers-that-be at these universities had a plan, established consequences for violations of rules and followed through. But most didn’t, which caused further escalations to the point the police had to be called.
Last week, the University of Florida sternly warned that students who violate clearly established rules for protesting will face immediate suspension and banishment from campus for three years. The university didn’t stop there. They also advised that employees and professors caught breaking rules would be fired.
Clearly established consequences. Basic psychology.
We will see if the University of Florida campus remains calm and controlled in the next few days. And if it doesn’t, we will see if they follow through with their stated consequences.
Criminals in general understand which jurisdictions enforce laws and which ones do not. Those that don’t suffer the consequences.
What is interesting and sad is how obvious it is that the lack of consequences has its own consequences. Consequences that disrupt society and result in the police getting called.
As my friend Gordon Graham has said for years, “If it’s predictable, it is preventable.”
You would figure the highly educated would be able to grasp that bit of wisdom.
Let’s hope they do before someone really gets hurt…or worse.
READ what readers have to say…
I have been a police officer since 1972.
I still work part-time at a community college PD, but my REAL job is teaching criminal justice at a local high school.
I am retiring this month after 24 years in the classroom because the current crop of students are just as described in your article: entitled, disinterested, unmotivated and prefer watching TikTok videos to classroom learning.
And the consequences have disappeared…we have gone from making sure they LEARN to making sure they PASS.
We are creating the kind of “monster” that we now see rioting across the country.
Steve, similar to you, I started policing in the mid-1970s and have been teaching CJ at the university level for over 20 years. I just retired and often feel like I am the only one holding students accountable. Our accrediting body has a “contact hour” requirement for students to receive college credit, but I have received push back for failing students for exceeding the limit of unexcused absences. Same for failing them for academic dishonesty- specifically plagiarism. Students think the rules do not apply to them and Jim hit the nail on the head with this article. As you said yourself that “we” (or more specifically the parents, schools, and society) have refused to dole out consequences. There are laws such as disorderly conduct here in Georgia: GA Code § 20-2-1181 (2022) making it “unlawful for any person to knowingly, intentionally, or recklessly disrupt or interfere with the operation of any public school, public school bus, or public school bus stop as designated by local boards of education. Except as provided in subsection (b) of this Code section, a person convicted of violating this Code section shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of a high and aggravated nature. “
I agree with your asssement. This should apply anytime freedom of speech crosses the line to a criminal violation. Unfortunately, it is never my fault because there are no consequences.
Yep, JIm, I totally agree. Sounds so simple. But for reasons that none of us understand, apparently it isn’t !
Excellent and accurate thoughts on the current American climate!
First of all, and most importantly of all, I’m a “Law and Order” personality. I served a total of 39 years in sworn service, and work in a non-sworn support position now. Being an “old man” with quite a number of years of “personal experience” I speak a bit more from those years of experience. I’ve lived through the turbulent 1960’s, and into the turbulence of today.
Up front, I too am revolted with what is occurring now on our college campuses. At the same time, all too often, our college campuses are reflective of our society. Again, I’m speaking from my experiences over the past 60 plus years.
In the 1960s significant social change was taking place in the United States. Changes to the family, experimentation with drugs, racial unrest, the draft, the Vietnam War; all these issues were present in society, and they were most notably addressed on college campuses. Today, we face issues of gender identity, workforce challenges, immigration, continued racial unrest, homelessness, mental health challenges, as well as the challenges of an aging population, and a federal government struggling to pay it’s obligations.
In the 1960s many protests were peaceful and lawful, and some of those were met with violent police responses. Other protests were peaceful except for some agitators, both activist and paid agitators. A similar situation faces our society today. As in the past these protests bring attention to some of the complex issues facing our society. Unfortunately, too often our Federal representatives are too busy figuring out how to game the system to make themselves rich rather than addressing these issues before they become crises.
By all means, prosecute those who break our laws, imperil order, and disrupt the functioning of a college, but also, recognize that these colleges reflect society as a whole. Remember, the media just doesn’t bother to cover the students going about their classes and activities on campus; they will admit to you it simply doesn’t match their story line, nor does it gain any viewership.
In the 1960s, some of the needed changes to our society, such as the Voting Rights Act and the Civil Rights Act might not have happened except for protests which occurred on college campuses. The end of our involvement in the Vietnam War was a result of the growing protests against the war. Overdue changes to how WE as law enforcement were expected to perform our responsibilities came as a result public outcry of the time.
As a society, we are at a paradox: while few have confidence the US Congress can solve societal problems, individual Representatives and Senators continue to be overwhelmingly re-elected by their constituencies. With the impact of the drug trade as well as gang and mob activities of the 1970s, US law enforcement needed to become much better armed and adjust our tactics and equipment to address the threats to our communities. Now, with an aging population, and a society addicted to social media, what our communities expect from THEIR police appears to have changed again.
I’m not suggesting that all change is good any more than I am suggesting that violence and property destruction should be allowed. What I am suggesting is that we become aware of the changes that have occurred, and are occurring, in our society, especially with the advent of social media, and recognize that the methods police have used successfully in the past may no longer be socially, or even legally, acceptable.
It is critical that in our profession we not let ourselves be drawn into believing that these protests are “against” us as individuals, or even against our profession. Law Enforcement is simply the easiest target for both the media and the protesters. We are armed and uniformed. Too many school administrations do nothing concerning unrest until it gets out of hand, and then call the police to restore order. When the police do restore order those same school administrators complain the police were too heavy handed in order to facilitate the healing needed on campuses afterwards.
There is an old saying, “If we’d wanted to be popular we would have become firefighters.” We took that higher calling of being there to maintain peace and order in our communities because in short, nobody else can. Lt Col Grossman reminds us there are three types of people in the world; the sheep, the wolf, and the sheepdog. Neither the sheep, nor the wolf, like the sheepdog. The sheep don’t like the sheepdog as he reminds them of their vulnerabilities. The wolf doesn’t like the sheepdog because he keeps them from preying on the sheep.
Major societal changes are coming at us whether we like it or not. Yet, the Peelian Principles continue to apply. It is critical as law enforcement we continue to maintain the public trust and confidence. Law Enforcement must respect community values, not insist on what they should be. Today’s unrest comes not from law enforcement not doing it’s job; today’s unrest comes from politicians not identifying problems and successfully addressing those problems.
It is imperative that law enforcement today continues step up to these societal challenges resulting from our failing political officials to ensure that society, and the individuals in this society, don’t collapse. We are the last line of defense against anarchy.
I am often amazed at the public’s response to any police action, but especially to the foreseeable response to actions requiring police intervention. The police are not there in response to protests or the stifling of anyone’s First Amendment Rights but in response to violence and lawbreaking. The video is self-explanatory and I do not expect to see any public outcry on behalf of police officers across the country who will themselves become injured in the line of duty. Unfortunately, there is a lack of adherence to the “Rule of Law” in our country and there are no signs of change. The lack of consequences will allow for these and other unlawful behaviors to continue. My inherent thought is that; ” Consequence leads to Compliance.”
Very simple, it’s riot season. This happens every 4 years, but that’s a coincidence. The media is trying desperately to find a cause for this season and, so far, haven’t been able to. Remember, just a short time ago “Chicago police fired 96 times at a black man…”. Unfortunately for them the truth came out too soon and that cause died with the suspect. These “mostly peaceful protests” may be this season’s cause.
I worked as a campus security officer at a Canadian university. A university which currently has an encampment of protesters who have proclaimed “We will continue to stand our ground and the encampment will remain indefinitely until the university agrees to our demands and divests from genocide,” The university supports their right to peaceful protest. When I worked there, I responded time and time again, to the unruly and often criminal behaviour of entitled students who if caught, simply waited for the university big-wigs to furrow their brows, wag their fingers and warn against future bad behaviour. You see, to expel the little darlings would mean a loss of tuition money, campus fees, housing dollars etc, and would result in more protests of unfair action taken by the university. If the police were involved, the arrested knew that the courts wouldn’t do anything because they are overburdened with too many other more important issues. And so, entitlement became empowerment, as the scofflaws soon realized they could do what they wanted, with the tacit approval of the courts, and a university which is putting out more and more whiney, entitled, easily offended and often unemployed graduates. But who can blame the students? They can go on to become politicians, or reality stars, where their 4 years of learning how to cheat, scheme, swerve responsibility, whine, and lie is rewarded with fame, followers and in the case of Survivor, a million dollars. Police departments shouldn’t demand applicants have a degree. They should demand that applicants have a moral compass.
Denver police chief had the right response to campus administrators who seemed to think they could just keep dumping their problems on the police.
https://www.denver7.com/news/local-news/denver-police-chief-said-he-refused-second-sweep-of-aurarias-pro-palestinian-encampment