Why are police funerals so off-putting?
Before I try to answer the question, let me say that, like thousands of other Torontonians, I felt deeply saddened by the senseless death of Sgt. Ryan Russell, who was, by all accounts, a fine officer, a devoted father and husband, and an exemplary member of his community. His wife and child now find themselves in a terrible situation, and the city, as a whole, has been diminished by this tragedy.
It’s also true that for all cops, such incidents are surely traumatic. I have an old and dear friend who has served with the Toronto force for 20 years, and I always think about how this sort of violence affects him, professionally and emotionally. Of course, Sgt. Russell’s colleagues, as well as ordinary citizens, want to pay their respects and acknowledge the extraordinarily steep price he and his family paid.
At the same time, I do not understand why the police as an organization (and certainly not just in Toronto) insist on transforming a deeply human tragedy into a show of force and a media circus.
There’s a certain irony here. I feel the Sgt. Russell we came to know as an individual in the past few days has been subsumed by a brand of militaristic ritual that serves to reinforce the otherness of the police as a social institution.
And maybe that’s appropriate: when I sit down at my computer in the morning to begin working, I am reasonably certain I will be in tact when I get up in the afternoon. Cops, on the other hand, do risk their lives on our collective behalf, and so when one of those lives is lost to violence, we should honour them in a different way, or so the logic goes.
Yet the traditions of police funerals, for me, evoke images that have nothing to do with mourning and the genuine connections between people that such tragedies engender. These events, rather, are filled with profoundly complicated visual symbols — of invasion, of force, and of a conspicuously defensive sort of esprit de corps. Indeed, in the wake of last summer’s G20 riots, how should those Torontonians who were appalled by the actions of the police react to the sight of thousands of uniformed officers again clustered in the downtown core?
What’s more, the sheer elaborateness of police funerals serves (perhaps unwittingly) to minimize the sacrifices made by hundreds of other individuals who lose their lives while doing sometimes-risky jobs, among them the garbage collector crushed by his truck last summer in Vaughan. Do those lives count for less?
The point is precisely that we shouldn’t be called upon to make such comparisons, but rather to mark all these losses in the appropriate way. An obvious example: the way we’ve come to mourn Canadian soldiers killed in Afghanistan. The ceremonies manage to be both heartfelt and organic (ordinary people watching the hearses drive solemnly along the 401 from CFB Trenton) and traditional yet restrained (military funerals). The Canadian Forces don’t take over downtown Ottawa every time a man or woman in uniform dies in combat. Yet we, as a society, still manage to signal our respect for their sacrifice and express our condolences.
From where I sit (risking nothing but negative comments on the string below), perhaps the less-is-more principle should prevail the next time we must come together as a city, filled with regret, to bury a cop.
Photo by Paul Henman
41 comments
Cops take over the roads for their funerals, because they can. Cops indulge a “militaristic ritual that serves to reinforce the otherness of the police as a social institution”, because they can. Cops threaten, harass and beat protesters, and even sometimes use deadly force with poor justification, because they can.
You and I will get flamed for having a nuanced opinion, but the truth is that though this officer did not deserve getting killed, that has nothing to do with how without oversight the police operate in our province. Someone will say that there are only a few ‘bad apples’, but what about the ‘blue wall of silence’? You can never get evidence out of other officers to indict one.
As for how dangerous their job really is, it’s not in the top ten in Canada. I think the job must be depressing and disagreeable, but there are many other jobs as depressing and disagreeable, and some more dangerous, and all of those are far worse paid.
John:
Thanks for your piece. I shared your queasiness this week, and found myself questioning the motives of the scale of the event (and then censuring myself for thinking that way). I just couldn’t help but reflect on the concurrent police budget negotiations and the effect that this show of solidarity would have on them. I also wonder how much these spectacles help the grieving family, who might well prefer a more quiet ceremony.
I agree with you Mr. Lorinc, and applaud your courage in writing about the obvious use by the police, supported by the media and other public institutions, of this death for their own public relations purposes. And by public relations I mean the perpetuation of the lie that the public needs to be afraid, and we need police to protect us from evil and disturbed forces in our midst.
This study – http://www.csls.ca/reports/csls2006-04.pdf – reports an average of five deaths per day in workplace accidents in Canada between 1993 – 2005. Unheralded deaths. Why? Because these workers were just average sods, and their deaths are the price we pay for progress, I guess.
It gets worse. The United Nations reports that every day 18 000 children die of hunger (http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2007-02-17-un-hunger_x.htm).
These are not simply invidious comparisons, nor do I believe that the current human condition is so irrational and absurd that cynicism is unavoidable. We need to openly discuss what is happening, and each of us do what we can to reduce human suffering, especially of the innocent and vulnerable.
Thanks
Oliver
Good article. I think you’ve hit on an unexpressed under current of concern that all non-police (civilians) have.
Especially after the trauma-inducing and blatant violation of basic human and charter rights that the G20 engendered, the populace is still sore from those wounds. To tie in a real, personal tragedy that all of us feel for the family of Sgt Russell kind of mutes any criticism. And as Mayor Rob Ford has been quoted “You are either for police or against them”. Digest that scary thought.
Something you may have missed: Protestor at a Funeral? http://www.torontosun.com/news/columnists/joe_warmington/2011/01/19/16953666.html
Yes it was tasteless, but not illegal. His being arrested is proof of police state mentality it seems. They probably set him up for a good civil suit against the police/city. sigh
What a shame that the G20 has now turned intelligent people against the police. I think this piece is quite a bit of overreaction. Ever since Princess Diana’s funeral there have been periodic outpourings of public feeling around patriotic/honour issues– it is highly variable, since it depends on a number of factors (timing, media, etc.) but it just so happened in this case that everything lined up for a large public display. As for the police role in the spectacle, this is easily enough explained. Canada has but a tiny military tradition, so the police fill the honour/tradition role that in the United States, UK or elsewhere would be filled by troops in uniform. I hate to think what Lorinc would write if he ever attended an American Army-Navy football game…
To answer the question “how should those Torontonians who were appalled by the actions of the police react to the sight of thousands of uniformed officers again clustered in the downtown core?” I would say “nonplussed” to “pleased”. Cops are welcome to congregate in the downtown, not because they have the power to, not because they are some sort of brutal overlords, but because they are cops. You know, the good guys who work for us. If you want them to behave differently, elect leaders who will change the laws accordingly.
I would have a different reaction if a large group of hooligans bent on look-at-me-you-tubification and rage-against-the-world vandalism gathered in the downtown. That’s a public circus I am happy to not see repeated.
I have never responded on-line to an article, but I have to here. Bravo to you for speaking the truth. I appreciate the work the police do on a daily basis. But it’s not the risk to their life I appreciate, it’s the bulls*** they deal with on a daily basis that is dealt to them by truly the knuckle-draggers of our city. At the end of the day, it is just a job with certain risks….risks that every member of the police service signs up for. That goes for firefighters too. And our armed forces. On that note, we celebrate our veterans but we have to understand WHO we’re celebrating. Generally we celebrate those that VOLUNTEERED to fight, and, generally, fight in wars where the dangers were little understood and truly, it was a romantic notion to go off to war. We understand those dangers quite well now and many would be very disinclined to volunteer (I know I would be pretty hesitant). Anyway, our armed forces people are in paid jobs and they know the risks going in. I’m not about to celebrate their so-called “sacrifice” when it’s not. It’s part of their job description. And so, I’m not about to celebrate the so-called sacrifice of Mr. Russell. I feel for his family and for the families of our armed forces servicemen and women…I celebrate them as they are truly the ones that have made a sacrifice.
I commend policemen & policewomen who risk their lives saving others, and my uncle & cousin are cops. But I get the sense of early 20th century military parades & rah-rah patriotism & don’t question authority by such overblown displays of police. Especially given that in this city so many police brutality cases get thrown out or set out extremely meagre punishment. At the extreme end is Don Cherry with his Cops & Soldiers Good, Left Wing Pinkos Bad stereotype. Frankly these police funerals are in this day & age, merely PR for the Police establishment.
Yes, I so agree with this article. I too was saddened by the loss of an officer. He was killed right at the intersection I live at, and I have seen Sgt Russell around my building while on the job.
However, I do not feel that the City of Toronto needed to go ahead with all the pomp and ceremony which virtually crippled the downtown core on Tuesday. Sgt Russell died in the line of duty, as so many Canadian soldiers have done in the last century. He did not however, die while trying to save anothers life, like the NYC PD and NYC FD were during 9/11.
The rituals for those officers and fire protection services were justified. This was not.
Sgt Russell wasn’t even obligated to get out his police vehicle at the time to stop Kachkar. He chose to do so, firing his gun at the subject in an attempt to apprehend Kachkar, instead of using his own vehicle as the other officers did later to pinion the assailants vehicle, preventing Kachkar from escaping and from further mayhem.
Homicide officers at Avenue & Davenport that same sad day detoured traffic along Davenport so that they and SIU could do their jobs. I would like to add however that TPS did neglect to have a traffic officer on duty all day , to ensure that the school children and seniors could cross the intersection safely. Why was this? An officer died on the job so now it’s okay for TPS to ignore doing their jobs protecting the public?
S once again the police force has locked the City of Toronto down again while they did their own thing. We need to start reminding the police force they work for Toronto, not the reverse
There aren’t many examples of how else to show the kind of emotion we’re/they’re feeling. In a militaristic working culture developed over the last centuries mostly by men, the show of force is exactly HOW emotions are demonstrated. Angry? Frustrated? Unsure of yourself? Sad? Show some force.
The stronger the emotion, the bigger the force.
My question is:
Would Sgt. Russell have preferred to have some of the money spent on this ceremony, directly or indirectly, to go to a charity?
By all means, honour and provide for a respectable funeral according to family’s wishes. But the Metro Toronto Convention Centre?
Wow. This is being discussed right now on radio CFRB 1010 and right winger police-loving Jerry Agar actually defending tasteless protestor’s right to free speech, while callers call for him to be beat up some more.
Has my universe shifted?
MRPOMMER,
The scale of a police funeral is determined by the family not by the police service or association. If the family does not want a large public funeral then there isn’t one.
Also the size and cost should have no effect on the perception of budget negotiation as police die in the line of duty infrequently. The funding for funerals is a budgeted reserve that all police organization hope to never use.
Great piece. I did think the spectacle was a bit over the top, but til now did not voice my opinion on the subject.
Mr. S, I did have a little giggle after your the first paragraph of your comment, where you referred to your opinion as “nuanced”, right after suggesting that the police operate by no one’s rules but their own, but the rest of your comment was a little more measured, and persuasive.)
MrPommer, it’s my understanding that the family can choose to have the full pomp and circumstance of a military-style funeral, or have a private family funeral. If this is correct, then it was the family’s choice. (Although, one wonders if they realized a good chunk of the downtown core would be shut down for the better part of a day in order to pay tribute.)
Thankfully for everyone involved, there’ll only need to be one police funeral in Toronto every 10 years or so.
Funerals for soldiers, firefighters, paramedics, construction workers, or bystanders accidentally killed by police continue, but without taking over the downtown core.
PS MrPommer, excellent point about how the spectacle may impact the budget negotiations, in terms of persuading the citizenry of the heroic and necessary role our police services play. It is cynical to think this way, but alas, we live in cynical times.
1. The funeral was used as a PR tool to underscore the “brotherhood and sisterhood” within the culture of policing. It is this culture that maintains the veil of silence and ensures that no police officer is ever brought to justice in the courts or elsewhere.
2. Were the thousands of officers who attended the funeral paid to attend?
3. It’s sad that a husband and father has died. The fact that he was a police officer does not make him more important than any other person.
I wondered whether it was about an individual or it had become about some kind of branding. It seemed a bit like a PR event. John, I think many people had the same thoughts as you.
iSkyscraper, I thought the reaction to Princess Diana’s death to be inexplicably over-the-top and silly anyway. But at least that, and all those people who went out and stood to watch Pierre Trudeau’s funeral train pass by, were–at least in significant part–spontaneous acts by the public.
Take a look at the picture that heads this article. Not a spontaneous public event at all. Not an “outpouring of public feeling”, but a highly-choreographed police rally. (I don’t think the Liberal party mobilized everyone to go stand by the train tracks in October 2000.)
And the coverage was over-the-top as well. Metro Morning treated the whole thing as if it was the funeral of a higher-order being, a combination of Gandhi, Superman, Christ, and Einstein, who died protecting all Earth from total annihilation by Cthulhu or something. And who wants to think of Cthulhu at 5:45 AM??
I totally share your viewpoint and admire your courage for expressing what many others felt when they saw the massive circus that this week’s funeral event evolved into.
While its certainly not the most hazardous profession the fact remains that police officers do put their physical safety at risk on our behalf and this must not go unappreciated. To effectively shut the the central core of the country’s largest city for hours on end however is way over the top.
It reminded me of the type of funeral event that outlaw bikers stage for their fallen brethren and left me wondering if that is really the type of messaging the police force should be sending.
Many Thanks
A delicate subject so eloquently handled.
The minute by minute coverage of this tragedy and subsequent memorial by the press and media seemed to go well beyond the norm..
However for one to simply question anything surrounding this event would be misconstrued as being anti-police in the same manner as questioning our government’s military role in Afghanistan borders on being disloyal to our men and women in the armed forces.
And neither could be further from the truth.
Again Many thanks
“From where I sit (risking nothing but negative comments on the string below)”
Heh, not on this website, and you know it…but then, most people don’t overanalyze police funerals using terms like “militaristic ritual”. Most people, based on the number of spectators I saw, seem to *embrace* such rituals and are drawn to them as a means of expressing their support and solidarity towards the institutions that are the bulwark against crime and disorder. I know the Spacing crowd don’t think that way, but many others do. I walked the entire length of the procession, and I didn’t hear anyone repeat the sentiments that are expressed here. I mean, that shot the Star had, of the construction workers removing their helmets out of respect…what’s your explanation of that? I saw a lot of that along the route. Had to think the term “militaristic ritual” was far from their minds. That plays well in York grad poli-sci seminars, but not on the street. Just saying that many here have a tin ear for this kind of thing.
Other issues: yes, the family chooses whether to have a full funeral or not, it’s not imposed on them. So the decision was Sgt. Russell’s widow to make. You can criticize her all you like, any takers? And really, this is involved somehow with budgetary negotiations? Uh-huh…even though these funerals are funded mostly by the association, and that the officers who march are *already* on vacation, leave, day-off, or have had someone cover their shift in their stead.
Re: other unsafe jobs and lack of recognition. I’ve never understood this argument. No one is saying that other jobs don’t merit recognition for their hazardous nature, but it’s completely beside the point. A workplace fatality in a manufacturing plant, say, is the result of a breakdown of safety procedures, or negligence on the part of the owner. It’s not, barring a criminal act, the result of intential targeting and behaviour on the part of an individual, such is the case with police shootings. And miners who are killed (see Westray), are, indeed, given elaborate burial ceremonies, so again, not sure where this is coming from. A real apple to oranges thing here. I recall, for example, that when a TTC collector was murdered in 1994, that there was an elaborate funeral, so again, there are precedents for this outside the policing community.
But the bottom line is this: police work *is* fundamentally different than all other kinds of work, that’s why they have guns, that’s why they enforce the law versus stitching together a shirt or replacing a balcony railing.
That’s just the long and short of it.
If you can’t get past this fundamental distinction, than it’s no wonder you’ll look at police funerals as some alien, threatening thing that you want no part of. And it’s because their deaths are, thankfully, rare, that that point needs to be reinforced through such ceremonies.
I am with Roland on this one. In essence John is attacking their beliefs. As such, the same questioning can be leveled at religious gatherings and rituals as well.
If you don’t like it, don’t attend but don’t tell others how to feel on the subject.
I had a negative feeling about how this week passed off but I think it was more because of how the media piled in on it (not to mention Don Cherry’s inapt outburst on HNIC). I read Roland’s comment above with appreciation.
I am thankful that we didn’t lose that firefighter on Yonge Street this week so there was no opportunity for comments like “let’s have two parades for the fireman, and it’s okay for them to appear in uniform and not hard hats and fireproof coats without being deemed militaristic, but none for the cop because, well, omg G20!”
I thank John Lorinc for having the balls to write about this, however I would critique his piece directly in one respect. Obviously as a local cop who died in the City, Sgt. Russell’s passing touched people more directly than, say, an Atlantic Canadian, Western Canadian or Quebecois soldier killed 11,000km from Toronto, a city with a small military headcount per head of population. I’m sure in their local communities those deaths resonated as loudly as Sgt Russell’s did here.
There is a difference when one is killed at work due to work accidents such as the case with a construction worker, or a flight attendant in a plane crash; than when a police officer is murdered for what he represents. A police officer represents our justice system, a police officer represents the core values of our society such as truth, honesty and integrity. So, when a police officer is murdered doing his job it a very serious crime and a direct attack on our society values. Therefore, a police officer killed in the line of duty deserve a funeral such as Sgt. Ryan RUSSELL’s.
I have to agree with the writer on this one. To some extent, we can all share in mourning the passing of this young man who died in the course of carrying out his duty. Most people would acknowledge that police officers often contend with difficult situations, even though we should point out that theirs is not the most dangerous line of work. But the scale of police funerals seems to be less about mourning and more about image-building; salary negotiations (ie creating a “mindset” about cops putting their lives on the line “each and every day”, and hence deserving substantial compensation). To some extent, these displays also strike me as somewhat intimidating towards, not on the part of the mourning family, but rather on the part of the whole police establishment. In many ways they seem intended to draw a clear demarcation between the police and civilians. If for no other reason that the public is picking up much of the tab of these events, I agree with those who say they need to be scaled down.
Roland, you wrote:
“And really, this is involved somehow with budgetary negotiations? Uh-huh…even though these funerals are funded mostly by the association”
I think it’s entirely reasonable to discuss the costs of a funeral. My grandfather had his insurance in order and his plot purchased decades before he passed on. When we chose a casket for him, we didn’t just pick the most expensive. The death notice we purchased in the paper was edited ruthlessly to keep the word-count down. That’s not disrespect for the dead, it’s simple pragmatism. We all die eventually and it’s silly to make it taboo to discuss the costs.
In this case, the funeral is paid for by the taxpayer; in Toronto, the executive was recently elected on a platform of “respect for the taxpayer.” It would be shocking if Torontonians were disinterested in the cost, it’s not shocking at all that they are.
It’s clear that police in North America set themselves above and apart from the law and the people they are supposed to serve.
It’s been a while since a cop was killed on the line of duty in Toronto, but I don’t remember it being such a media circus. Did they shut down city streets? Was it broadcasted on all the major networks, with the3 CP24 voice over guy promoting it (“Happening now…”)?
I don’t want to downplay man’s life, but if this guy single handedly took down a crime syndicate that was terrifying the people of the city, then I could understand such a mass showing.
Well, Al, the police represent one part of the *enforcement* aspect of the justice system. They certainly do not represent the justice system as a whole, which consists of laws, and courts, and jails (and I’m sure I’m missing some aspects here)….as well as police.
I assume that, were a judge to be killed in the line of duty–and it’s possible, considering the killing at Osgoode Hall back in the 1980s–we should shut down the city for the judge’s funeral too.
It seems that the Age of Advertising–in which our public space is plastered with billboards and free speech means a sales pitch–has so diminished our civic sensibilities that we view even our most solemn public occasions as just another opportunity for “image building” and “negotiations” about money. Moreover, because we have accepted the notion that citizens are just consumers and governments must be run like businesses, the sacrifices made by public servants count for no more in our eyes than the provision of services purchased by our tax dollars.
There is little point in explaining the importance of honouring, publicly, a man like Sgt. Russell to those who have embraced this economic–one could also say materialist–mindset, because for those cynics the public ritual is meaningless or, rather, means nothing more than a TV commercial, and, worse, puts the city’s (economic) core on hold for hours. They cannot understand why his colleagues would put on their best and, grimly, march the streets out of respect for a dead man who — as many of his fellow men and women in uniform also do — ran toward the danger the rest of us avoid and do our best to ignore. Are they trying to intimidate us through “militaristic” rituals? Or, in contradiction to the first question, repair their post-G20 image? Or are they just trying to convice us that we should pay them more? Are you kidding? It’s hard to imagine a worse insult to a person in mourning. And they ARE people, as sensitive to the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune as any one of us, both in and out of uniform.
I thought better of John Lorinc before this article.
I have to disagree. This is a once-in-a-decade event, a reminder of what these sworn public servants do for us on a day-to-day basis. Much as the gatherings on overpasses along the Highway of Heroes express to our fallen soldiers, this was a symbol for every police officer to be honoured, whether they give their life or not.
There have been, and will continue to be, excesses and unfortunate incidents by police officers; but those are the exception, and for the most part, they keep society on an even keel, which grants them the leave to honour it how they choose when the time is right to do so.
I’ve noticed a substantial amount of grumbling about the size/scope of the funeral, and every piece published by the Star, the Globe and the Post has managed to shoehorn in a reference to the G20.
I don’t see any connection. It’s a stretch, to be plain – a big one.
I lost a great deal of respect for the TPS in June, and their abuses should not be forgotten or excused. Nevertheless, I think it is very poor to make a substantial linkage between the PR disaster that was/is the G20 and the death of Ryan Russell – it’s tantamount to calling his killing a PR boon.
I echo the comments of ISKYSCRAPER with respect to how those horrified by police behaviour in June should react to thousands of cops downtown. Most rational people allow circumstances to colour their judgement of events. Mounted police in riot gear bearing down on a crowd do not resemble a funeral parade, and a long line of shielded officers beating their batons in unison does not bring to mind the sound of a solitary bagpipe.
The notion of Esprit de Corps shouldn’t be dismissed as detrimental out of hand, as if to suggest that the only things that bind police officers together in support of one another are a code of silence and a willingness to look the other way to excuse the indiscretions of a brother officer. I’m not ignorant; we needn’t look any further TPS’s recent actions in connection with the investigation into the arrest of Adam Nobody to see a prime example of contemptible, arrogant and clannish behaviour. Nevertheless, it is premature to dismiss the comradeship and devotion to duty of the police force as exclusively negative in nature.
When I first learned about the Russell’s death, I was very saddened at the fact that this man lost his life unnecessarily. It is very sad and I am really sad for his family too.
Around the same time Russell died, there was a pedestrian who had died on Toronto’s streets. So I started thinking about all the pedestrians who lose their life unnecessarily due to negligent and distracted drivers. Remember last January, there were 14 pedestrians who died in 14 days?
These pedestrians aren’t even being paid to cross an intersection. Yet when they die we just shrug it off as another casualty of our streets. So I asked myself why we are mourning so much for someone who is paid to be at risk, yet shrug when someone who is not paid gets killed?
It just seems a little backwards to me. We should be equally saddened at any unnecessary death in our city.
John, thank you for being, as far as I’ve seen, the only journalist to take this on. That this particular police funeral was the largest ever held in the city, taking place at the same time negotiations on the police budget are underway, and shortly after the TPS suffered a serious blow its trustworthiness, is surely no coincidence. A very sad event for Russell’s family and his colleagues was pumped into a massive PR event that made me, and others, extremely uncomfortable.
To FFeeley. Yes the job of a police officer is fundamentally different than most … but that still doesn’t explain why 12,000 have to come from across the continent to march around my city. The police are not military … but they wish they were. These funerals are from a different time and place. I’m saddened by the death (my brother is a cop) and as a journalist I’ve worked with them on many levels the past 30 years. There are some wonderful men and women that work on the various fotces around the GTA, but please don’t put them on a pedestal. Of all the groups (politicians, educators, artists, athletes etc.) the police come on top when it comes to the concept of self entitlement. Racism, sexism, lies, arrogance, drugs, drinking on the job, drunk officers working on RIDE programs … I’ve seen or heard it all. The police do not want to be told what to do by city hall or anyone else. I used to think Blair was a good chief, but the G20 changed all that. Innocent men and women had their rights taken away and were even assaulted by the police. Media photograohs and other videos captured the image of some of the cops, but the Chief and the other 6,000 cops wouldn’t identify them. Enough said. I have a suggestion. The next time an officer dies in the line of duty – which I hope is never again – it would be wonderful to have all of these men and women officers congregate in this city, but without uniforms, bagpipes and flags. No marching and no closing off of streets. Why can’t they show their respect by standing with us – side by side – as we all bid farewell (as human beings) to another human being. Just a thought.
A useful column, and a set of responses.
Something that my father said about it all – what about the redirecting of all the funeral costs towards a trust fund for the family? Is the family of a deceased adequately resourced? – odds are fairly good that it’s a “yes”… but it’s still worth exploring/asking.
I’m similarly in awe at the magnitude of this funeral, but i’m more concerned by the totally neglected reason for this tragedy involving two lives. The policeman lost his life trying to stop a landscape truck snow plow that had been stolen by a homeless man with a questionable mindset. Granted perhaps he was potentially dangerous, but also perhaps not. Once his frozen feet had warmed up he would probably have parked the truck somewhere with the engine running, and an alert police force would have quietly taken him from the truck to the nearest holding cell. I seriously doubt that he was anxious to reek havoc on the City with a pickup truck and blade. But when he was ardently chased by the police, he panicked, killed one officer, smashed into numerous other vehicles, and ended up inciting a gun barrage to bring his flight to an end. We will never know whether any harm would have come from the theft, and how it would have ended, but if protecting stolen property was considered insufficient reason for an intense police chase, the officer would be alive today, and the funeral would not have happened!
I agree 100% with John Lorinc. His view/column is not a reaction to the G20 fiasco. This issue has been out there for quite some time. The only connection to G20 that I see is that they are two sides of the same coin. Both are shows of power and a belief within the bulk of the police force that they are worthier, righter, more important, more entitled than everybody else. Officer’s death was awful and we should honour fact that police put themselves on the line, but this is way, way out of proportion.
@Bruce Gavid Ward, that’s stretching it, extremely. Most of us don’t live in ‘What if’ land, most of us live in reality.
@Mr. Lorinc, So if shutting down downtown Toronto is wrong for the police to do, why would you draw a link to when downtown Toronto was being shut down during the G20 by the Black Bloc? Shouldn’t you have reacted twice as harshly then?
Thanks to spacing for being one of two outlets I’ve seen (Open File is the other: http://toronto.openfile.ca/blog/opinion/2011/no-more-heroes) to be willing to think critically about last week’s display. Even Now Magazine (http://www.nowtoronto.com/news/story.cfm?content=178789) kept the kid gloves on, and Warmington (http://www.torontosun.com/news/columnists/joe_warmington/2011/01/19/16953666.html) hedged a lot.
Clearly, Toronto ho-hummed throughout the funeral of Sgt. Russell. We went about our daily business, hustling and bustling as usual to work, to school, shopping, etc. One poll shows 91% of Torontonians feel that the funeral was overstated, and a waste of taxpayer dollars. Dont kid yourself – those were taxpayer dollars, every cent. Regional forces get their fiscal budgets from tax coffers just like every other public service does. The death of Sgt Russell is, without a doubt, a tragedy but one has to wonder what a man with a severe enough mental illness was doing roaming the streets, barefoot, in January, and able to commandeer a snowplow through a predawn metropolitan area. It is obvious that the man has serious mental health issues. Let there not be a tragic miscarriage of justice here all because of police ego trips. There was no gallantry on the part of Sgt Russell – he was doing what every officer does every day of their work week – keeping Torontonians safe. Thats their job. What they get paid very handsomely for. Sadly his decision to get perilously close to the snowplow was a fatal decision that took his life when he slipped and fell into its path, causing his death. Was the show of alleged 10,000 mourning police officers too much? Without a doubt it was and the real reason, sadly, was a show of strength and an unstated statement that, given the flack that Blair and at least 100 of his officers have taken over the past 7 months since the G20 in which they created a police state, brutalized many and broke the law, it was Blairs first opportunity to take a we ll show em approach. Unfortunately, his selfish motives undermined the true tragedy: the death of a police officer, the loss of a father, husband and son. And… Torontonians were blase about the entire show. Ho hum.