A Plea For Zero Tolerance

Irksome

The concept of “zero tolerance,” in which prohibited behavior receives a set punishment without discretion and regardless of mitigating facts, is a popular one in law enforcement and anti-drug circles.  We’re told that a zero-tolerance policy in schools, where kids are suspended for possession of weapons (even if it’s a pocketknife) or drugs (even over-the-counter) communicates society’s disapproval of the behavior in question, is necessary to keep schools safe, and reduces litigation over discretionary decisions which might otherwise be deemed arbitrary or capricious.  If every kid carrying a pocketknife to school is suspended, there can be no recriminations that authorities didn’t do everything they could the next time a pocketknife massacre takes place.

The one area in which zero tolerance policies seem to be unpopular among the usual chorus is law enforcement itself.  That’s a shame, because the idea has a lot of merit.  Consider the case of the Grady County, Oklahoma Sheriff’s Department, which seems to follow a “maximum tolerance” policy.

At least, toward its own deputies:

Allegations against the recently promoted Deputy Sean Knight of the Grady County Sheriff’s Department have arisen after he allegedly falsified his timesheets while working security detail for Winter Creek Golf Course in Blanchard.

According to a manager with the business, Knight clocked in one evening to the high paying security position and later that evening a fire alarm went off. However, Knight was nowhere to be found when the fire department showed up.

Knight was promoted to sergeant after the previous occupant of the office was caught stealing money from jailhouse inmates.  That’s a fine example of zero-tolerance in action.  But it appears the policy won’t be applied to Knight, even though his supervisor at the Sheriff’s Department got him the after-hours security job.  Even though his supervisor at the Sheriff’s Department fired him from the after-hours security job.

Deputy Laffoon, who first denied knowing anything occurred pertaining to Knight’s employment at his second job, but who later admitted Knight had been fired for the situation, said, “Who told you about this, I want to know… look I can’t say anything else about it, I was told by Art (Kell) that you need to talk to him if you have any further questions.”

Sheriff Art Kell said, “I have enough to worry about with this other deputy stealing from the department to start an investigation over another deputy who may have falsified timesheets… until they break the law, I’m not going to get involved. I’ve had enough bad media press to deal with to start this up.”

It would appear that in Grady County, a man who allegedly falsifies his time is too risky to work as a rent-a-cop, but perfectly acceptable as a real cop.  Even though he has a record of murdering dogs.

And in August, Grady County, Oklahoma, Deputy Sean Knight stopped in Blanchard at the home of Tammy Christopher to ask directions. He ended up shooting her approaching dog in the head. A video of that incident has become evidence in a lawsuit against Knight, the county and the state.

A lawsuit that is about to be settled for about 100 times the cost of a new dog, which is the general measure the law uses in valuing such things.  You can see video of the Deputy’s performance around frisky canines at the link above.  My impression on seeing it was that I don’t want that man carrying a badge anywhere, much less a firearm.

That’s why zero-tolerance works.  If Grady County just had a zero-tolerance policy toward deputies who needlessly shoot pets, there would be no need to agonize over whether it’s appropriate to retain deputies who can’t be trusted to guard a golf course.

Update:  It would seem that plenty of people agree with this expansion of zero-tolerance.  I had no idea that Deputy Knight was already an internet celebrity when I began this post.

Last 5 posts by Patrick

6 Comments

6 Comments

  1. tom  •  Mar 31, 2009 @4:36 pm

    let me guess all of you that are posting this info have worked in law enforcement before and know all there is to know. my advise to you is that maybe you should know the facts and then start expressing your opinions. the reason the dog was shot is that it was in attack mode toward the officer. law states that you can protect yourself, and that is was what the officer was doing. would any reasonable person let a dog attack them and not defend themselves. well all the tree huggers who disagree with me sorry but its true. the fact of the matter in the security incedent came from a person who knows nothing aboput what he is saying. in fact it is a news reporter. we all know that media looks for a good story and tries to get people against others. that is why they have ratings. WAKE UP PEOPLE IT IS NOT AGAINST THE LAW TO DEFEND YOURSELF. you are the same people that will gripe that the officer drives to fast and you have no idea of the situation, but will complain when its your time that you need them and they get there to slow.

  2. Patrick  •  Mar 31, 2009 @5:22 pm

    Dogshit Tom. Let me guess you don’t know a damned thing about dogs, or about Central Oklahoma, where dogs (as shown on the video) run free in huge yards or tracts.

    The dog was not in “attack mode,” Deputy Knight had the option of retreat if he thought it was, and he had time to motion to his companion in the vehicle to stay still while he pulled his gun and aimed, before firing.

    Go back to Hannity.

  3. David  •  Jun 9, 2009 @3:36 pm

    I just watched this video…The dog was coming to say hi…and if he is scared of a little dog like that i hope he never comes to my house with my pits and shepherds…Hell even my chihuahuas arents safe with this dork for a cop…Not only that he was out of his district and they have computers that tell them directions…its called GPS…and also if you notice the dog was about 3 feet to his front and looked to me like it was running past him. absolutly not a case for deadly force… pepper sray the dog…has this guy never seen the use of force guide sheet…He needs to be sued along with the county and the state…I really hope you win tammy and as far as toms reply…your probably buddies with this ass so of course the brotherhood of the badge GANG is gonna stand up for their soaring eagle buddies. and Also he had plenty of chances to get back in his car….HE DID NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO SHOOT THAT DOG.

  4. pet coat stains  •  Jun 16, 2009 @10:37 am

    As an avid dog lover, I just wanted to say thank you.

  5. Yo Momma  •  Sep 5, 2009 @10:39 pm

    Knight was promoted to sergeant after the previous occupant of the office was caught stealing money from jailhouse inmates.

    Patrick ………. your an IDIOT. The previous occupant was not caught stealing money from inmates. Thus the reason he’s not in jail and the charges will soon be dropped. He was accused of it because he called Sheriff Kell out for lieing on his campaign promises. Get your facts straight … or go to work for the National Enquirer.

  6. marcus  •  Sep 26, 2009 @3:32 pm

    Tom, you’re an idiot. You step on my lawn and even look like you’re gonna pull your gun, and you’re a dead man. Got it? It’s time you learn your badge won’t stop a bullet, and it sure as hell won’t stop me from getting to you.

Leave a Reply

Allowed tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>