When a public servant, clothed in public authority, using the public's tools, on the public's time, performs a notable act purportedly on behalf of the public, should that public servant's identity be made available to the public?
What if the act in question is one of the most extreme assertions of state authority over an individual imaginable — a police officer's fatal shooting of an unarmed man?
Most citizens, I think, would say that the identity of the public servant should be public.
As Mark Draughn shows us, the Fairfax, Virginia police disagree — and disagree rather scornfully. Read Draughn's excellent column to see how the police use evasion, bureaucratic jargon, and the thin blue line to justify concealing the identity of the public servant who shot a man on the people's behalf. Note well, those who enjoy indulging in media-bashing, how the state can employ it to justify withholding information from the public.
Last 5 posts by Ken White
- Hate Speech Debate on More Perfect Live - September 5th, 2017
- Popehat Goes To The Opera: Un ballo in maschera - August 19th, 2017
- Department of Justice Uses Search Warrant To Get Data On Visitors to Anti-Trump Site - August 14th, 2017
- America At The End of All Hypotheticals - August 14th, 2017
- Lawsplainer: Why John Oliver Is Anti-Diversity Now - August 11th, 2017