As Country Embraces Transparency, Georgia Cops Demur

“Sunlight is said to be the best disinfectant,” former U.S. Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis once wrote.

Without proper context, it may appear as though he was referring to killing germs, but in reality, he was talking about the benefits of transparency, which can keep both individuals and governments honest and better behaved.

Since Brandeis made this proclamation, governments have—sometimes begrudgingly—made strides toward increasing transparency, including enacting freedom of information acts. Unfortunately, not every agency and level of government has embraced this openness, but more should, including the police.

Few government entities have received more criticism over the past few years than law enforcement departments. Following some high profile cases of police misbehavior, calls to entirely defund the police grew widespread, despite that being a horribly misguided idea. Who would you call in an emergency, a defunded department? If you believe that, then bless your heart.

Instead of trying to dismantle a necessary government function to protect Americans’ rights and liberties, a more prudent step would be to increase its transparency to hold bad actors accountable, learn from mistakes and more easily earn greater public trust. The FBI created the Use-of-Force Data Collection program to do just this. It aims to collect data surrounding use-of-force incidents from departments across the country. It is a noble endeavor, but it comes with drawbacks, including being a voluntary program.

Only states and locals can mandate participation in it. Some states cooperate better than others, and Georgia is one of the worst offenders. According to research compiled by my colleagues Jillian Snider and Logan Seacrest, only around 51 percent of Georgia’s officers engage in the program and only 107 of 769 agencies participate to any degree. Compare that to Alabama, which has about a 100 percent participation rate. I speak for everyone in the Peach State when I say that Alabama should never outperform Georgia.

Despite this, there are other ways to be transparent, including creating and using state databases. Indeed, plenty of states, like Alabama, Tennessee, North Carolina and Florida, have use-of-force data reporting laws on the books. Georgia, on the other hand, stands out as an outlier by having no use-of-force data laws whatsoever. This is a disservice to Georgia’s police officers and the general public, and it creates knowledge gaps.

The most recent national research suggests that of the 50 million or so annual police interactions with civilians, less than 2 percent result in the threat of or actual use of force. Put simply, it is a relatively rare occurrence, but it is sometimes necessary. Police don’t always deal with the most upstanding pillars of society, but the problem is parsing through when use-of-force is a necessity or an overreaction in the heat of the moment.

Some states can more readily answer those questions, but not Georgia because the Peach State grossly underreports such activities. While I cannot say with certainty, I would wager that if local departments participated in this reporting, we’d find that Georgia law enforcement officers largely act with restraint and well within legal bounds. Having ironclad data proving this would build goodwill and greater trust within the community. Instead, cops must grapple suspicion and distrust.

Of course, within every group, including police officers, there are some bad apples or those who simply have had a bad day and overreacted to a situation. Again, without the requisite data, it is difficult for policymakers to determine how often misbehavior happens amongst law enforcement and, in turn, how to more effectively prevent it from reoccurring.

It only takes a quick Google search to find numerous cases of alleged use-of-force and/or police misconduct in Georgia. Some of them are without a doubt concerning, and that is what grabs headlines. The media isn’t inclined to report on the host of interactions in which officers acted with politeness and let Georgians off with a warning. That just doesn’t make for an interesting read.

A lack of transparency also has an impact on our access to more mundane—but still important—public information. Not long ago, I submitted an information request to the Georgia Bureau of Investigation, but they refused to provide rather simple data unless I paid them for their services. I guess my taxes weren’t enough. In other cases, agencies use delaying tactics, redact important information or worse—withhold it altogether. In the wrong hands, this lack of transparency can not only shield wrong-doers, but also expose government officials to unfair criticisms.

Ignorance of how government agents—who are approved to use deadly force—operate isn’t a recipe for success. This demands change. Policymakers ought to consider mandating that more sunlight be shown on law enforcement. While it could serve as Brandeis’ disinfectant, it might also demonstrate law enforcement’s selflessness and adherence to the law. Either way, greater transparency should be embraced in a free society.