Do police shootings reflect societal fear?

"It's a big deal. It's a life."

This quote-headline in Sunday's Press gets directly to the heart of why officer-involved shootings merit close scrutiny. Scrutiny is not a lack of support for law enforcement. It is not criticism, nor lack of respect. These men and women play a vital role in society; we need them. The tough job they face includes an element of unpredictable, serious risk. They are to be appreciated and given the benefit of doubt when firearms are discharged in complex situations.

Yet a life - yes, any life - has constitutional and ethical value which merits additional, close scrutiny when it is threatened or taken. A society which does not place such emphasis on life is not one in which any life is truly secure.

Bear with me please, because I may not be going where you think. The scrutiny I mean goes far beyond investigation of any one event, beyond cops and suspects.

I leave it to others more qualified to analyze recent officer-involved shootings both local and national. It's easier when a suspect has a weapon to say "justified;" in situations where an unarmed person not suspected of violent crime is shot and/or killed, questions arise (even if answers finally satisfy).

In a society which values life, they must.

So where do we stand, statistically? First, note the Department of Justice neither conducts nor requires reports on fatal suspect shootings, so information varies. However, officer deaths in the line of duty rose in 2010 and 2011 at the same time crime decreased, according to an April 2012 article in Law Enforcement Today. However, in 2012, deaths in the line of duty decreased by 34 percent, according to a May 13 press release at FBI.gov.

Is our attention simply focused on high-profile incidents of officer-involved shootings, or are there really more than before? According to an ABCNews.com article of Sept. 28, 2013, as far as we know the overall national rates have stayed fairly stable over five years.

But let's look at this differently for broader perspective.

We also know two other things: Violent crime is down almost everywhere in recent years, and according to ABC News and other sources, smaller locales - towns and small cities - have seen more incidences of such shootings by comparison to past decades, in which they were generally restricted to "the big city."

Does this suggest more violent reactions to less violent crimes? Is this about an enlarged sense of fear? If it is, law enforcement probably isn't to blame; this fear is reflected in society at large.

If violent crime is down, why are we so afraid? One possibility is people tend to fear the unknown, and we have created more unknown.

We're all less compassionate and more rude, less interested in others, more self-centered and self-consumed, and less compromising (just consider Congress). Think broadly here, beyond crime and punishment, beyond shootings and beyond hometown, even beyond nation.

It's ironic given the high-tech information age, but we're simply less connected with one another, on a person-to-person, intimate level. Texting and Facebook do not promote intimacy; instead they seem to be encouraging self-absorption.

That is a change, and not for the better.

Andy Griffith and other 1950s shows may not reflect the full reality of those times, but how long has it been since we saw that level of neighbor-to-neighbor closeness? People routinely rushing to help someone who has dropped something, open doors for seniors and baby strollers? Who even notices seniors and strollers in this gadget-obsessed world? Even in the last 30 years there is less tendency to think about and consider effects on others before acting.

We have changed. We care less, or at least we pay less concentrated attention. Me, me, me. It may seem a stretch to some, but there is a logic in connecting this phenomenon with our more extreme reactions as a society to fearful stimuli. We have a weakened ability to see others as complicated and vulnerable as ourselves. A result of lessened intimacy with one another is a lack of understanding, compassion - yes, less hesitation to react with harshness.

Common teenage pranks or just-plain-stupid acts were always frowned upon, but now instead of taking a wayward youth home with a warning the first time, or punishing but with an eye to individual situation, we are quicker to arrest, prosecute and incarcerate, which can start a tumbling spiral more than it fixes one. That's not because of some independent shift in the system; it's because society demands it - society as a whole; this is about all of us.

We no longer feel as connected with one another, with "strangers" in our communities that once-perceived closeness is gone, so we fear others more and react in fear. Fear is unreliable. Ironically, such reactions breed more fear and distrust.

So it will take all of us to try to change, to become aware, to lift our heads from smart phones and iPads and interact, reconnect. Quality of life and happiness lie not bent over a screen but face-up, with each other. That - a renewed intimacy with one another and the sense of responsibility and care which go with it - is the best way we can feel and be safer.

Sholeh Patrick, J. D. is a columnist for the Hagadone News Network. Contact her at [email protected].