Have you heard of CopBlock? Let's take a look.

In a recent article for the L.A. Times, writer Nigel Duara profiled some of the members of a loosely-organized movement to disrupt and interfere with LEOs on the job. CopBlock urges its followers to, “police the police by filming traffic stops and watching for potential violations of search laws.” The Times report highlights the efforts of two men—Kenny Lovett and Kory Watkins—who show up at police calls to videotape them. They also advise members of the public with whom police are interacting not to cooperate.

CopBlock’s a small web of police detractors, many of whom have had run-ins with government agencies. They claim to keep an eye on law enforcement when it oversteps its bounds. I don’t want to give the impression that CopBlock’s a big deal: tiny chapters have popped up in places like Berkeley and rural Texas. But considering the atmosphere the group engenders, it’s worth a closer look at them and some of their supporters. In my observations, proponents appear to share three major characteristics, (these are generalities and don’t apply to everyone associated): they tend to favor drug use without penalty; they espouse widespread possession of weapons; and many of them would support a Ron Paul candidacy over that of a more mainstream one. They’re also prone to some strong invective against the police. The article “When Should You Shoot A Cop,” by Larken Rose, advocates violence against police. He compares police work to the oppressive dictators like Hitler, Stalin and the Pol Pot regime of the Khmer Rouge, includes an invective against the war on drugs, and disapproves of border security checks. Further arguments are even more disturbing.

Comparable movements suggest if you have the perception that police are violating your rights, then you can resist. While citizens bear no obligation to obey unlawful orders, the law is not determined by an individual’s prejudice or beliefs, no matter how heart-felt.

The issue for us isn’t so much that this organization exists but how police will deal with the safety issues that crop up when dissenters show up at active scenes and traffic stops.

Now might be a good time for departments to address these issues. Bearing in mind that body-cams can show what police detractors don’t want the public to see: what led up to the confrontation in the first place. But that’s not the only action police executives should take.

I recommend making your personnel aware of any groups or individuals that might interfere with an arrest or provide a danger to a safe working environment. Good intelligence saves lives and keeps departments out of court. Know what and with whom you’re dealing, then formulate a plan to keep your officers and the public safe. Your job should be to ensure that everyone leaves every scene without injury.

Finally, I believe police should share their information with other agencies. Free speech is one thing, but professional agitators and individuals with axes to grind should not be allowed to put officers and the public at risk. Developing a thick skin helps but developing a plan of action helps more.