Ed Erdelatz: How do we define bad cops or bad columnists?

Re “For NYPD, no defense for the indefensible” (Opinions, Jan. 11): As a retired San Francisco police officer, I agree with columnist Leonard Pitts Jr. that society should support good cops and oppose bad ones. I take issue with his opinion that the officers involved in the deaths of Michael Brown and Eric Gardner are “bad cops.”

The fact that grand juries did not find sufficient cause to indict the officers seems immaterial to Pitts. He suggests that the grand jurors may have had a conflict of interest, but he has no problem with the Obama administration and New York Mayor Bill de Blasio, relying on the counsel of the Rev. Al Sharpton, architect of the Tawana Brawley hoax.

The so called “sin” of Mayor de Blasio and President Obama is not calling for police reform, nor as he suggests are the cops having a tantrum. The NYPD is no longer being pro-active because they are afraid. To be clear, they are not afraid of the armed felon, but rather of being abandoned by an administration that presumes cops to be at fault. Officers will continue to lay their lives on the line, but they are concerned about their futures when President Obama, Mayor de Blasio and Al Sharpton are the ones determining who are the good cops and who are the bad ones.

This story was originally published January 15, 2015 at 9:49 AM with the headline "Ed Erdelatz: How do we define bad cops or bad columnists?."