Just about every public official, whether elected or appointed, is often in a position where he or she is called upon to make remarks to an audience. Although the primary focus of the remarks often changes based on the nature of the event, issues of critical community interest are typically always on the agenda and should always be described in the same manner with the same message and with the same passion. Unfortunately, such is not always the case.

As a troubling example, I recently attended a law enforcement function where several elected officials were among the invited guests. In what can only be described as sickening was the conduct of a prominent public official who vociferously described his support for law enforcement and praise for peace officers but whose conduct outside of that limited venue was often just the opposite. Clearly, this person was “playing” to his constituents and “trying to have it both ways” in garnering the support of law enforcement but not loudly enough to inflame other audiences outside of that limited venue. In the incident described, the public official, certainly, in my judgment, was an individual who crossed the line in terms of being honest to the electorate. To varying degrees and without evil intentions, it is not unusual for well-meaning public officials to somewhat inadvertently exhibit the same troubling behaviors.

I think most would agree that one of the best and worst attributes of our democracy is the First Amendment to the Constitution, which addresses the issue of free speech. It is used for good and evil, cited in support of every agenda, and often used to distort the true weight and magnitude of whatever is being addressed. A frequent example is the abusive use by plaintiffs’ attorneys in alleged police misconduct cases who call a press conference to make often outrageous allegations as part of an effort to orchestrate the issue consistent with their legal representation strategy. Beyond the often false and always exaggerated comments of the attorney, there are typically remarks from grieving relatives to likely further distort the actual facts of the situation. Although such theatrical performances typically involve fewer than a dozen participants, the media message typically goes to many thousands of people. As an editorial aside, most officers get awfully tired of having to continually explain the truth and reality to their friends and family in the wake of these never-ending “press conferences.”

Public officials need to be constantly cognizant of their responsibility to be candid and transparent with the people they influence, with both the accuracy of the information and in doing their part to assist the public in understanding both the depth and magnitude of the issue at hand. It is understandable that public officials seek to have open avenues of communication with all of their constituencies, but not at the expense of the truth. In public statements, they must not speak softly to one group and loudly to another on issues of strong public concern but rather should have the courage and character to say the same things to all groups with the same level of passion and commitment, whatever that position might be. Having the courage to articulate a perspective to an audience that may have a strong opposing view(s) goes with the territory of being a public official.

With few exceptions, people and organizations are advocates for the positions and issues that are important to them and will seize every opportunity to influence others. Whoever said that “the squeaky wheel gets the grease” really understood the realities of human behavior, and this reality — coupled with the First Amendment to our Constitution — often translates into a woefully misled and confused electorate. For those of us in law enforcement, we often witness gross exaggerations of isolated incidents that are portrayed by special interest groups as nationwide, everyday events. These troubling misconceptions are further exacerbated by public officials who “tread lightly” on certain issues in public comments for fear of alienating a portion of their constituency.

Among the challenges facing law enforcement today are special interests who work hard and passionately to portray the overwhelming percentage of the wonderful men and women of law enforcement as basically evil and heavy-handed, when just the opposite is the case. Public officials who lack the courage and inclination to speak up and speak out in support of their officers do a great disservice to not only the men and women who work hard and professionally to keep our communities safe, but also do a terrible service to those they represent by virtue of permitting misconceptions to be seen as reality.

To all of our elected and appointed public officials, please take note and say the same thing in the same manner and with the same passion to all of your audiences, whatever that position might be!