The concept I am writing about is hardly new to iePolitics.  What is new is that I am going to relate it specifically to the discussions we have been having about morality in the San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department.

I will ask a question I have asked more than once on this blog.  If a man (or woman) is willing to break the most important covenant given to him by God, then why should we expect any higher degree of integrity or morality on lesser issues?  The covenant of which I write is, of course, that of marriage.

Let me put this is more direct terms. If a man is willing to lie to his wife whom he is supposed to love, honor and cherish, then why should we expect him to be truthful on the witness stand?   If a man has an anger control issue severe enough that he physically harms his wife, whom once again he is supposed to love, honor and cherish, then is it really inconceivable that he might beat the crap out of a prisoner?

If an officer of the law is willing to break the law that he is sworn to uphold, then what makes him any different than the crook he arrests?  Is a law enforcement officer driving under the influence of alcohol somehow better capable of making wise decisions than the average citizen driving under the influence?  Didn’t they both just make equally unsound decisions?  Should one be treated any differently than the other?

Integrity, morality, and ethics are not situational.  One cannot lack integrity in one area and be considered to have integrity in another.  That is a contradiction that cannot be overcome.  A person has integrity in all aspects of his life, or he has none at all.  The fact that he does the right thing some of the time is not a sign of integrity; it is a sign that he is not without any redeaming qualities whatsoever.

Since we first started running the stories of infidelity in the Sheriff’s Department, there has been lots of criticism and finger pointing.  And there have been those that somehow feel being a cop justifies bad behavior.

I would argue exactly the opposite.  Only the most moral and just should ever be allowed to carry a badge and gun.  If law enforcement officers cannot do their jobs or live their lives without breaking the law then there is really no hope for our society.

But we cannot expect deputies in the field to be held to standards higher than those at the top hold themselves too.  Some argue that Floyd Tidwell’s, Gary Penrod’s, or Rod Hoops’ affairs and indiscretions are not worth noting.  I would differ.

I have heard from a number of old-timers who tell me that one of the biggest taboos in law enforcement was to have an affair with another cop’s spouse.  Officers who did that were run out of the department, and rightfully so.

I can already hear the complaints.  Private lives are private lives.  Not when you are a cop and the public is at risk.

What do they teach you in the scademy about the most dangerous type of call to respond to?  Which courtroom in the courthouse is the most dangerous?

When you add to that, broken promises, guns, badges, egos, you have a recipe for disaster.  Perhaps we have not had one cop kill another cop in a jealous rage . . . yet.  But what is going on in the Sheriff’s Department is a time bomb waiting to happen.

And nothing will get done about it. Why?  Remember those “indiscretions” that are not worth noting?  That’s why.  A superior cannot discipline a subordinate for behavior he, himself, participates in.  Remember the Randy Beavers case?  The defense may very well be “because the Sheriff was sleeping with my wife.”

Call me old-fashioned, self-righteous, or whatever you want to call me, but we write about the most perfect example of what I’m describing here on the blog on an almost daily basis.  That person is District Attorney Mike Ramos.

Ramos has cheated on his wife Gretchen with more women than we can count.  And that lack of integrity carries right on over to his professional life.  As the District Attorney of San Bernardino County Ramos is expected to uphold the Constitution of the United States.  Ramos instead chooses to violate its most basic elements.

As I said, a person either has integrity or he does not.  Ramos does not.  Neither does Hoops or many in his executive staff.  Until they are all replaced the department will continue to go down hill until a private citizen is killed by a drunk deputy, takes the bullet meant for his wife’s lover, or finds themselves on the wrong end of a cop with a anger control problem or a cop committing suicide.  It’s only a matter of time.