A Spur of the Moment

Driving through a shady part of the city, a man approaches a police officer only to end up dead by a gun shot while reaching for his wallet to show his identity. There are two conflicting sides of this scenario: the police officer is either justified or not, but must the guilt perpetually weigh over the hands of the police for simply defending themselves without premeditation of harming the victim? The short story “Identities” written by W.D Valgardson unfolds the tale about a middle-aged wealthy man living in Winnipeg, Manitoba, who leaves his neighbourhood in his Mercedes Benz to escape his dull abode. He visits the ghetto of which initially was his childhood neighbourhood and soon becomes cognizant of the officer’s presence. The unshaven man in blue jeans attempts to reach for his ID, but ends up getting killed. The death of an innocent man or woman cannot easily be forgiven; however, impulsive reactions can occur while being in a risky position. The police officer had to choose between his life or the suspected thief, and his unconscious response was appropriate as an amateur. Naturally, someone’s first instinct when stopped by a police officer is to take out their ID, however, with the exception of being a rookie who was panic-stricken by his surroundings and suspicious of the man, the officer had a reason to take the shot. In addition, the contrasting presence of the Mercedes with the poverty-stricken environment made him view the man as a thief: “When the officer, who, is inexperienced, who is nervous because of the neighborhood, who is suspicious because of the car because he has been trained to see an unshaven man in blue jeans as a potential thief and not as a probable owner, orders him to halt, he is surprised” (Valgardson). His lack of experience and perturbation made him feel his life was at risk causing him to act subconsciously. Although the police officer should not have shot him right away, the man also should not have instantly gone for his wallet. He told the man to halt, but the man did not obey; impulsivity is then triggered through him due to the sinister atmosphere of “yards all proscribed by stiff picket fences” (Valgardson) and” a ten-foot wire fence enclosing a playground bare of equipment and pounded flat” (Valgardson) resulting in a reflex of pulling out the pistol. Furthermore, it is not the police officer’s fault for being trained to stereotype men based on their appearances; the man matched the exact description of a potential thief with the inclusion of the Mercedes making the scene more cogent to the officer. The odd calmness of the man described by how “he does not feel fear but relief” (Valgardson) may have also puzzled the officer on the man’s intentions and was surprised by the man’s sudden grab of the wallet; therefore, he had to react quickly based on his intuition. From the evidence provided, the police officer is not guilty as the man appeared to be pulling out a weapon after he advised him to stop; he had no choice but to defend himself.