SUNDAY, MAY 29 , 2022. THE WASHINGTON POST EZ RE A25SUNDAY OpinionI
n the two years since George Floyd’s
murder by Minneapolis police
sparked nationwide calls for re-
forms in law enforcement, there has
been a wide gap between federal rheto-
ric and action. That gap closed in a
small but meaningful way this past
week, when President Biden signed an
executive order that raises the bar for
what policing in the United States
should look like. But whether the order
achieves its transformative potential
depends on what happens next.
The executive order requires all fed-
eral law enforcement agencies to create
policies consistent with the Justice
Department’s recently revised use-of-
force policy, which reintroduces the
sensible but often ignored principle
that force is unreasonable unless it is
necessary. And unlike an earlier draft
that was leaked in January, this order
applies not just to deadly force b ut all
force.
It also goes further than most state or
local no-knock entry reforms by requir-
ing all law enforcement agencies to
adhere to another new Justice Depart-
ment policy that makes it nearly impos-
sible to use the dangerous drug-war-era
rationale of preventing evidence de-
struction to justify no-knocks.
The executive order further requires
that all federal agents receive training
in both de-escalating force and peer
intervention — a commitment that
moves beyond merely ordering officers
to prevent their colleagues from com-
mitting unnecessary harm.
Biden’s order signals the administra-
tion’s recognition that we rely too
heavily on police to meet community
safety needs, and have been blind to the
harms of doing so. It directs the attor-
ney general to provide guidance and
resources to communities for develop-
ing alternatives to a police response to
persons in mental health crisis. It also
requires the Department of Health and
Human Services to undertake an un-
precedented review of the health effects
on communities of police violence.
The order resisted truly inexcusable
attempts by some law enforcement
groups to pretend that institutionalized
racism has no bearing on policing in the
United States. It emphasizes the impor-
tance of acknowledging the legacy of
systemic racism in the criminal legal
system, as well as other U.S. institu-
tions, and the need to reduce not just
intentional discrimination but dispari-
ties that endure. It addresses explicit
bigotry in law enforcement as well,
requiring the development of screening
tools to ensure that law enforcement
agencies do not hire or retain people
who promote white supremacy.
Some of the wonkiest provisions in
the executive order are among the most
potentially transformative. The order
requires the development of a police
accountability database and a use-of-
force database, and incentives to local
agencies to both use and input informa-
tion into those systems. The databases
contemplated are far too limited, but
the infrastructure and norms they cre-
ate hold promise. The order requires a
study of the racial and other impacts of
facial recognition technology and the
use of predictive algorithms. In what
might turn out to be the biggest lift, the
order requires the creation of standards
for entities to accredit law enforcement
agencies, and incentives to agencies to
become accredited.
Collectively, the requirements in the
10,000-word executive order have the
potential to change policing norms in
significant ways. But none of it is
self-executing — it is, in the end, just
words on a page. It will take an
enormous amount of effort and focus,
particularly by Attorney General Mer-
rick Garland and the Justice Depart-
ment, but by other federal agencies as
well, to ensure that the mandated
guidance, studies, grants, task forces
and databases are not only created but
remain faithful to the goals of the
executive order. And that is going to
require advocates to keep persistent
pressure on the government.
To be clear, even if fully implemented,
this executive order is far from suffi-
cient to remake policing as is necessary.
For one thing, an executive order is not
legislation. This means, for example,
that those of us who support modifying
qualified immunity for officials accused
of violating a plaintiff’s rights, or creat-
ing direct municipal liability for police
misconduct, must still push Congress to
pass the necessary laws. An even bigger
limitation is that while the executive
branch can provide state and local
governments support and incentives to
reduce the harms of policing, it cannot
direct them to do so. The bulk of that
work must continue to be done in cities,
counties and states across the country.
Nevertheless, this order offers the
opportunity — finally — for broad,
meaningful changes in how policing
operates in the United States. Now, the
task is to keep our eye on the ball to
make sure the administration follows
through on this promise.CHRISTY E. LOPEZBiden’s orderis just a starton policereformCongratulations, graduating seniors! After
years of effort and anticipation, you are
officially moving to the next stage of life, via a
piece of paper as flimsy as it is significant: the
thank-you note.
That diploma is nice, too. You might even want to
get it framed. It shows you were a competent student
who completed the requirements set forth by your
institution. But writing a real thank-you note shows
you can express gratitude, which is one of the
requirements of being a competent adult.
Yes, I said a “real” thank-you note. A store-bought
card, preprinted with “Thank You” on the front and
inscribed with a single fill-in-the-blank sentence,
might be better than no acknowledgment of a gift. At
least the writer went to the trouble to find a pen.
But “Thank you for the nice [present]” barely
earns a passing grade — and only because current
standards have fallen so low. It’s like grade inflation
but for manners.
So what’s a real thank-you note, and how do you
write one? I’m glad you asked. “It’s Never Too Late to
Learn a Skill You Should Already Have” happens to
be the title of the commencement address no one has
asked me to give.
There are three simple rules:
(1) A real thank-you note is from a real person. It
should not sound robotic or formulaic. It should be a
little weird, a little particular, a little you. Every
personality, even yours, has a corresponding syntac-
tic representation. The enthusiastic exclaimer! Per-
haps the hesitant questioner? The chit-chatter,whose thoughts and feelings overflow the bounds of
typical sentence length, with dependent clauses and
prepositional phrases dotted about here and there
like eddies in the great flow of meaning. The taciturn.
(2) A real thank-you note is to a real person.
Presumably you have some sort of relationship with
the individual who was thoughtful enough to give
you a gift in honor of your graduation. Check your
note. Does it read as if you believe the gift arrived
from a kind stranger? Or do you take the time to refer
to your history or future with the gift giver, or to
some quality of theirs that you value?
It’s ultimately their generosity that you must zero
in on, though, which brings us to the final hallmark
of a real thank-you note.
(3) A real thank-you note expresses gratitude.
Naturally, you think, or well, duh — whichever your
personality dictates. But expressing true gratitude
involves more than saying “thank you.” It involves
articulating what you’re thankful for and why, which
means you have to figure that out.
This is not always easy. Perhaps you find disap-
pointing the dollar amount of the check you have
received. Perhaps the article of clothing you have
unwrapped matches another, unworn article of
clothing from a matching aunt. Perhaps you have
been given the last hard-sided briefcase that a
member of Gen Z will ever be expected to carry.
Perhaps you never could stand the pushy cheerlead-
ing of “Oh, the Places You’ll Go!” and now you have
three copies. Oh, the doggerel you’ll donate!
Well, my young friend, this is your moment. This iswhen you muster your inner grown-up and stare
hard enough at the fancy pen in its fancy case to see
the effort another human being has made on your
behalf. It’s true you’re basically a texter and you’ll
never write a check in your life, but the pen is
pleasingly heavy, and its quiet elegance reminds you
a little of your grandmother and the gold bracelet she
always wears. Some of your friends don’t even have
grandmothers, or they have an ungenerous variety,
and yours has always been sweet to you, whatever
issues she might have had with your mom.
You get the general idea. The particulars, I’m sorry
to say, are up to you. One tip: Don’t start with “Thank
you for the _______.” It’s not wrong, but it will plop
you right into the plodding rhythm of the rote note.
Start with “Guess what I just opened!” Start with
“You always come through for me.” Start with “I
know just what I’m going to do with your hard-
earned cash.” Start with “I hope you’ve recovered
from the covid you caught at commencement.” Start
literally anywhere else, and you’ll find it’s easier to
get where you’re going.
Which is a place of gratitude. A gift says, “I care for
you,” and a thank-you note says, “I am grateful for
that care.” It’s not just an expression of gratitude; it’s
a practice of gratitude, a way for you to stop and
acknowledge your good fortune. Feel it and strive to
make someone else feel that you do. Then you’ll have
made a real thank-you note and a truly significant
piece of paper.
Whoever receives it might even want to get it
framed.KATE COHENDear grads: This is how to writea real thank-you noteELLEN WEINSTEIN FOR THE WASHINGTON POSTafter Tuesday’s massacre, “The idea that an 18-year-old
kid can walk into a gun store and buy two assault
weapons is just wrong.” Indeed, even President Donald
Trump, in the aftermath of the Parkland shooting, called
for raising the minimum purchase age to 21. “Raise age
to 21 and end sale of Bump Stocks! Congress is in a mood
to finally do something on this issue — I hope!” he
tweeted after meeting with Parkland students.
Basic neuroscience supports the notion of limiting
the sale of lethal weapons to the young. Prefrontal
cortexes, responsible for impulse control, don’t finish
developing until the mid-20s. In the meantime, young
people are more susceptible to acting on anger andWhy do we let children buy guns? They can’t
purchase alcohol or cigarettes in this country
until age 21. But deadly weapons? Under
federal law, you need to wait until 21 to get a
handgun, although there are easy ways around that
restriction. If you’re 18 and want a semiautomatic
assault rifle? No problem, except for a handful of states
with stricter rules — and those are being challenged in
court as unconstitutional.
The back-to-back massacres of the past two weeks
underscore the insanity of this approach. In Uvalde, Tex.,
Salvador Ramos bought two assault rifles and
375 rounds of ammunition just after turning 18 earlier
this month. On Tuesday, he opened fire at Robb Elemen-
tary School, killing 19 students and two teachers.
Ten days earlier, Payton Gendron, also 18, allegedly
killed 10 people at a Buffalo supermarket with a legally
purchased Bushmaster semiautomatic.
Their young ages are sadly typical. In 1999, Eric
Harris, 18, and Dylan Klebold, 17, murdered 12 students
and a teacher at Columbine High School in Littleton,
Colo. In 2012, Adam Lanza, 20, killed his mother, then
headed to Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown,
Conn., where he fatally shot 20 children and six adults
before killing himself. Nineteen-year-old Nikolas Cruz
killed 17 people at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High
School in Parkland, Fla., in 2018. Dylann Roof was barely
21 when he murdered nine people during a Bible study
meeting at a Charleston, S.C., church.
Raising the minimum age for gun purchases wouldn’t
solve the problem — not in a country with more guns
than citizens. In the Sandy Hook shooting, Lanza used
guns his mother had bought legally. Harris and Klebold
persuaded an older friend to purchase some of the guns
they used at Columbine. But in Uvalde, Buffalo and
Parkland, the killings were carried out with guns that
were legally purchased by the shooters themselves.
What rational society allows that?
And although not all mass killers are young — the
average age is 33, according to the Rockefeller Institute
of Government — the tragic fact is that the perpetrators
of school shootings tend to be young, current or former
students. A Post database of all school shootings found
that the median age of the shooters is 16.
As President Biden put it in his remarks to the nationaggression. Crime statistics bear that out. According to
the Giffords Law Center, 18- to 20-year-olds account for 4
percent of the U.S. population but 17 percent of known
homicide offenders.
There ought to be a law — specifically a federal law.
The current system is riddled with loopholes. The rule
restricting handgun purchases to those 21 or older
applies only to federally licensed dealers. Private sales —
remember the gun show loophole? — aren’t covered.
The 18-year-old minimum age for purchases of long
guns also applies only to sales by licensed dealers,
meaning that buyers even younger can get such weap-
ons in the 17 states that do not set a minimum age for
buying long guns.
Senate Democrats — Cory Booker (N.J.), Robert
Menendez (N.J.) and Richard Blumenthal (Conn.) —
have proposed a broader federal licensing bill that
would impose a minimum age of 21 for all firearms
purchases. Don’t hold your breath.
In the aftermath of the Parkland shootings, Florida
adopted such a rule. But only five other states —
California, Hawaii, Illinois, Vermont and Washington —
require that buyers of some or all long guns, including
assault weapons, be at least 21.
And those laws, as my colleague Charles Lane recently
observed, are under assault in the federal courts. The
U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit heard oral
arguments in March in the National Rifle Association’s
challenge to the Florida law.
Just two weeks ago, a divided panel of the 9th Circuit
struck down California’s ban on the sale of semiautomat-
ic rifles to anyone under 21.
The opinion, by Trump appointee Ryan D. Nelson,
opened with a paean to Colonial-era youths. “America
would not exist without the heroism of the young adults
who fought and died in our revolutionary army,” he
wrote, joined by fellow Trump appointee Kenneth Lee.
“Today we reaffirm that our Constitution still protects
the right that enabled their sacrifice: the right of young
adults to keep and bear arms.”
Seriously? Tell that to the parents of the dead fourth-
graders in Uvalde. This isn’t about who could carry
muskets back then. It’s about who has access to deadly
weaponry today, guns more lethal than the authors of
the Second Amendment could ever have imagined.RUTH MARCUSWhy do we let children buy firearms?BRANDON BELL/GETTY IMAGES
A young attendee at the NRA’s annual convention in
Houston examines a rifle on display Friday.