From 2022 to 2024, the number of times Chicago police officers pointed a gun at an individual increased from 2,925 to 4,209 — a jump of nearly 44%. Supt. Larry Snelling recently acknowledged the increase in gun-pointing and indicated that he is working to address the issue.
Pointing a gun at someone causes serious harm, even when the officer does not fire. When a police officer points a gun at a community member, research shows that the interaction leads to increased emotional distress, a desire to avoid future police interactions and reductions in overall feelings of safety. This is trauma — trauma induced by the very institution that is entrusted to preserve a community’s sense of safety.
Given these costs, the Chicago Police Department’s current policy on gun-pointing is far too vague and permissive. It states that a gun may be pointed at a person when an officer believes it is “objectively reasonable” to do so. CPD data for 2024 reveals that in nearly two-thirds of gun pointing incidents, officers are aiming a gun at an individual who is not armed. Beyond the raw numbers, the media has repeatedly reported on incidents where Chicago police officers pointed guns at children and handcuffed, subdued or otherwise compliant adults. Aren’t there better, less dangerous ways to diffuse most of these situations?
If the CPD is serious about reducing gun-pointing incidents, it should change its policy. Instead of the “objectively reasonable” standard, gun-pointing should only be permitted in cases when deadly force is authorized. If this change were adopted, officers would only be allowed to point a gun at someone when that person poses an immediate threat of serious bodily injury or death to another individual. This policy change is critical but not radical. Chicago’s Use of Force Community Working Group, of which I was a member, asked CPD to adopt this standard in 2022. The Consent Decree Coalition recommended this change in 2025. Twenty-seven large cities, including Philadelphia, Los Angeles and Dallas, have already adopted this policy. It is my sincere hope that Chicago becomes No. 28. I am heartened that Supt. Snelling has expressed a desire to address this issue, but the time to act is now.
Aaron Gottlieb, associate professor, Crown Family School of Social Work, Policy, and Practice, University of Chicago
Northwestern can’t move forward without confronting past
In light of Northwestern University’s recent decision to settle with the federal government for $75 million — a move seen by many alumni as an act of extortion — there’s a palpable sense of shock and disappointment. This reaction is particularly striking given the university’s ongoing efforts to enhance enrollment opportunities and improve the experiences of students, faculty and alumni.
As co-author of “Voices and Visions: The Evolution of the Black Experience at Northwestern University,” I have chronicled over 140 years of Black student enrollment at NU, shedding light on the stories of 50 prominent alumni and community members. Through this lens, I believe we can draw valuable lessons from this situation that reflect the historical dynamics at play.
- Institutional self-interest — Northwestern has consistently prioritized its own interests. Historically, it was never designed as a bastion for eradicating racism or promoting true diversity, equity and inclusion. The university acknowledges its past as a racist institution, as evidenced by the 1968 accords that ended the bursar’s office takeover. While NU’s actions may not always be overtly racist, it often perpetuates systemic inequities that reflect broader societal attitudes.
- Crisis-driven change — The needs and interests of Black community members at NU have rarely been addressed without conflict. Throughout its storied history, there has been no instance where the institution has successfully navigated these waters without a crisis. This current settlement, while disappointing, allows NU to move forward without excessive governmental interference, potentially preserving its substantial endowment and enabling continued progress in Black student enrollment.
- Importance of representation — The recent crisis highlighted a missed opportunity for inclusive leadership. The Jewish community has been presented with significant reforms aimed at enhancing their members’ experiences at NU, yet similar initiatives were not extended to the African American community and others. It is crucial for student, faculty and alumni leaders from diverse backgrounds to be involved in discussions that shape university policy. History teaches us that voicing concerns is essential for effecting change.
While the recent settlement may come as a disappointment, it should serve as a reminder of the historical patterns at play within Northwestern University. Engaging with our alma mater and holding it accountable is vital for steering it toward a more inclusive future. As we reflect on past disappointments, let us also recognize the potential for progress through active participation and advocacy.
Jeffrey Sterling, former president, Northwestern University Black Alumni Association
Driving the point home
Kudos to Neil Steinberg for his column on the “benefit of tolerance.” His interview with David Awschalom, a University of Chicago professor of molecular engineering and physics, invokes the correlation between past and current discoveries in similar fashion to the way authors like James Burke have done, discoveries that radically alter our understanding of ourselves and the world around us. But Steinberg then takes us beyond the underlying question of “are we what we know?” He punctuates his closing by describing how creativity and scientific genius comes from all over the globe, and that the war on immigrants is not only immoral, it is so very counterproductive.
Howard Mogil, Lake View
Christkindlmarket crowd control
Amazing, isn’t it? Some city leaders are hesitant to impose curfews on youth who come downtown and wreak uncontrolled havoc. Yet the same city has no qualms about instituting crowd control measures at a peaceful Christkindlmarket, which brings people and money to the city. Really makes a person wonder.
Joseph M. Cichocki, Oak Forest