Police training inadequate

[wickedsolo]

I think they need really tight psych evals before being hired. Screen them for racism or that power hungry shit a few of them have as well.

And consistent, periodic evaluation of police officers.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Vlad the lad]

This is today’s America that the dem party wants. Don’t blame the criminals. It’s always some one else’s fault.

So if you are black and from the inner city. Voting dem all your life. Living in poverty. Raised without fathers. Committing crimes as a child. Turning violent. Hating police and when you finally get caught breaking the law, you fight back, or run, or just disrespect authority. When the consequences of your actions finally come to life, you blame the police for noticing that you broke the law.

Sure, we need more dem policies to blame others.

[bacchys]

There aren’t enough cops, especially in most major cities, they aren't adequately trained, and institutional corruption means their agencies protect cops who abuse their authority.

Cost-cutting measures and relying on technology has shifted a lot of policing to task forces, like Baltimore's Gun Trace Task Force, that have no or only negative contacts with the communities they're supposed to serve.

They're also overused, put into situations, such as welfare checks on the elderly and mentally ill, for which they aren’t prepared to handle in any manner other than as a cop with a suspect. The case of Kenneth Chamberlain Sr. is illustrative. Chamberlain was a 68 year old retired Marine with a heart condition. He wore a LifeAlert pendant. One night he inadvertently triggered it, and two officers were sent to perform a welfare check
When he refused to let them in- which he had every legal right to do- they busted into his apartment and killed him. Their defense is he was armed with a knife in his own home.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shoo...20front%20door.

We need major reforms. One of them needs to be a serious, scientific study of how many police we need to have real community policing. If Chamberlain had a "neighborhood cop" who knew him because he was in the neighborhood every day, his death probably wouldn't have happened. If the response had been by trained social workers, it probably wouldn't have happened. If the officers involved understood he had the legal right to refuse them entry, it wouldn't have happened.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

[bacchys]

Cops aren’t social workers.

If you’re out in the street losing your shit with a weapon and threatening people, there is a high likelihood you will end up in a ziplock.

But to the OP’s overall point, police definitely need better training and more consistently. You don’t achieve that by defunding police departments though. You achieve that by implementing strict standards, transparent budget control, and holding leadership accountable.

None of those things have been happening in most major cities. Wonder why.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Institutional corruption. It's also not limited to major cities.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

[bacchys]

We could bring Ray Lewis out of mothballs to do some training. Think Terry Tate office linebacker type tactics for subduing perps.

NYPD officer James Frascatore did that in New York. He attacked the wrong man. His victim was former tennis pro James Blake.

The media focused on the fact his victim wasn't the suspect he thought he was assaulting, and completely ignored that his actions wouldn't have been justified against the actual suspect, who was wanted for writing fraudulent checks.

Frascatore is an example of institutional corruption in policing. He was given a tap on the wrist for violently assaulting Blake. He was hammered for violating NYPD rules that have nothing to do with his interactions with the public.

https://www.nydailynews.com/new-york...316-story.html

If you're a cop, you learn you can brutalize people and shit on the Constitution, but don't show up late for roll call.



Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

[bacchys]

That would be awesome...

I haven't heard a whole bunch of ambiguous words periodically punctuated by "at the end of the day" in a long time.

He could have both sides scratching their heads but also smiling...

I laughed when Flacco said he never knew what Ray was saying.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

[owknows]

I laughed when Flacco said he never knew what Ray was saying.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

I did too.. gotta love Ray... but, damn.

[wickedsolo]

NYPD officer James Frascatore did that in New York. He attacked the wrong man. His victim was former tennis pro James Blake.

The media focused on the fact his victim wasn't the suspect he thought he was assaulting, and completely ignored that his actions wouldn't have been justified against the actual suspect, who was wanted for writing fraudulent checks.

Frascatore is an example of institutional corruption in policing. He was given a tap on the wrist for violently assaulting Blake. He was hammered for violating NYPD rules that have nothing to do with his interactions with the public.

https://www.nydailynews.com/new-york...316-story.html

If you're a cop, you learn you can brutalize people and shit on the Constitution, but don't show up late for roll call.



Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

I totally agree with you on things like these. I've said it in other threads, but not everyone should be a cop and police departments need to be held to higher standards because they're in positions of power and are paid public servants.

Bad cops get to stay bad cops for far too long.

Honestly, if I were running a police department, I would have a pretty strict zero tolerance policy on most things. But I would also support police officers to a much higher degree than what they are currently.

[owknows]

NYPD officer James Frascatore did that in New York. He attacked the wrong man. His victim was former tennis pro James Blake.

The media focused on the fact his victim wasn't the suspect he thought he was assaulting, and completely ignored that his actions wouldn't have been justified against the actual suspect, who was wanted for writing fraudulent checks.

Frascatore is an example of institutional corruption in policing. He was given a tap on the wrist for violently assaulting Blake. He was hammered for violating NYPD rules that have nothing to do with his interactions with the public.

https://www.nydailynews.com/new-york...316-story.html

If you're a cop, you learn you can brutalize people and shit on the Constitution, but don't show up late for roll call.



Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

I would agree that there is a fundamental problem with "cop culture" that is given to overdisplay of machismo and contempt.

I think it is reinforced by media images of the "tough cop".

And that while it may not represent most cops, it is endemic enough that it's a problem.

And as pertains to the current situation, I think any overzealous police action is attributed to racism if the victim is black. Whether race played any part in the motivation or not.

The result is a wedge driven between people who might otherwise cooperate to solve the issue. Us vs Them. The most radical of elements are the most vocal. The most distal pole of the BLM movement suggests that the problem is inherent in white people, and that they are all oppressive toward the black community whether they realize it or not. And most white people know themselves well enough to realize that this isn't true. Likewise, the most distal poles of the right suggest that if you are subjected to police violence, that it is because you are a scummy person, and you must have deserved it. And that Black People (committing most of the crime) have no basis for complaint.

And reality is somewhere in the middle. There is a problem. The militarization and aggressive machismo of police creates abuse. And it is far too widely tolerated. But it is not an exclusively black problem.

It is however being cast as an exclusively black problem for reasons of advancing an agenda. And the tactic of driving a wedge between segments of the population is intentional. The intent appears to be to set as many segments of society against one another as possible. By whispering in their ears that they are all victims.. That the only way to see any situation is through the lens of class struggle. Oppressor vs. Victim.

Anyone who does not conform to the accusation and bend to this orthodoxy is an oppressor. And anyone without sufficient victim status is subject to being pushed into the oppressor class in the court of public opinion. So a constant struggle arises for laying claim to victimhood. A need so great in the social media world, that it creates Jussie Smolletts out of thin air.

I believe the ultimate goal of those who are the architects of this social engineering, is to make it impossible to maintain any sense of social cohesion... any cooperation... any ties that bond us as a nation. And they have thusfar been quite effective. If they are ultimately successful, they will set us so thoroughly at each other throats that even the most rational actors will become partisan.

And the only thing that can stop it is honest conversation between intelligent people.

But that is becoming increasingly difficult.

[darb72]

I would agree that there is a fundamental problem with "cop culture" that is given to overdisplay of machismo and contempt.

I think it is reinforced by media images of the "tough cop".

And that while it may not represent most cops, it is endemic enough that it's a problem.

And as pertains to the current situation, I think any overzealous police action is attributed to racism if the victim is black. Whether race played any part in the motivation or not.

The result is a wedge driven between people who might otherwise cooperate to solve the issue. Us vs Them. The most radical of elements are the most vocal. The most distal pole of the BLM movement suggests that the problem is inherent in white people, and that they are all oppressive toward the black community whether they realize it or not. And most white people know themselves well enough to realize that this isn't true. Likewise, the most distal poles of the right suggest that if you are subjected to police violence, that it is because you are a scummy person, and you must have deserved it. And that Black People (committing most of the crime) have no basis for complaint.

And reality is somewhere in the middle. There is a problem. The militarization and aggressive machismo of police creates abuse. And it is far too widely tolerated. But it is not an exclusively black problem.

It is however being cast as an exclusively black problem for reasons of advancing an agenda. And the tactic of driving a wedge between segments of the population is intentional. The intent appears to be to set as many segments of society against one another as possible. By whispering in their ears that they are all victims.. That the only way to see any situation is through the lens of class struggle. Oppressor vs. Victim.

Anyone who does not conform to the accusation and bend to this orthodoxy is an oppressor. And anyone without sufficient victim status is subject to being pushed into the oppressor class in the court of public opinion. So a constant struggle arises for laying claim to victimhood. A need so great in the social media world, that it creates Jussie Smolletts out of thin air.

I believe the ultimate goal of those who are the architects of this social engineering, is to make it impossible to maintain any sense of social cohesion... any cooperation... any ties that bond us as a nation. And they have thusfar been quite effective. If they are ultimately successful, they will set us so thoroughly at each other throats that even the most rational actors will become partisan.

And the only thing that can stop it is honest conversation between intelligent people.

But that is becoming increasingly difficult.

Precisely.

[bacchys]

I don't think it's primarily a race problem, but we still have the legacy of white supremacy in our institutions and race is a factor in police misconduct issues. The numbers wouldn't be what they are if it weren't. That's a very different thing than saying cops- especially any individual cop- is a racist.

Further, the problem isn't cops. Cops are people. They're good, bad, and some of both in different degrees. Bad cops can do good things and good cops can do bad things. Just like everyone else. Some people who sell drugs or commit murder are kind to children and puppies. They're good people in some aspects of their lives and not good in others. Stress impacts how people act, too. I've watched good Soldiers turn into shitbags over getting bad news from home. They weren't always shitbags and somehow hiding it.

The problem is the institutions. Just like the Catholic Church covered up pedophile priests to protect the institution, police agencies cover for cops who commit some kinds of misconduct. Others are condoned by prosecutors and judges. The public also shrugs at cops who commit certain kinds of misconduct, especially unlawfully detaining and searching people. In many cases I don't even think those involved or observing it recognize it as wrong. The incentives bend towards covering it up, not correcting it or getting rid of it.

One example of this not-seeing-it-as-wrong is Elijah McClain. He's a young man killed by Aurora, CO police. He had a health condition and often wore a ski mask even in summer. Someone called the police because he looked "suspicious" and two officers were dispatched to investigate. They saw him walking down a sidewalk and initiated a stop. He was listening to music with ear buds and didn't respond to their calls to stop, so they physically took him down. He eventually died from their efforts to restrain him. A prosecutor decided all of their actions were justified, but he's wrong. They didn't have sufficient information to have reasonable suspicion. Being suspicious isn't a criminal act. Acting strangely isn't a criminal act. In Terry v. Ohio the Supreme Court said police may briefly detain someone for investigative purposes if they have reasonable suspicion, defined by the Terry Court as articulable facts which would lead a reasonable person to believe crime is afoot. The courts have repeatedly said the totality of the circumstances apply, and they've suppressed evidence in cases where the "suspicious" activity wasn't bolstered by other articulable facts which suggested criminal activity. Had McClain been walking into a convenience store wearing a ski mask, or following someone, the totality of the circumstances might well have provided reasonable suspicion. Walking by himself down a sidewalk, however, doesn't. So the initial stop was unlawful. The use of force to affect the unlawful stop was therefore unlawful. Very often in these situations even when the courts decide the police conduct was unlawful, however, they excuse it. They basically say the mistake of law or fact was "reasonable" and we can't expect cops to perfectly know everything. This might well be reasonable both as a matter of law and policy, but it shouldn't be the end of the process. It usually is. When police make mistakes there need to be corrections. There needs to be discipline. Especially when those mistakes cost someone his life.

I don't much care if some people think it's all about race. If we get good reforms out of it, it'll correct the problem even if they're wrong about what the problem actually is.

[owknows]

I don't think it's primarily a race problem, but we still have the legacy of white supremacy in our institutions and race is a factor in police misconduct issues. The numbers wouldn't be what they are if it weren't. That's a very different thing than saying cops- especially any individual cop- is a racist.

Further, the problem isn't cops. Cops are people. They're good, bad, and some of both in different degrees. Bad cops can do good things and good cops can do bad things. Just like everyone else. Some people who sell drugs or commit murder are kind to children and puppies. They're good people in some aspects of their lives and not good in others. Stress impacts how people act, too. I've watched good Soldiers turn into shitbags over getting bad news from home. They weren't always shitbags and somehow hiding it.

The problem is the institutions. Just like the Catholic Church covered up pedophile priests to protect the institution, police agencies cover for cops who commit some kinds of misconduct. Others are condoned by prosecutors and judges. The public also shrugs at cops who commit certain kinds of misconduct, especially unlawfully detaining and searching people. In many cases I don't even think those involved or observing it recognize it as wrong. The incentives bend towards covering it up, not correcting it or getting rid of it.

One example of this not-seeing-it-as-wrong is Elijah McClain. He's a young man killed by Aurora, CO police. He had a health condition and often wore a ski mask even in summer. Someone called the police because he looked "suspicious" and two officers were dispatched to investigate. They saw him walking down a sidewalk and initiated a stop. He was listening to music with ear buds and didn't respond to their calls to stop, so they physically took him down. He eventually died from their efforts to restrain him. A prosecutor decided all of their actions were justified, but he's wrong. They didn't have sufficient information to have reasonable suspicion. Being suspicious isn't a criminal act. Acting strangely isn't a criminal act. In Terry v. Ohio the Supreme Court said police may briefly detain someone for investigative purposes if they have reasonable suspicion, defined by the Terry Court as articulable facts which would lead a reasonable person to believe crime is afoot. The courts have repeatedly said the totality of the circumstances apply, and they've suppressed evidence in cases where the "suspicious" activity wasn't bolstered by other articulable facts which suggested criminal activity. Had McClain been walking into a convenience store wearing a ski mask, or following someone, the totality of the circumstances might well have provided reasonable suspicion. Walking by himself down a sidewalk, however, doesn't. So the initial stop was unlawful. The use of force to affect the unlawful stop was therefore unlawful. Very often in these situations even when the courts decide the police conduct was unlawful, however, they excuse it. They basically say the mistake of law or fact was "reasonable" and we can't expect cops to perfectly know everything. This might well be reasonable both as a matter of law and policy, but it shouldn't be the end of the process. It usually is. When police make mistakes there need to be corrections. There needs to be discipline. Especially when those mistakes cost someone his life.

I don't much care if some people think it's all about race. If we get good reforms out of it, it'll correct the problem even if they're wrong about what the problem actually is.

I can accept the thrust of what you said and find a lot of common ground in it.

The last paragraphs wanders a bit relative to my view of things. And it highlights what I think you left unaddressed from my post to you. Whether you left it unaddressed out of a desire to continue a civil dialogue (which btw I appreciate) or whether you just thought it silly, I'd really like to know what you think.

Do you believe that the people at the top of ANTIFA and BLM are motivated fundamentally by a desire to remedy the core issue of systemic injustice against the black community? Or would you concede (based on their allied participation and their shared stated goals) that their ultimate agenda is perhaps something different?

Again, I'm not talking about the majority of people out there raising their voices because they think it is the right thing to do... I'm talking about the leadership... of ANTIFA... and of BLM... and of perhaps even the people funding them.

Because as you've pointed out... it isn't necessary or helpful to intentionally drive wedges between gay and straight, rich and poor, black and white, religious and secular.. But this seems to be the primary thrust of both of these groups. At least to me. If they were interested in actually resolving the stated problems, I would think their actions would be different. More like the conversation we are having here... where people (even people who could and have been quite hostile to one another) are attempting to reach a common understanding.

I ask this, because I think it will be impossible to ever achieve a common understanding... to unify as a nation.. to bring about peace and goodness.. if everything we do is viewed and expressed in terms of victim and oppressor. And that is my resistance to BLM and ANTIFA.

I am not a racist. I could not care less about the color a man's skin. If he lives his life in peace and good will, I would happily call him friend and brother. I make an honest attempt to walk the walk. I could tell you things that would verify this for you, but this is the internet. Talk is cheap.

The problem I have is being called a racist when I am not. Or being told that my racism is a natural consequence of my birth... a privilege. An original sin if you will. When I was born into circumstances harder than most. And I have earned my way. The problem I have is being told that I must make restitution... I must atone.. I must provide remedy... for sins I did not commit. And if I dare object... it is further evidence of my sin.

I have an equal problem being called a victimizer of men because I have achieved. Being cast as a villain when all of my dealing in life have been honest, above board, and forthright. I object to being told that any success in life is only accomplished by oppressing another... again, the class division instead of race. Everything viewed and expressed only in terms of victim and oppressor.

That way lies ruin... and I'm curious whether you can see it.