Increase funding, make police work more financially attractive to prospective applicants, allow for more training, a higher rotation through problem areas, more monitoring and involvement by supervisors and other support personnel.
Increase funding, make police work more financially attractive to prospective applicants, allow for more training, a higher rotation through problem areas, more monitoring and involvement by supervisors and other support personnel.
I-5 wrote:They've been doing that for years, and the problem has gotten worse.
Hawktawk wrote:I was talking with a retired Kennewick precinct captain about all this and he said"cops are just a cross section of the public" Some are great, some are good ,some are mediocre, some are bad and some are dirty "I fired lots of them over the years".
I-5 wrote:What would we think of airline pilots were a cross section of society vs 'cream of the crop'? Do we really want to know? I draw that analogy because it's something I heard Chris Rock talk about...with both cops and commercial pilots, our lives literally depend on their skill and judgement. The CEO of American Airlines can't say that most of their pilots are good...they ALL have to be good. Rock also said police need to be paid more. That's fair.
I do think most cops are good, but the problem is that even one bad or dirty cop with a gun is a potential monster, and the bigger problem is that when that bad cop does something wrong, the system is designed to protect him as I outlined above.
I-5 wrote:What would we think of airline pilots were a cross section of society vs 'cream of the crop'? Do we really want to know? I draw that analogy because it's something I heard Chris Rock talk about...with both cops and commercial pilots, our lives literally depend on their skill and judgement. The CEO of American Airlines can't say that most of their pilots are good...they ALL have to be good. Rock also said police need to be paid more. That's fair.
I do think most cops are good, but the problem is that even one bad or dirty cop with a gun is a potential monster, and the bigger problem is that when that bad cop does something wrong, the system is designed to protect him as I outlined above.
I-5 wrote:They've been doing that (increase funding for police) for years, and the problem has gotten worse.
RiverDog wrote:So specifically what has the SPD done wrong to where you can say that the problem has gotten worse? Has there been any unjustified officer-involved shootings where suspects were killed or seriously wounded? Relative to other similar PD's, has there been an unusually high number of complaints of excessive use of force? Have there been an unusually high number of racial profiling complaints or unjustified harassment? Are their hiring/promotional practices in need of revision? Do they not have enough minorities/women officers or promoted them into management positions?
It's not good enough to just point at a PD in Minneapolis, Atlanta, or Houston and say that the problem at SPD has gotten worse. These departments are paid for separately and should be judged on their own merits, not by events in other cities.
Aseahawkfan wrote:Money won't change that being a police officer in America is a terrible, no win job.
Aseahawkfan wrote:Let's be real. Police officer is a terrible job right now. Difficult, dangerous, and not worth the pay or headache.
NorthHawk wrote:Like you, I see the police officers in a no win situation.
We train them like military and emphasize force and control with a few hours spent on the softer aspects of policing
then send them out to be experts in marriage counseling, drug addiction, mental health, and other societal ills as well
as confronting robbers, thieves, murderers, and the other seamy sides of life. That's just too much of a burden of
responsibility for any one person. Since what we have isn't working, maybe taking some of that responsibility off of
law enforcement and putting it onto those trained in the social aspects, we can have better results. That's what the
so called defunding movement started out to be. There's enough proper crime to not substantially cut the police budget
but that will mean higher taxes to pay for the new experts on the social side.
So the choice would be paying higher taxes to have a more effective police force that concentrates on the actual job
of policing society and another group who "police" the social side and get people the help they need. It might lead to
a happier society who has more trust in the police and mitigate some of the suffering of those who aren't well.
RiverDog wrote:So what's your solution? Just give up?
The problem, as I understand it, is that there are rouge cops like Derrick Chauvin that are killing citizens during arrests by the unjustified use of lethal force. So the question has to be how do we ferret out the bad cops, help cops make better decisions as to when to use deadly force, how to mitigate situations where deadly force could result, etc.
Police are not hired to solve society's problems. Their primary duty is to protect the innocent, law abiding citizen from society's problems. They are a buffer.
Plus society has Demonized the occupation and created a huge morale problem. If only a fool would want to work at a difficult, dangerous job not worth the pay, guess what kind of applicants are going to apply.
Police aren't the problem, nor are they the solution to the problem. But if we misidentify the problem as being related to the police and try to solve it by slashing their budget and making the work even more unattractive, the problem will only get worse. Supporting the police, helping departments ferret out the bad cops, keeping the good cops in the fold, making them better and more efficient at their work won't solve the problem, but it can help from letting the problem cause collateral damage and making things worse.
NorthHawk wrote:Like you, I see the police officers in a no win situation.
We train them like military and emphasize force and control with a few hours spent on the softer aspects of policing
then send them out to be experts in marriage counseling, drug addiction, mental health, and other societal ills as well
as confronting robbers, thieves, murderers, and the other seamy sides of life. That's just too much of a burden of
responsibility for any one person. Since what we have isn't working, maybe taking some of that responsibility off of
law enforcement and putting it onto those trained in the social aspects, we can have better results. That's what the
so called defunding movement started out to be. There's enough proper crime to not substantially cut the police budget
but that will mean higher taxes to pay for the new experts on the social side.
So the choice would be paying higher taxes to have a more effective police force that concentrates on the actual job
of policing society and another group who "police" the social side and get people the help they need. It might lead to
a happier society who has more trust in the police and mitigate some of the suffering of those who aren't well.
RiverDog wrote:Here's some more details on the Seattle city council police department budget cuts, which were vetoed by the mayor but could be overridden by a super majority vote of the council:
Seattle Mayor Jenny Durkan on Friday vetoed a City Council budget plan to slash funding to the police department and eliminate the city's homeless outreach team, among other programs.
The nine-member council approved the rebalanced budget that would have reduced police funding by 14% for the remainder of 2020. The move also would have resulted in the loss of 100 police officers through layoffs and attrition.
The cuts would have totaled around $23 million of the remaining $127 million in the budget, KOMO News reported.
One of the programs on the chopping block was the city's Navigation Team, which consisted of police officers and homeless outreach workers.
Other units -- including the Harbor Patrol, SWAT, Public Affairs and Horse Unit -- also were slated to be dismantled.
https://www.foxnews.com/us/durkan-seattle-cops
Nice to know that they're not expecting an active shooter and can wait an additional 30 minutes or so for some other agency to provide a SWAT team if someone decides to start picking off people from one of the high rises.
Aseahawkfan wrote:I despise the Seattle City Council. That is what you call a group of looney Liberals. The kind conservatives have nightmares about who want to try to social engineer a society using Orwellian policies. They are terrible.
NorthHawk wrote:As usual, those on the extreme pull the trigger before the ducks are all in a row. To make any change like this successfully, the other support programs have to be in place prior to reducing the police side.
Tamir Rice: Random call to 911 by people saying someone was threatening people with a gun at the park. Why was there no visual confirmation of shots fired or danger conveyed to cops?
I-5 wrote:What's the actual law change here? Or is it a tactical process change? If not the cop, who would be the person(s) to do the visual confirmation on a kid with a toy gun before the cops get involved and take him out without asking questions? Let's get specific.
I do agree 5 cops don't need to show up for a guy selling illegal cigs.....that's the same thing that happened with George Floyd
I-5 wrote:What's the actual law change here? Or is it a tactical process change? If not the cop, who would be the person(s) to do the visual confirmation on a kid with a toy gun before the cops get involved and take him out without asking questions? Let's get specific.
I do agree 5 cops don't need to show up for a guy selling illegal cigs.....that's the same thing that happened with George Floyd
Aseahawkfan wrote:This would be a process change, though this entire case was a difficult situation with a lot of stupid. But the cop should have confirmed danger first and spoken with the kid. He went to his gun quick.
Not sure if you followed that case. This is the kind of stupid that happens when someone up the chain screws up, which is why better laws and tactical processes are necessary. Laws to make sure the cops know they will suffer legal consequences for going to guns too quickly and processes so they don't have to rely on their guns as quickly. I think even technology could help substantially. I think the police maybe need flying drones on their cars. Then they can send the drone in first to engage with the citizen to attempt to deescalate through the drone or at least put both at ease with no danger except to the drone. Law-enforcement is a good area for drone technology to act as a buffer.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Tamir_Rice
This situation has been left to fester for months and is completely out of control. Mobs are beating other citizens unconscious. The governor has national guard troops at her disposal. What is it going to take before she acts? What's the sense in having a national guard if not for situations like what we've been seeing in Portland? The state and city governments are completely paralyzed.
NorthHawk wrote:It seems that what happens in these type of situations is an unorganized and peaceful demonstration that lasts longer than a couple of days
tends to be usurped by organized groups that take it on a different direction. We saw the same thing with the Occupy Wall St. demonstrations
in that it was a grassroots movement started by Tea Party and ordinary citizens that was not at all organized and taken over by the left wing
groups. The impact of the original protests was then dismissed by the powers that be as being a bunch of lazy radicals and the cause of
the protest was lost. It was really about ordinary people protesting that capitalism wasn't working for us. Unfortunately I think the meaning
of these protests are being lost, too. We'll see how devoted they are if they are still there when we get 2 straight weeks of rain and cold.
c_hawkbob wrote:The instigators of the violence usually are not associated with the actual protesters and in fact are often, as in the attached story and video wherein the guy that got it started at the George Floyd protest was a member of a Kentucky prison/street gang known as the Aryan Cowboys. Clearly his intent was to instigate violence and destruction that the Right could claim to be the fault of the protesters.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/28/us/umbre ... index.html
But like I told North Hawk, it doesn't really make a whole lot of difference who is responsible for this continued mayhem. A rock through a store front window is a rock through a store front window. It should have been stopped months ago. If it had, then perhaps the situation in Portland and elsewhere around the country would not have been the magnet that it appears to have been for these right wing extremist groups.
people are not happy with the Democrat reaction to the violence at protests.
I-5 wrote:That's a fair comment. However, when it comes down to lockdowns, one big difference I between large gatherings that I see is that, depending on who is organizing them, you'll either see everyone wearing masks, or hardly anyone wearing masks, and that makes a big difference. Who doesn't hate violence? I hate and it is always senseless when people engage in that, but for the rest of the people who are doing the right thing, what choice do they have but to keep going despite what some people do to give the movement a black eye? What would you do if you feel you aren't being heard? What's the solution for peaceful protestors?
c_hawkbob wrote:It may not matter to the window, but it sure better matter to the people involved! If even a percentage of your "dark side of the BLM" is actually the Alt Right, credit needs to be given where credit is due. If I go to a peaceful protest and leave when most of the other protesters do, then see when I get back home all the rioting going on after dark, I don't want that blanket of blame being thrown over my shoulders along with the punks smashing and burning things.
RiverDog wrote: My point is what are you going to do about it? The Democratic mayor of Portland/Governor of Oregon have done absolutely NOTHING to stop the violence. Even the police have said that they are completely out-manned and out-gunned.
c_hawkbob wrote:Quelling the civil unrest in the Colonies didn't work either, the only thing that worked was a change in the basic dynamic that brought about the civil unrest. I'm not saying a revolutionary war is the only thing that will stop it, but it is going to take some substantial evidence of racist police being taken to task rather than covered up for by all the decent cops out there as well as the system itself. There needs to be some demonstrated accountability and not just another unarmed black man being shot while another white supremacist is allowed to carry his AR through the streets killing protesters as the police seemingly look the other way. We cannot continue on with two completely separate sets of rules for what are supposed to equal members of society. Further violence heaped upon them simply won't make the problem go away.
RiverDog wrote:Like I said, I have no doubt that the Alt Right is responsible for much, if not most, of the violence that started out as peaceful BLM demonstrations. That's part of the 'dark side' of the BLM movement, that it's attracting counter protesters. It's what happens when protests are allowed to continue for week after week and month after month. Now you have groups and individuals from all over the country and from different political creeds participating in the free-for-all orgy.
But that's not really my point. My point is what are you going to do about it? The Democratic mayor of Portland/Governor of Oregon have done absolutely NOTHING to stop the violence. Even the police have said that they are completely out-manned and out-gunned.
c_hawkbob wrote:Quelling the civil unrest in the Colonies didn't work either, the only thing that worked was a change in the basic dynamic that brought about the civil unrest. I'm not saying a revolutionary war is the only thing that will stop it, but it is going to take some substantial evidence of racist police being taken to task rather than covered up for by all the decent cops out there as well as the system itself. There needs to be some demonstrated accountability and not just another unarmed black man being shot while another white supremacist is allowed to carry his AR through the streets killing protesters as the police seemingly look the other way. We cannot continue on with two completely separate sets of rules for what are supposed to equal members of society. Further violence heaped upon them simply won't make the problem go away.
RiverDog wrote:Glad you ruled out a revolutionary war, but what's your solution? Just let the riots continue until they get tired or the weather turns cold?
I'm not sure if 'demonstrated accountability' is the answer or not. Derrick Chauvin has been arrested and charged with murder, but that hasn't stopped any of the protests. I get the sense I get is that even life in prison won't satisfy the movement, and even if it did, it will only last a few months until the next questionable use of force by a policeman somewhere in the country, which with 700,000 cops, is going to happen no matter what kind of policies are adapted.
And as far as the white supremist carrying AR's in the streets killing protesters, you have your Democratic pols to thank for that. They're the ones that are turning a blind eye, not the police. The police would love to engage that scum, but they are being denied the tools and manpower in which to do it.
c_hawkbob wrote:So you arrest a single cop in a single instance and because that didn't make everyone just shut up and let you get on with your day you're not sure demonstrated accountability is the answer? I guess in your world there is no answer.
c_hawkbob wrote:Put accountability laws in place, make police academy training as long and arduous as military academy's, make policemen go through stages wherein they don't actually carry a gun until they have been on the force for a certain amount of time and gone through certain levels of training. Make the road to having the lives of the public in your hands long and difficult enough to deter some of these power tripping wackos that join the force just so they can take their frustrations out on people without going to prison. DO MORE THAN WHAT IS BEING DONE NOW. I'm not going to pretend to have all the answers, but I'm sure not going to pretend there are none.
c_hawkbob wrote:There's something wrong with anyone that can look at this situation and only be mad at the protesters, and actually think that the only behavioral change warranted is for everyone to just stop raising a ruckus and accept it as the way things are.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests