Why American policing is off the rails and is the problem.

sk018

Cyclist said:

kellercl said:

Cyclist said:

A black driver is about 31 percent more likely to be pulled over than a white driver, or about 23 percent more likely than a Hispanic driver. "Driving while black" is, indeed, a measurable phenomenon.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/09/09/you-really-can-get-pulled-over-for-driving-while-black-federal-statistics-show/?utm_term=.a61dc9791931

Pulled over and pulled over without cause are two grossly different things.  Look up crime rates, or are we going to ignore statistics?  

If a particular demographic is committing less crime, it stands to reason they get investigated less often.  I'm guessing in particular males 16 to 34 are pulled over the most.... go figure, that demographic commits the most crime.

They don't commit 31% more crime...

They commit 50% of all violent crime and make up 13 percent of the population.

Tarponator

Being overwhelmingly poor and over-prosecuted explains those statistics perfectly, SK.

Not to mention, it's not commission of violent crime your statistic is meausiring, but rather prosecution, and quite a different thing.

So, your point is?

cpr

Don't resist, in every video the cops are always yelled stop resisting.
Don't give the cops lip. Smile and be polite. The beach ho in NJ refused to pore her booze out and mouthed off. She then resisted and got  a well deserved punch.

Tarponator

Because mouthing off deserves assault, after all.

cpr

Tarponator said:

Being overwhelmingly poor and over-prosecuted explains those statistics perfectly, SK.

Not to mention, it's not commission of violent crime your statistic is meausiring, but rather prosecution, and quite a different thing.

So, your point is?

https://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-09-29/race-and-homicide-in-america-by-the-numbers

kellercl

cpr said:

Tarponator said:

Being overwhelmingly poor and over-prosecuted explains those statistics perfectly, SK.

Not to mention, it's not commission of violent crime your statistic is meausiring, but rather prosecution, and quite a different thing.

So, your point is?

https://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-09-29/race-and-homicide-in-america-by-the-numbers

While not PC, I don't get how people can deny flat out statistical fact.  Crime in this country is high in specific pockets.

kellercl

Tarponator said:

Because mouthing off deserves assault, after all.

Perhaps not, however it isn't particular helpful.  Being smart enough to do one's self a favor shouldn't be a challenge.    

Heatwave

Cyclist said:

mustang190 said:

Two things. 
1. Don’t violate the law. 
2. Follow the directions/orders given to you by a cop. 

What if the law wasn't violated and the cop is the problem. They kill people and get away with it. Read the article.

There’s no training on how to de-escalate tense scenarios in which no crime has been committed, even though the majority of police calls fall into that category. 

To some, those leading the Radical Right, it is ok for an officer to come out to you out of the blue and demand anything that isn't illegal. Like, talk to you like a child, tell you to "get in line" or "Stop right there, I need to see your ID" It could be for various reason, some may be good enough, others not. But, that is part of the POLICE state they want.
None of this is going to end good. None of it.
Curious how long before we get a 60 minutes special on the children immigrants being separated from their parents. It is stupid for them to come over the boarder, I do not think they should, we should have stopped it years ago when the republicans were clamoring for farm workers. Of course, it was wrong then... BUt whatever is happening to those kids, it isn't good...

cadman

Cyclist said:

There’s no training on how to de-escalate tense scenarios in which no crime has been committed, even though the majority of police calls fall into that category.

Let us pretend for a minute, 

Scenario one:

You are a police officer, You got a call that a violent crime has happened. You encounter a person who you think might be the suspect, Unknown to you, he is not the person you seek, 

You approach the individual who is confrontational and belligerent. He just had a fight with his wife and is in a really bad mood, but again, you do not know this. 

You ask the person to halt and ask to see his I.D. He tells you to f off, you are just harassing him for no reason. He takes a few steps in your direction, Your backup has just arrived behind you and about to get out of his car. The person, who you believe fits the description of a violent criminal, is coming at you, yelling and screaming and making threats. 

What do you do to de-escalate this situation? 

Scenario two:

Just as above, except the guy is a violent criminal who is trying  to get to you and your gun to kill you and the other cops,

How do you de-escalate this situation?


How do you determine which is which?

Before you answer any of those questions, which I doubt you do, let me say for a fact, if i was a police officer, I would not want you for a partner. I would like to end my day alive. 

mustang190

tankard said:

Cyclist said:

kellercl said:

Are we going to mandate cops get a Ph.D. in psychiatry?  I'm with mustang, avoid breaking the law and follow orders.  I have yet to see a single cop shooting when the person of interest is being polite and complying.  It all starts with attitude and ignoring commands.  Which is a reflection of how much our values have changed.  Growing up if I had disrespected a cop and my parents caught wind, they would have beaten my ***.  But today people are taught to ignore the law and those who represent it.... and then complain when it ends badly.  

The point is, if you read the article you would pick this up, is that police are not supposed to act like the military and treat everyone like a terrorist. Police mistakes lead to MANY unnecessary deaths and the law backs them up because the law is a bad law.

I  agree with Cyclist 100% here. They have gotten way too militarized, and most of them weren't in the military, so they take it overboard.

We are talking about two different animals. 
I too am against the militarization of the police.
and have been for years. 
 But we are talking about what happens when a cop stops you. 

cadman

I think you need a SWAT team or similar that is outfitted militarily. There are some situations that do call for a more military type approach. I do think, in some cases, the use of military type equipment by police agencies has gone overboard and needs to be evaluated. 

But when the bad guys run around in body armor and automatic weapons, you better hope your police has guys with weapons who can deal with them. 

Mango Man

Tarponator said:

Being overwhelmingly poor and over-prosecuted explains those statistics perfectly, SK.

That explains why they commit crimes? Being poor, I could understand. But overly prosecuted?  

Tarponator

They go hand in hand in America.

Tarponator

cpr said:

Tarponator said:

Being overwhelmingly poor and over-prosecuted explains those statistics perfectly, SK.

Not to mention, it's not commission of violent crime your statistic is meausiring, but rather prosecution, and quite a different thing.

So, your point is?

https://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-09-29/race-and-homicide-in-america-by-the-numbers

https://vittana.org/26-poverty-and-crime-statistics

Urban poverty increased the risks of violence and crime for US households, but did not change the racial risk factors. Whites are the most at risk in an urban poverty household to experience crime, at a rate of 5.64%. Blacks/African-Americans had the second highest level of risk for experiencing crime in urban poverty at 5.13%.

Again, your point is?

Westwall01

Cyclist said:

They are not being trained correctly...and yes, it is a difficult job.

With your vast knowledge on this subject what would you consider proper training? Please be very specific

Jack Hexter

Cyclist  Please answer cad's questions in post 40 of this thread, then go on to answer Westwall01's question above as it relates to your answer to Cadman's scenarios

Tarponator

I'm more interested in how you would answer those questions, Jack or Westwall, rather than Cyclist's take.

What do you two think is proper training?  How would you respon to Cad's questions?

Do you think de-escalation is properly implemented or even valid?

kellercl

Tarponator said:

I'm more interested in how you would answer those questions, Jack or Westwall, rather than Cyclist's take.

What do you two think is proper training?  How would you respon to Cad's questions?

Do you think de-escalation is properly implemented or even valid?

I think de-escalation isn't the primary goal.  The primary goal should be protection of bystanders followed by protection of the officer.  If a person is being belligerent and a cops takes them down, I simply don't have an issue.  This new age hippy BS that people should be allowed to treat cops as poorly as they want too, and the cops should react as a personal therapist....  just no.  

Florida Bullfrog

Tarponator said:

cpr said:

Tarponator said:

Being overwhelmingly poor and over-prosecuted explains those statistics perfectly, SK.

Not to mention, it's not commission of violent crime your statistic is meausiring, but rather prosecution, and quite a different thing.

So, your point is?

https://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-09-29/race-and-homicide-in-america-by-the-numbers

https://vittana.org/26-poverty-and-crime-statistics

Urban poverty increased the risks of violence and crime for US households, but did not change the racial risk factors. Whites are the most at risk in an urban poverty household to experience crime, at a rate of 5.64%. Blacks/African-Americans had the second highest level of risk for experiencing crime in urban poverty at 5.13%.

Again, your point is?

In the article you’re quoting, “experiencing” violent crime means being the victims, not the perpetrators. Whites are slightly more likely to be victimized than blacks when living in poverty. That’s all your quoted statistic is saying. 

Carry on. 

surfman

Sometimes it seems that cops are a little too fast on the trigger but, I am not a cop and have never walked a beat as one, these folks deal with the worst people America has to offer on a daily basis. I would love to see some of the critics walk a mile in their shoes, we just might see a different attitude. It is so easy to be an armchair cop.

Cyclist

cadman said:

Cyclist said:

There’s no training on how to de-escalate tense scenarios in which no crime has been committed, even though the majority of police calls fall into that category.

Let us pretend for a minute, 

Scenario one:

You are a police officer, You got a call that a violent crime has happened. You encounter a person who you think might be the suspect, Unknown to you, he is not the person you seek, 

You approach the individual who is confrontational and belligerent. He just had a fight with his wife and is in a really bad mood, but again, you do not know this. 

You ask the person to halt and ask to see his I.D. He tells you to f off, you are just harassing him for no reason. He takes a few steps in your direction, Your backup has just arrived behind you and about to get out of his car. The person, who you believe fits the description of a violent criminal, is coming at you, yelling and screaming and making threats. 

What do you do to de-escalate this situation? 

Scenario two:

Just as above, except the guy is a violent criminal who is trying  to get to you and your gun to kill you and the other cops,

How do you de-escalate this situation?


How do you determine which is which?

Before you answer any of those questions, which I doubt you do, let me say for a fact, if i was a police officer, I would not want you for a partner. I would like to end my day alive. 

That quote is from an Afghanistan soldier and CIA operative and now Savanna police officer. I think he probably knows more about this than you do...

Cyclist

Westwall01 said:

Cyclist said:

They are not being trained correctly...and yes, it is a difficult job.

With your vast knowledge on this subject what would you consider proper training? Please be very specific

Read the article....that's why I posted it...

Cyclist

Jack Hexter said:

Cyclist  Please answer cad's questions in post 40 of this thread, then go on to answer Westwall01's question above as it relates to your answer to Cadman's scenarios

Read the article...

Cyclist

kellercl said:

Tarponator said:

I'm more interested in how you would answer those questions, Jack or Westwall, rather than Cyclist's take.

What do you two think is proper training?  How would you respon to Cad's questions?

Do you think de-escalation is properly implemented or even valid?

I think de-escalation isn't the primary goal.  The primary goal should be protection of bystanders followed by protection of the officer.  If a person is being belligerent and a cops takes them down, I simply don't have an issue.  This new age hippy BS that people should be allowed to treat cops as poorly as they want too, and the cops should react as a personal therapist....  just no.  

An ignorant cop that is poorly trained and not aware of the situation IS THE ESCALATOR. Especially if he is confronting someone who is minding there business and when the cop automatically assumes the black guy is at fault.

Cyclist

I am assuming that not many read the article. That is what we are discussing. If you can't read the article then why are you here discussing the article?

I posted the opinion of a person who has policed everyone from bin laden to Savanna misfits. He has a good take on the situation and his experiences in Afghanistan and Savanna are incredibly interesting.

I am basing my opinion in part on his testimony in this article.

One thing Sullivan says that sticks in my mind is that we are spending billions and billions oversees with lots of money paying off informants and getting hosed by informants with bad info. All for little benefit to Americans. Then the Savanna police force, which has a hell of a lot more to do with the safety of Americans than does some perpetual semi-war in the middle east is getting hosed with no money for training and proper equipment. Thay can get armored vehicles and grenade launchers buy money for tasers is not to be had.

Crazy. Sullivan is a true American hero.

mustang190

It’s funny reading through all of this. 
 I know retired cops who all say that cops today are far more docile today. 
 Forty years ago they would pop you up side your head with a blackjack if you gave them lip or acted belligerent. 
 Not to mention a rough ride downtown. 

Cyclist

mustang190 said:

It’s funny reading through all of this. 
 I know retired cops who all say that cops today are far more docile today. 
 Forty years ago they would pop you up side your head with a blackjack if you gave them lip or acted belligerent. 
 Not to mention a rough ride downtown. 

Today they just shoot you...

mustang190

Cyclist said:

mustang190 said:

It’s funny reading through all of this. 
 I know retired cops who all say that cops today are far more docile today. 
 Forty years ago they would pop you up side your head with a blackjack if you gave them lip or acted belligerent. 
 Not to mention a rough ride downtown. 

Today they just shoot you...

No they don’t. 
The numbers would never add up. 

kellercl

Cyclist said:

kellercl said:

Tarponator said:

I'm more interested in how you would answer those questions, Jack or Westwall, rather than Cyclist's take.

What do you two think is proper training?  How would you respon to Cad's questions?

Do you think de-escalation is properly implemented or even valid?

I think de-escalation isn't the primary goal.  The primary goal should be protection of bystanders followed by protection of the officer.  If a person is being belligerent and a cops takes them down, I simply don't have an issue.  This new age hippy BS that people should be allowed to treat cops as poorly as they want too, and the cops should react as a personal therapist....  just no.  

An ignorant cop that is poorly trained and not aware of the situation IS THE ESCALATOR. Especially if he is confronting someone who is minding there business and when the cop automatically assumes the black guy is at fault.

I remember when my child was younger (2 years old) and I was doing work around the house.  It was an early Sunday morning and she called 911 on my cell.  A cop showed up and I answered the door sweating with a hammer.  I told him it was an accidental 911 call.  His response was he wanted to go through the house and see the kids.  I said sure and was polite, he left after a few minutes.  I can't help but wonder if I would have said no and screamed obsencities while telling him to get a warrant if everything would have played out differently.  Point being, people reap what they sow.

Gardawg

Start with not calling the cops for every little problem. We cannot continue to demand that officers respond to drug abuse, mental health crises, family disagreements and the whims of a prejudiced populace.  911 operators should have more options than  guns and fire hoses.