US police and the use of firearms

[Deleted Member]

It does not. However when the cop that shoots him in the back goes to GenPop for murder the other cops will think twice. Prison is supposed to also act as a deterrent.
Why don’t you go rob a bank? Because you know if you get caught you can go to prison...

If I have qualified immunity robbing a bank becomes less inclined to carry steep penalties! YAY!

 

[grumpy356]

Horseshit. They have more rights than the average citizen. For instance I am active duty military with 21 years in. I can't carry a firearm on a military base without personal permission from the base commanding officer. Police officers can when they are on base. They are automatically given that permission.

Oh they do for sure. That is the problem. SHOULD was the key word.

We are fixing the countries problems here. Keep up.

 

[Provience]

Defunding them isn't as insane as the term sounds. I've got no problem shifting a lot of responsibility away from police over time. Let them enforce the law, but people need to remember what that means. Ultimately, a law requires force, violence, in order to be enforced. That needs to be kept in mind when passing legislation.

This is what we’re up against. This is EXACTLY why we’ve planted the marker at “Defund the Police” and not “reform.” Because they lose their shit even over “reform.”

ACAB. Deuces.

quote from elsewhere on the internet. Defund IS EXACTLY as insane as it sounds. Defund is NOT reform, defund IS abolish.

Reform is needed, but starting at the chopping block of ending police and not starting at the chopping block and ending the shit web of laws they "enforce" IS the problem. Maybe a different comparison is valid. Reason why I am/was against the "trump tax cuts" is because they did fuckall about the federal spending problem, in part. Cut out the bullshit laws and the police will shrink. cut out the bullshit laws and the responsibility can be shifted to "others"

starting with cutting the face is the absolute wrong way to do this.

https://www.theroot.com/seattle-police-chief-carmen-best-resigning-after-city-c-1844687471

'comments section'

 

[clodhopper]

Couple thoughts...

England is not a reasonable comparison. The country's culture accepts a higher level of things we consider crime here. The police over there are severely limited in what they are permitted to do and what is expected to just be overlooked. Personally I think we over-police the population here, are too punitive on small things. However, politicians promise safe cities and the only way they really have to do that is ramping up policing. Some of it is historical from puritannical roots, but some is just what people are accustomed to. Aside from a few really bad urban areas, the US is probably one of the safest places to live in the world. We pay for that in taxes to fund the policing and losses of liberty.

There are some here that clearly view the cops as evil, qualified immunity as a license to kill, and the ranks are filled with trigger happy assholes. "They need to quit hiring cops scared of their shadows". Have you ever hired someone before? It is really hard to judge a persons character and tendencies from a short hiring window that has massive limitations imposed by the fed gov. Then they get on the force and then different laws and the union make it really hard to get rid of bad apples. That aside, the vast bulk of the force is really good people that try their very best. These are the people you think should be on the force, right? How do you attract them to the job? Tell them they have life and death responsibility, but if they take a life (even a good shoot) they will stand for it in court? Yeah, the good people will look for other jobs and ONLY the assholes will show up. With imperfect people (people make mistakes, you do too), imperfect evidence, imperfect situations, imperfect criminals, there will be mistakes. It will happen. Policing mistakes could be eliminated by eliminating the cops (defunding, right?) but at what cost? Crime will expand or run rampant. Is 10 good citizens killed by untethered criminals better than 1 killed by a policing mistake? 100? Should all crime be just accepted as the new norm?

Balanced policing is hard and the dopes pushing for defunding have no mental comprehension of the difficulties and complexities of effective and positive law enforcement.

 

[Provience]

https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/op...154949045.html

long opinion article that goes over the subject. it's a good read

The future of policing in the US


Modern policing conscripts a wide variety of parties including health workers, transnational corporations, the non-profit sector, educators, religious institutions, social workers, and increasingly, vigilantes and other everyday citizens. This pervasive "policing web" enlists even seemingly neutral actors and positions them as forces of social control.

For this reason, Vitale's optimism about "mental health policing" in the UK is perplexing. Few countries blur the line between law enforcement and health services more clearly than Britain, where for nearly half a decade, academics and medical professionals have protested the health sector's role in unethically monitoring political organisers, people of colour, and Muslims in the name of "deradicalisation".

Consider Lyn Jenkins, the retiree who casually disclosed his participation in climate protests during a doctor's appointment. This admission led to an unexpected visit by the police and his referral to the UK's counterterrorism programme PREVENT. Or consider the Muslim man who visited his general practitioner about a leg injury, only to be pressed for his opinions on the ISIL (ISIS) group. As a July 2020 report indicates, such encounters are not isolated events, but indicative of institutionalised patterns of racism and religious discrimination.

Vitale's blind spot, however, is hardly his alone. To critics of American policing, Britain may appear like a successful model to emulate. Despite a 2019 influx of tasers, the majority of police officers in the country remain unarmed - a policy partially responsible for Britain's low rate of police murder. But this is not the only lesson to learn from the UK. It also demonstrates how a (largely) disarmed police force does not necessarily lead to a less repressive state.

snippet


edit: the point of it is, UK style reform or putting the 'counter violence' onus on the medical system doesn't result in a less abusive system, in fact it may make things worse by now making violence the always failed whim of politics of the day. Like every "great society" program ever presented, it increases the system and increases the institutionalization of racism. liberty is still the least flawed answer

 

[BarfBag]

Couple thoughts...


There are some here that clearly view the cops as evil, qualified immunity as a license to kill, and the ranks are filled with trigger happy assholes. "They need to quit hiring cops scared of their shadows". Have you ever hired someone before?

Yes, and I do agree that it is hard. I assume most police departments have pretty comprehensive human resource departments, they should be properly trained and able to weed out some of the people who have absolutely no business being in the law enforcement field. I don't do human resources, I just do engineering.

 

[grumpy356]

quote from elsewhere on the internet. Defund IS EXACTLY as insane as it sounds. Defund is NOT reform, defund IS abolish.

Reform is needed, but starting at the chopping block of ending police and not starting at the chopping block and ending the shit web of laws they "enforce" IS the problem. Maybe a different comparison is valid. Reason why I am/was against the "trump tax cuts" is because they did fuckall about the federal spending problem, in part. Cut out the bullshit laws and the police will shrink. cut out the bullshit laws and the responsibility can be shifted to "others"

starting with cutting the face is the absolute wrong way to do this.

https://www.theroot.com/seattle-poli...y-c-1844687471

'comments section'

Silly question, but what is "POLICE"? is Police the same as the Sheriffs department? Because Sheriffs Deputies and City Police draw a distinction.

I am all for Defunding the police and transferring the power to the sheriffs department.

The Sheriff is an ELECTED position and is accountable to the voters. The Police Chief is an appointed position and is nothing but the standing army of the mayors office, and while the mayor is an elected position, the police chief is removed from voters and often last through many administration. The police chief is NOT directly accountable to the citizens.
(Hamilton warned us of the dangers of standing armies)

I got NO problem shifting the funding and responsibilities of the police to the sheriffs.

 

[clodhopper]

Yes, and I do agree that it is hard. I assume most police departments have pretty comprehensive human resource departments, they should be properly trained and able to weed out some of the people who have absolutely no business being in the law enforcement field. I don't do human resources, I just do engineering.

I do engineering too, but have been a division manager closely tied to corporate operations. Hiring and firing are not as simple as generally thought. You and others regularly vote in politicians that promote job security and job protections. This keeps bumping the expectations for an employer to retain poor employees.

 

[BarfBag]

I do engineering too, but have been a division manager closely tied to corporate operations. Hiring and firing are not as simple as generally thought. You and others regularly vote in politicians that promote job security and job protections. This keeps bumping the expectations for an employer to retain poor employees.

Truth, managing people in engineering is harder than the engineering. So Chip, back to your critique of my original statement along the lines of if police departments would not hire people afraid of their own shadows and assholes, many of these events wouldn't happen. I understand the difficulty in vetting new hires, but can you really argue that people walking around afraid of everything should be in a career where any situation can go in any direction in the blink of an eye? Aren't those driven by fear less likely to remain calm and make rational decisions?

 

[Splib]

Silly question, but what is "POLICE"? is Police the same as the Sheriffs department? Because Sheriffs Deputies and City Police draw a distinction.

I am all for Defunding the police and transferring the power to the sheriffs department.

The Sheriff is an ELECTED position and is accountable to the voters. The Police Chief is an appointed position and is nothing but the standing army of the mayors office, and while the mayor is an elected position, the police chief is removed from voters and often last through many administration. The police chief is NOT directly accountable to the citizens.
(Hamilton warned us of the dangers of standing armies)

I got NO problem shifting the funding and responsibilities of the police to the sheriffs.

This is a great thread with great ideas and expression. Not trying to fuck it up But here in Sacramento, that is not the case. The Sherrif (s) control/patrol the cities that dont have a PD and the unincorpotated areas outside of the City PD jurisdiction. The city PD with their appointed chief patrol the city. The transfer will not work in that scenario.

Two bad shootings here in the last 4 years were situations badly handled but in both cases excessive force was used. i.e 7 or 8 hits, > 20 shots fired at a single perp who " went for a gun/cell ph=one) or simply treid to run away. A single lead bullet from .38 revolver has come a far distance from these guys dumping their Glocks or Smiths until the body corpse stops wiggling.

I absolutely do not buy the argument "shoot until the threat is neutralized" That is simply murder. One shot, pop the balloon, call for back up and the medics. Little League umpire shit, read, pause react.

 

[Provience]

Silly question, but what is "POLICE"? is Police the same as the Sheriffs department? Because Sheriffs Deputies and City Police draw a distinction.

I am all for Defunding the police and transferring the power to the sheriffs department.

The Sheriff is an ELECTED position and is accountable to the voters. The Police Chief is an appointed position and is nothing but the standing army of the mayors office, and while the mayor is an elected position, the police chief is removed from voters and often last through many administration. The police chief is NOT directly accountable to the citizens.
(Hamilton warned us of the dangers of standing armies)

I got NO problem shifting the funding and responsibilities of the police to the sheriffs.

this comes back to the laws issue.

in the unincorporated cities, there are no parking meters and there are typically much fewer laws to even be in violation of. Oddly enough, my strangely shaped suburb falls into a non-regulated firearm discharge zone. I can literally go shoot cans in my backyard. Across the road is city limits and they don't want guns brought out in self defense, across the field is farm zoning and they can only discharge to dispatch animals.

the police chief is selected based on the mayor, the mayor is voted on by the people and wields great power over the city, it has the same effect of voting for a sheriff. the city needs more police staff because they have significantly higher population densities, which are fairly well linked to higher crime, and they have a whole myriad of additional crimes/laws. If we were to simply shift from the city force to the sheriff's office, there would be a massive increase in the "power" wielded by the sheriff and any contentions between the sheriff and the city laws would result in a huge standoff between the mayor and the sheriff, both as elected officials.

 

[grumpy356]

This is a great thread with great ideas and expression. Not trying to fuck it up But here in Sacramento, that is not the case. The Sherrif (s) control/patrol the cities that dont have a PD and the unincorpotated areas outside of the City PD jurisdiction. The city PD with their appointed chief patrol the city. The transfer will not work in that scenario.

t.

Because the funding is more slight of hand, you’re not really defunding the police you’re transferring the funding to the sheriffs department and then the sheriffs department Expands its patrols to include the cities, (and considering In most states the sheriffs department controls to jail and the jails are in the city, as well as all the restaurants they’re eating at, and routes between calls, etc. they are already in the city for a pretty good portion of their shift.)

 

[Roc Doc]

I absolutely do not buy the argument "shoot until the threat is neutralized" That is simply murder. One shot, pop the balloon, call for back up and the medics. Little League umpire shit, read, pause react.

Sorry but one shot does not necessarily take the fight out of a perp. Most folks will give up after being shot, but not all.

Not defending the actions of the cops in this situation, I believe they fucked up, and the guy swinging the door open with gun in hand fucked up too. He would have been better off having a discussion through the door first. Lots of bad decisions made all the way around.

 

[rockyota83]

I think that's impractical & idiotic. I don't see how disarming cops would decrease crime in any way. Likely the opposite.

Better idea = take mental health issues off the cops' plates & put it back in the hands of mental health professionals.

yet 80% of the cops work load is dealing with mentally ill people how the fuck are "mental health experts" going to handle mentally ill people out in the streets breaking the law and harming people?


ill wait

 

[clodhopper]

I understand the difficulty in vetting new hires, but can you really argue that people walking around afraid of everything should be in a career where any situation can go in any direction in the blink of an eye? Aren't those driven by fear less likely to remain calm and make rational decisions?

I don't disagree with you at all. How do you effectively identify who is likely to be a shrinking violet from a couple interview meetings? Nearly impossible. So they are likely to be hired and then you have to deal with how to either reassign them to someone else's responsibility or find some approved way to get them released from employment. They can't just be fired or terminated for mediocre performance. Either HR will not allow it, the mediocre employee can invoke fed protections that will require you to keep them on staff, or they can sue in civil court which will likely be much more expensive than keeping them on payroll. So the number of mediocre to crappy employees continues to grow. Unions make all options even harder.

That aside, the better employees will be keeping an eye on protecting their careers/future. You remove the qualified immunity from a person trying to do a good job in a policing position and immediately they will become a timid, twice thinking, fear driven person. How could you expect otherwise? Or they will come to their senses, realize that the risk to their future is not anywhere worth the risk of staying in the job and quit. And the percentage of less optimal (crappy) employees expands.

The direction we are headed with defunding, removal of immunities, and ever expanding job protections will result in further eroding the quality of policing in the US.

 

[87manche]

It started waaay before that.

but that's been the justification for everything shitty about the legal system for the last 50 years.

no knock warrants? looking for drugs that might be destroyed.
Warantless searches on the side of the road? I smelled weed.
Seizure of property and money without a crime being committed? Well it must be drug related if you're carrying 10K cash.

 

[Splib]

Sorry but one shot does not necessarily take the fight out of a perp. Most folks will give up after being shot, but not all.

Not defending the actions of the cops in this situation, I believe they fucked up, and the guy swinging the door open with gun in hand fucked up too. He would have been better off having a discussion through the door first. Lots of bad decisions made all the way around.

Agree completely. Stephon Clarke (?) shot hit 8 times. Police had guns on him, HALT and he reached for his cell . .. . RIP

 

[BarfBag]

They can't just be fired or terminated for mediocre performance.

We used to hire through an employment agency. After a short time period, we were able to either transition them to a full time employee, renew another short term contract through the agency, or call it done with them. Maybe an option in law enforcement too?

 

[KarlVP]

but that's been the justification for everything shitty about the legal system for the last 50 years.

no knock warrants? looking for drugs that might be destroyed.
Warantless searches on the side of the road? I smelled weed.
Seizure of property and money without a crime being committed? Well it must be drug related if you're carrying 10K cash.

But on the flip side, what about the cops that are trying to catch criminals?

Case in point, we have a "tweaker patrol" in the town I live in. They are looking for drug activity. I got profiled hard one day making a quick trip to the parts store in my beater car. Sure it was a nuisance, but the interaction with the cop after he pulled me over was about 45 seconds after he saw my credentials and the fact I'm not a meth head. Sure it took time out of my day, but I fully support them looking for drug activity and catching the "bad guys".

He gave a total bullshit reason for pulling me over too.

 

[grumpy356]

But on the flip side, what about the cops that are trying to catch criminals?

Case in point, we have a "tweaker patrol" in the town I live in. They are looking for drug activity. I got profiled hard one day making a quick trip to the parts store in my beater car. Sure it was a nuisance, but the interaction with the cop after he pulled me over was about 45 seconds after he saw my credentials and the fact I'm not a meth head. Sure it took time out of my day, but I fully support them looking for drug activity and catching the "bad guys".

He gave a total bullshit reason for pulling me over too.

Stop the war on drugs.

Study Portugal.

 

[Stuck]

Horseshit. They have more rights than the average citizen. For instance I am active duty military with 21 years in. I can't carry a firearm on a military base without personal permission from the base commanding officer. Police officers can when they are on base. They are automatically given that permission.

Gee maybe because they are on duty you fucking moron. Also as any active military person knows you give up certain rights when you sign on the line. Base commander says "no guns" well too fucking bad for you. Dont like it dont re-enlist or resign your commission. You sound like one of these whiny **** "protesters".

 

[clodhopper]

We used to hire through an employment agency. After a short time period, we were able to either transition them to a full time employee, renew another short term contract through the agency, or call it done with them. Maybe an option in law enforcement too?

Maybe, but do you think the unions would accept that? Might cut into their monthly profits.
The main point here was not to find that one easier path through the mess, but rather to highlight that with good intentions of helping people stay employed, we have sailed off the cliff and are now simply aiding retention of shitheads.

 

[Stuck]

but that's been the justification for everything shitty about the legal system for the last 50 years.

no knock warrants? looking for drugs that might be destroyed.
Warantless searches on the side of the road? I smelled weed.
Seizure of property and money without a crime being committed? Well it must be drug related if you're carrying 10K cash.

The items on your list are all examples of lazy law enforcement.
the only time a noknock should be used is its a life threatening situation. Destruction of evidence isnt one.

Warrantless searches are a necessary tool BUT the courts should hold officers to the higher standard that using them requires. I smell weed does not meet the exigent standards for a warrantless search. If thats the case the officer should call in for a warrant.

The only time property should be seized iis if there are charges filed and the property is seized as evidence. If charges are dropped the property should be returned immediately. Civil forfeiture without charges is bullshit.

 

[Stuck]

Maybe, but do you think the unions would accept that? Might cut into their monthly profits.
The main point here was not to find that one easier path through the mess, but rather to highlight that with good intentions of helping people stay employed, we have sailed off the cliff and are now simply aiding retention of shitheads.

That has nothing to do with the unions.

 

[clodhopper]

That has nothing to do with the unions.

It shouldn't, but it will. Employing non-union employees for extended periods through a placement agency? yeah, I think the union might have a problem with it.

 

[Stuck]

It shouldn't, but it will. Employing non-union employees for extended periods through a placement agency? yeah, I think the union might have a problem with it.

No my point was that unions wouldnt be the ones stopping it. Do you have any idea the cost involved in training a new boot everyday run of the mill patrol cop? There is no way any dept or agency is going to go along with temp police officers.
As for the dummies that dont actually know what qualified immunity means. No temp agency is going to stick their neck and take the burden of liability that would entail. You should see the liability issues involved with basic armed security guards. Then you start moving up into private protective security, no agency is going to shoulder the responsibility of actually policing the streets. And god help the citizenry if they do. You think there is a problem now. Look back to the time of the Pinkertons and other private police forces. This trainwreck of an experiment has been tried before and failed miserably. Theres a reason its left to the govt.

 

[clodhopper]

No my point was that unions wouldnt be the ones stopping it. Do you have any idea the cost involved in training a new boot everyday run of the mill patrol cop? There is no way any dept or agency is going to go along with temp police officers.
As for the dummies that dont actually know what qualified immunity means. No temp agency is going to stick their neck and take the burden of liability that would entail. You should see the liability issues involved with basic armed security guards. Then you start moving up into private protective security, no agency is going to shoulder the responsibility of actually policing the streets. And god help the citizenry if they do. You think there is a problem now. Look back to the time of the Pinkertons and other private police forces. This trainwreck of an experiment has been tried before and failed miserably. Theres a reason its left to the govt.

agreed.

 

[Truckedup]

In my opinion some here are looking at unions as protecting cops with bad attitudes... There' s another factor that veterans are aware of. Comradrie with with your group and covering anyone's back if they will cover yours..

 

[IH-SSII]

Stop the war on drugs.

Study Portugal.

LOL, Americans PROVE everyday they cannot handle simple alcohol and weed. Making MORE drugs readily available is a solution? How do you think users get the money to get drugs? The attitude for Cops is everything can be handled with a gun. That MUST be changed. One fact I know, a situation almost always goes from bad to worse when the cops show up. Except if you're a looting protestor.

 

[BarfBag]

LOL, Americans PROVE everyday they cannot handle simple alcohol and weed. Making MORE drugs readily available is a solution? How do you think users get the money to get drugs? The attitude for Cops is everything can be handled with a gun. That MUST be changed. One fact I know, a situation almost always goes from bad to worse when the cops show up. Except if you're a looting protestor.

stopping the war on drugs doesnt make them more readily available, it just stops the excuse to funnel money into the hands of connected people through excessive jailing, excessive contracts, etc. Removes one of the excuses for abusing power, abusing force, etc.