Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Ser Scot A Ellison

Police violence... when will people see that better training and tactics are essential

27 posts in this topic

We’re at 21 pages on the last thread.  Please continue the discussion.

Edited by Ser Scot A Ellison

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

disarm the cops or abolish the cops

problem solved

Edited by dr. thicc president

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, dr. thicc president said:

disarm the cops or abolish the cops

problem solved

Do you honestly think it would be possible to police in the US without armed officers?  Even the UK police need a % of firearms trained officers to deal with relevant incidents.  Admittedly our armed officers are very well trained, where in the US it seems to be today you join, tomorrow you are out on patrol with a lethal weapon.

The problem to me seems to be how long it would take to properly resolve the ongoing issues and put the training in place, is there the appetite for a wholesale overhaul of how policing in the US is delivered? 

The easiest wins would appear to be

Huge investment in training specifically around conflict deescalation and resolution (shoot first, ask questions later appears to be the biggest problem in so many of these videos that pop up far too frequently).

Mandatory wearing of body worn video for all armed officers 

Creation of an independent body that investigates all police shootings nationwide, similar to the IPCC, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_Police_Complaints_Commission who are not beholden to any police force.  Even though personally i'm no huge fan of the IPCC, at least we know over here that if we majorly f'ck up, its not going to be our mates investigating us. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is that there is no "US police force" to reform: There are hundreds of them, with seemingly only loose relationships to each other. The Fed can probably prod and push, but ultimately it's going to be up to each individual state to handle training standards and such, and there is way too much incentive to just let it slide. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As for US police, in addition to what BFC has said, how about a mandatory psychological test when applying for a police job? Here, for example, we have obligatory test for anyone wishing to obtain permit to own a gun. This wouldn't help solve the problem by itself, of course, but at least it would root out some of more trigger-happy or sadistic individuals (or at least restrict them to a desk job).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is already a psych exam that is part of screening for police applicants.  Maybe it should be beefed up, I don't know. 

I don't know that anyone really objects to more training, although police unions will object to anything they think will put police in more danger, and presumably significantly altering and increasing the training would cost $$$, but it would be well spent. 

I don't object to body cams, but again they are expensive, and the most recent data shows that they have minimal effect on police behavior,because unlike the predominant narrative of out of control/racist/murderous police.....the data shows police act the same, with or without the cameras......meaning that they believe their acts are justified, which is why they do them on camera....this should on one hand make people feel better that police are not evil, murderous racist thugs...and also, further shows that it's an issue of training, so while maybe it can't be totally eliminated in a country like the us with a violent underclass, it can be heavily mitigated by training.

ETA..the Feds can tie any any federal money to meeting new training requirements and training could be funded by the Feds also, at least for the first 3/5 years while a new system was put in place, which would be a good use of federal money for a change.

Edited by Cas Stark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

There is already a psych exam that is part of screening for police applicants.  Maybe it should be beefed up, I don't know. 

I don't know that anyone really objects to more training, although police unions will object to anything they think will put police in more danger, and presumably significantly altering and increasing the training would cost $$$, but it would be well spent. 

I don't object to body cams, but again they are expensive, and the most recent data shows that they have minimal effect on police behavior,because unlike the predominant narrative of out of control/racist/murderous police.....the data shows police act the same, with or without the cameras......meaning that they believe their acts are justified, which is why they do them on camera....this should on one hand make people feel better that police are not evil, murderous racist thugs...and also, further shows that it's an issue of training, so while maybe it can't be totally eliminated in a country like the us with a violent underclass, it can be heavily mitigated by training.

What about tactics?  In my view too many unarmed people are ending up dead at police hands.  That strongly suggests tactics need to change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

What about tactics?  In my view too many unarmed people are ending up dead at police hands.  That strongly suggests tactics need to change.

Isn't that an issue of training?  To change the way police are taught to handle these situations, how to defuse them, how to use non lethal measures?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Cas Stark said:

Isn't that an issue of training?  To change the way police are taught to handle these situations, how to defuse them, how to use non lethal measures?

I think it is more than juat training when police claim they’ve done everything as they are trained to do and unarmed terrified people still end up dead at their hands.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

I think it is more than juat training when police claim they’ve done everything as they are trained to do and unarmed terrified people still end up dead at their hands.

It seems the opposite to me.  If police are following their training, and this results in unarmed people getting shot even after police specifically state to them not to worry, we won't shoot you...what else is it other than training?  In some cases, like the Minn cases, it is clearly simple panic, but training too should alleviate that.  If you go through 3x more training that includes more role playing w/people, more ride alongs then you won't shoot the guy in the car who is doing what you told him to do, more or less, and you certainly won't shoot the woman in her pj's who called you about a rape she thought she heard.  This is all training, and in training I include the assumption that there will be a higher threshold to get into LE and a higher wash out rate to weed out people whose personalities are not suited for the job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A percentage of the human population is incapable of processing responsibility for actions unless the rest of us teach them right or wrong. It's why we have governments. 

Actually punish cops for murder and murder will decrease as their brain is forced to entertain the possibility of going to prison for the rest of their life as the barrel clears the holster. 

It is very simple. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, WinterFox said:

A percentage of the human population is incapable of processing responsibility for actions unless the rest of us teach them right or wrong. It's why we have governments. 

Actually punish cops for murder and murder will decrease as their brain is forced to entertain the possibility of going to prison for the rest of their life as the barrel clears the holster. 

It is very simple. 

I hear you.  

Cas,

I think we are saying the same thing.  I’m saying that the tactics US police are trained to use seem to be ending up with innocent unarmed people dead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

I hear you.  

Cas,

I think we are saying the same thing.  I’m saying that the tactics US police are trained to use seem to be ending up with innocent unarmed people dead.

I agree, with the stipulation that given the millions of interactions, arrests and hundreds of thousands of LE, 'innocent unarmed people dead' is a very, very small fraction, and so actually is violent, armed people killed.  However, it is incredibly damaging, so tactics/training needs to change.

Of course we could also change rules of engagement, as many seem to want, where police basically do not engage violent people in real time, they don't do hot pursuit, don't do traffic stops, they log it and presumably let the detectives handle it.  Me, personally, I think this will cause a rise in crime, but I could be wrong.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

I hear you.  

Cas,

I think we are saying the same thing.  I’m saying that the tactics US police are trained to use seem to be ending up with innocent unarmed people dead.

In an effort to further reach conclusion on this issue and save Ran some money on board space ;) I will point out that this still tacks on to what I said above. 

Cops are not trained and deployed with operative procedures that reinforce that they are supposed to protect or serve. Instead they are coddled and promised that they are the most important human innovation in public subjugation that their life is more valuable than any number of citizens that are out to get them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, WinterFox said:

In an effort to further reach conclusion on this issue and save Ran some money on board space ;) I will point out that this still tacks on to what I said above. 

Cops are not trained and deployed with operative procedures that reinforce that they are supposed to protect or serve. Instead they are coddled and promised that they are the most important human innovation in public subjugation that their life is more valuable than any number of citizens that are out to get them. 

Police lives matter, but they don’t matter more than the lives of the people they exist to serve.  They seem to act as though any hypothetical threat, real or imagined, justifies any response they offer regardless of how many innocent unarmed people they kill in the process.

That is unacceptable and must change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Police lives matter, but they don’t matter more than the lives of the people they exist to serve.  They seem to act as though any hypothetical threat, real or imagined, justifies any response they offer regardless of how many innocent unarmed people they kill in the process.

That is unacceptable and must change.

Your choice of words is not unnoticed.

But yes, we agree. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's been said before, by people far more invested and knowledgeable than me, that America's police often, and increasingly, treat their job as being that of almost an occupying army rather than servants and protectors. That mindset cannot be allowed to continue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, polishgenius said:

It's been said before, by people far more invested and knowledgeable than me, that America's police often, and increasingly, treat their job as being that of almost an occupying army rather than servants and protectors. That mindset cannot be allowed to continue.

Agreed.  I absolutely agree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Agreed.  I absolutely agree.


Although, to add to the notion, actual occupying armies are trained to far greater degree of firearm responsibility than the US police. Like the ex-marine who got fired, last year I think, because he didn't shoot someone he realised wasn't a threat.

 

eta: to clarify, fired from the police.

Edited by polishgenius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, polishgenius said:


Although, to add to the notion, actual occupying armies are trained to far greater degree of firearm responsibility than the US police. Like the ex-marine who got fired, last year I think, because he didn't shoot someone he realised wasn't a threat.

And occupying armies often (not always) care about optics and keeping people docile. 

Even the Werhmact actually waited for people to fuck up in Belgium before killing them in 1914

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0