|
Yeah, I asked the copgoons about that the other day, and was saddened at the response. There just isn't will nor budget for the kind of training that a lot of us want people empowered as agents of the government with a license to kill to have.
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 19:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 05:56 |
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:I'm not so sure stupidity and ignorance are limited to any one political ideology. Oh they aren't but I've never seen somebody actually be proud about how dumb they are while actively trying to be even dumber that wasn't a staunch Republican.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 19:48
|
|
|
I guess you could send all cops to Ft Wood, I'm sure the Army would love that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 19:48
|
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:Oh they aren't but I've never seen somebody actually be proud about how dumb they are while actively trying to be even dumber that wasn't a staunch Republican. See e.g. Minority students being accused of "acting white" for doing well in school.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 20:01
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:I think most people in here don't actually know what they want. They don't actually want "smarter" cops per se, but cops that are better able to handle stressful situations and deescalate instead of continuing to escalate. This is a cultural and training problem, and probably requires significantly more training than US police departments can afford. Liquid Communism posted:Yeah, I asked the copgoons about that the other day, and was saddened at the response. There just isn't will nor budget for the kind of training that a lot of us want people empowered as agents of the government with a license to kill to have. Wait, so how do other developed countries avoid having their police shooting fleeing citizens in the back, shooting guys who are restrained on the ground etc.? Do they have extensive training way beyond what the U.S. does? Are they mostly not carrying guns like in England? Or is it simply a matter of they don't have a large ethnic minority that their society doesn't get too concerned about getting slaughtered?
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 20:16
|
|
|
For comparison, US policec academies are a couple months while most European Police Colleges are 3-4 years. But that's not the fix-all issue. Besides that, out of major countries, only UK doesn't issue or train firearms to most officers.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 20:22
|
|
|
Liquid Communism posted:Yeah, I asked the copgoons about that the other day, and was saddened at the response. There just isn't will nor budget for the kind of training that a lot of us want people empowered as agents of the government with a license to kill to have. Oh there is budget. Just not will. They have to spend all their money on cool SWAT gear, not hippie poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 20:39
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Oh there is budget. Just not will. They have to spend all their money on cool SWAT gear, not hippie poo poo. Isn't most of that just extra defense budget bloat getting dumped off? It's not like the Hicksville PD has the money to pay bluebook for an APC or whatever.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 20:50
|
|
|
Voyager I posted:Isn't most of that just extra defense budget bloat getting dumped off? It's not like the Hicksville PD has the money to pay bluebook for an APC or whatever. What training the government will help out with is usually some ridiculous War on Terror hogwash about how to apply the paper bag test to spot the perfidious Musselman in the event he tries to jihad the local Wawa. Rent-A-Cop fucked around with this message at 20:58 on Apr 14, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 20:55
|
|
|
Voyager I posted:Isn't most of that just extra defense budget bloat getting dumped off? It's not like the Hicksville PD has the money to pay bluebook for an APC or whatever. The more important question is what the gently caress does a local police department need a literal goddamned tank for? Yeah SWAT teams should have access to some heavy duty equipment but Joe Trafficcop has no reason to have access to a tank. Nor does he have reason to keep five guns in his patrol car. Your bog standard local cop may very well have a pistol, mace, a tazer, a shotgun, an AR-15, and a knife in his car at all times.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 20:56
|
|
|
Voyager I posted:Isn't most of that just extra defense budget bloat getting dumped off? It's not like the Hicksville PD has the money to pay bluebook for an APC or whatever. Ex military stuff is free to police departments, so outfitting a swat team costs literally nothing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 20:57
|
|
|
Voyager I posted:Isn't most of that just extra defense budget bloat getting dumped off? It's not like the Hicksville PD has the money to pay bluebook for an APC or whatever. This, and also training is usually way more expensive then gear
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 20:58
|
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:The more important question is what the gently caress does a local police department need a literal goddamned tank for?
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 20:59
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:This, and also training is usually way more expensive then gear Also harder to quantify. I know after 9/11 a bunch of supposed experts on The Islamic Terror got big bucks for giving lectures to cops and feds and stuff--their expertise turned out to be reading Krauthammer articles.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 21:03
|
|
|
Tanks are a good solution to most problems, I don't see why crime can't be one of them.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 21:03
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:Ex military stuff is free to police departments, so outfitting a swat team costs literally nothing. Maintenance too? Training on how to use the equipment, or do they just wing it?
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 21:06
|
|
|
Rent-A-Cop posted:It's free and the public loves that poo poo so why not? Also does any police department actually own a tank? I know everyone likes to call MRAPs tanks because it sounds extra silly for cops to have one, but they're not remotely tanks, they're basically super armored Humvees. I know that rear end in a top hat Arpaio has that stupid self propelled howitzer as a PR stunt, but I think that's an isolated thing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 21:08
|
|
|
Spun Dog posted:Maintenance too? Training on how to use the equipment, or do they just wing it? What does your heart tell you? Its not like those MPAPs are actually going to move.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 21:10
|
|
|
Uh... MRAPs are way bigger than humvees.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 21:11
|
|
|
Spun Dog posted:Maintenance too? Training on how to use the equipment, or do they just wing it? Are you kidding me? Hell when I was in the Army we would just wing it most of the time, the only training we had was a manual and poo poo passed down.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 21:12
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:Uh... MRAPs are way bigger than humvees. Sorry, super armored, bigger humvees.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 21:13
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:Ex military stuff is free to police departments, so outfitting a swat team costs literally nothing. Someone, eventually, is in fact paying for it, and that money could at least theoretically be redirected to training. Admittedly that would take action at the federal level, but that's what this needs anyway.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 21:19
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Someone, eventually, is in fact paying for it, and that money could at least theoretically be redirected to training. Admittedly that would take action at the federal level, but that's what this needs anyway. Unless this issue is also about reducing military spending, no, that money can't be redirected to anything since the pickup truck from your backyard going to your cousin's house would not transfer to restaurant coupons.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 21:20
|
|
|
Rent-A-Cop posted:It's free and the public loves that poo poo so why not? I dunno, deploying APCs with county cops on top pointing rifles/submachine guns at townsfolk and repeatedly muzzle-sweeping them with loaded M4s didn't make the public very happy this past summer in middle America. There's a toxic mindset drummed into many cops that every second on duty could be their last and that their number one priority isn't public safety but "making it home at the end of the day." Blend that with systemic corruption, aggressive policing based on revenue generation and military hardware with dubious usefulness in day to day policing practically being given away to any department that wants it and you start to get what I described above.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 21:25
|
|
|
Vahakyla posted:Unless this issue is also about reducing military spending, no, that money can't be redirected to anything since the pickup truck from your backyard going to your cousin's house would not transfer to restaurant coupons. The issue though is that all of this military hardware got paid for at some point and apparently industry lobbyists and ensuring that the government is required to buy X amount of stuff every year whether they need it or not. Given that our military spending is obscene what people are seeing is that we're spending poo poo loads of money arming the police just as heavily as we do soldiers when there are people going hungry. The defense companies are making money hand over fist while the rest of us get to foot the bill. And for what? So Sergeant Fatty McRacistpants can murder black people more efficiently.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 21:25
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Someone, eventually, is in fact paying for it, and that money could at least theoretically be redirected to training. Admittedly that would take action at the federal level, but that's what this needs anyway. Well yeah if you have a time machine that can go back and stop the Iraq war.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 21:29
|
|
|
Rhesus Pieces posted:I dunno, deploying APCs with county cops on top pointing rifles/submachine guns at townsfolk and repeatedly muzzle-sweeping them with loaded M4s didn't make the public very happy this past summer in middle America. Edit: Joe Arpaio doesn't keep getting reelected because he's in league with the Illuminati. He polices a county full of blue-haired East Coast refugees who can't stand the sight of non-whites polluting their retirement villages. Rent-A-Cop fucked around with this message at 21:45 on Apr 14, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 21:40
|
|
|
Here's the thing, for those arguing for higher standards: Where do police forces get those more qualified personnel from? I was under the impression it wasn't actually hard to get a badge in the US. Sure, maybe you can't get one in the department of your choice (maybe for reasons having nothing to do with qualifications and everything to do with not having any family members on the town force already), but becoming a cop in general? Because especially for those highly qualified applicants, why would they want to become cops? They probably won't get paid super well. You have to deal with a lot of bullshit. You probably won't be trained adequately, so even if you're qualified there's a good chance you won't end up particularly good at your job. You need to work with the sort of people who become cops wherever you are. You end up growing increasingly bitter and prejudiced as many of your interactions will be with the worst members of the public... or with decent members of the public who just happen to be at their worst when they encounter you. So the police, it seems, have real problems attracting and keeping the sort of people we'd surely all like to be cops. In fact, if not for the perks they offered, they'd probably have problems keeping themselves staffed with even the worst sorts of people. So what are those perks that police work offers that other jobs might not? 1. Authority / Respect - People join for the image. They want to be on top, they want to be in control, they want to feel important, and they want other people to see them as those things. The badge gives them that authority, and that authority can be used to command respect. 2. Allies / A sense of family - You have a group of people who will support you, who will have your back when the poo poo hits the fan. If you end up beating the poo poo out of a guy because you had a bad day, they will not stop you and may even join in. The appeal of the thin blue line is real. 3. Protection - If you screw up, you get a good deal more leniency. The law doesn't apply to you in quite the same way. Your allies will cover for you if things go wrong unless the thing you've done wrong is to actively betray them. 4. Family History / Tradition - You join because your family has police in it and it's expected of you. 5. Excitement - Police work means the possibility for adrenaline pumping action as part of your job, and this appeals to a lot of people. Coincidentally, these are basically the same reason people join gangs: http://www.gangfree.org/gangs_why.html Is it surprising, when these are the perks police departments pretty much rely on to attract recruits, that we get the police we have? Even if we added more perks, of different types, these perks will still have appeal and probably aren't going away any time soon. I think if we want to start improving things, we need to start thinking about how to change that. How to discourage some of these seeming benefits and the people attracted to them, while also replacing them with other benefits that will actually draw in the sort of people we want to do police work... and hopefully keep them as those sorts of people, but that's another issue.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 21:54
|
|
|
Zwabu posted:Since the DA's in these cases often have a working relationship with the police involved, there is a systemic conflict of interest in their vigorously pursuing justice for a police victim like Garner in that it might hamper their working relationship with the police there. I would also point out that even if you discount that relationship, there are strategic reasons for a prosecutor not to vigorously pursue cases against police. The state's case in many or most criminal trials relies heavily on the testimony of police, and the tendency of judges and juries to accept them as credible simply on the basis of their being police is a tremendous boon to prosecutors. Contrarily, in many cases where an officer is accused of a crime, his first line of defense is to begin shaping the narrative before there's even any formal investigation or accusation. Immediately after the crime takes place he's in a position to preemptively obstruct investigation by manipulating/concealing/destroying evidence, falsifying reports, intimidating and bringing spurious charges against victims and witnesses, etc. Worse, this is all done with the acquiescence or active assistance of other officers. Getting a conviction in such a situation means breaking down that narrative, and demonstrating that at least one and probably many police officers are telling self-serving lies. There may be criminal cases that hinge on those officers' testimony. Convicting one of them of a crime could well result in burning their credibility as witnesses in those cases. Past convictions could be overturned, future cases could be wrecked. e.g. imagine that you're a prosecutor and you have a lot of drug cases based on a particular officer: his swearing to probable cause, his collection of evidence, his testimony. He's involved in a questionable shooting, where eyewitnesses and video evidence disagree with his version of events--basically, he's lying in his reports and he'll lie on the stand if he has to testify in his defense. What does that do to all those drug cases? It's also a problem collectively, because you don't want judges and juries to start realizing that police lie, that you can't assume they're telling the truth. One of the main objectives of the prosecution in jury selection is eliminating jurors who distrust the police, why make that task harder?
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 22:08
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:See e.g. Minority students being accused of "acting white" for doing well in school. I didn't realize that being a minority student was a political group, that only applies to certain groups, and "acting white" usually involves a whole lot more than that so I don't even think this one holds up at the most basic level.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 22:20
|
|
|
DARPA posted:The issue isn't coaching an officer to lie. It's giving him time to get his facts in line with the investigation. How long would you wait before questioning a civilian shooter? Do you tell him to head home and relax for a couple days while you let his buddies write out their statements first? The entire process is transparently designed to ensure the officer has the best possible chance of not facing repercussions. Perhaps in your country. But in the United States we don't have to talk to the cops until we, or our lawyer, is ready to. ToxicSlurpee posted:Oh they aren't but I've never seen somebody actually be proud about how dumb they are while actively trying to be even dumber that wasn't a staunch Republican. Self-reflection is hard.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 22:26
|
|
|
Zeitgueist posted:I didn't realize that being a minority student was a political group, that only applies to certain groups, and "acting white" usually involves a whole lot more than that so I don't even think this one holds up at the most basic level. Guessing most of them are not the hard right 'Murcia types.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 22:54
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:See e.g. Minority students being accused of "acting white" for doing well in school. Yes, god knows the fault lies with minorities themselves. They just won't stop holding each other back.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 22:55
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Yes, god knows the fault lies with minorities themselves. They just won't stop holding each other back. That isn't even remotely the point I was making and you know it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 22:55
|
|
|
Sometimes you make points you weren't intending to make.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 22:57
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:Guessing most of them are not the hard right 'Murcia types. Yeah everyone knew what you meant, lol.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 22:58
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Sometimes you make points you weren't intending to make. Sometimes you deliberately gently caress up an interpretation in order to bring it into alignment with your own perceptions.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 23:00
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:Sometimes you deliberately gently caress up an interpretation in order to bring it into alignment with your own perceptions. How big a problem is minority kids ragging on each other for attempting to do schoolwork, would you say?
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 23:01
|
|
|
Zeitgueist posted:Yeah everyone knew what you meant, lol. That speaking in absolutes is dumb because there will always be a counter example? The only people in the world who make fun of education are staunch republicans! What about this? gently caress you you're racist.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 23:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 05:56 |
|
|
Zeitgueist posted:How big a problem is minority kids ragging on each other for attempting to do schoolwork, would you say?
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 23:02
|
|