Dead Reckoning posted:Can you give me a specific example of what you're talking about? Like, "municipality X in state Y doesn't have Z standard, which has caused problem A." Because otherwise I fear we're falling into the trap of declaring that the solution to a complex problem is more training and higher standards, so that we can say something has been done, irrespective of whether it actually fixes the problem. (See: the FAA cranking up pilot hour requirements.) every public company has to follow the exact same accounting standards, whether they have the smallest market capitalization ($3 million last i checked) or the biggest (Apple is closing in on a trillion dollars). running a business with a market cap of $3 million (which is overvalued if you read about the business -- its a lawn care service) is immeasurably easier to do than to run a business with even a billion dollar cap, much less a $700 billion cap. different states have different laws regarding businesses (which is why so many businesses are HQ'd in delaware), but they all still have to follow the same accounting standard. there are waaaayyyy more public businesses than police departments, but somehow GAAP manages to be an effective deterrent of poo poo like Enron. boop the snoot fucked around with this message at 23:22 on Sep 19, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2017 23:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 23:43 |
|
|
NUKES CURE NORKS posted:every public company has to follow the exact same accounting standards, whether they have the smallest market capitalization ($3 million last i checked) or the biggest (Apple is closing in on a trillion dollars). Try running a fire district or a law enforcement district like a business. It works out about as well as running the federal government like a business (which we are currently seeing right now). The goals are entirely loving different and the expectations of the public are entirely different.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2017 23:22
|
|
windshipper posted:Try running a fire district or a law enforcement district like a business. It works out about as well as running the federal government like a business (which we are currently seeing right now). I agree with you, but you asked for an example of applying a standard across the board where things differ from state to state. You can have standards in anything; it doesn't have to just be a business. the goals of what you apply the standards to might be different, but the goals of the standards are the same: accountability and to weed out corrupt practices. boop the snoot fucked around with this message at 23:25 on Sep 19, 2017 |
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2017 23:23
|
|
|
[quote="“windshipper”" post="“476562915”"] To further clarify this point - One of the fire districts I work in only has one county sheriff’s deputy on duty from 3 am to 11 am. Backup is from the small town nearby usually at least 20 minutes away. We have sat on scene outside a house, outside the daylight basement sliding door with the husband and the deputy waiting for for the deputy to get backup before entering, while the wife having a psychotic episode was banging on the door to the daylight basement with a kitchen knife and screaming and wailing for him to come out for 45 minutes while waiting for backup from that small town. Outside of those hours, there are only two deputies on duty for the entire island. (side note- no one got shot or stabbed, and she ended up going to the hospital for a psychiatric evaluation) This isn’t to say that national standards are a bad thing and should not be further entrenched - but... When you’re stuck in a situation where it’s far more emergent and a danger to life, and you’re the only one nearby for the next 15-20 minutes, at a minimum (as we were waiting for 45 minutes, for example)... I’ve also been on standby for a home invasion where the suspect had a knife in the house, at 4 am in this same district. He ended up fleeing and being caught about 45 minutes later, but should he have decided to hole up in the house... That’s where questions come in. National standards should be put in place, but there are far, far more of these law enforcement districts in this country that exist than you might think. The US is loving HUGE, and population density in a lot of places is loving LOW. Edit 2 - This is simply to clarify that while yes, there should be further national standards for training and qualifications for law enforcement, there also needs to be a certain amount of understanding as far as the majority of districts that you’re talking about. I am work with law enforcement frequently, but even with that, I feel that the law enforcement I work with could do better on certain occasions for sure. That said, I cannot with full honesty state I would act better than them given some of the situations we both face and given their line of duty. I would, however, wish that they act better in some of those situations. I do, however, understand the strain they’re under, as we run about 2,000 calls a year, whereas that rural county sheriff’s department last I saw was nearing 120,000 calls a year. The island we are on is only a small part of that entire district that they serve, but poo poo man... [/quote] You aren’t wrong in the sense that big city vs those policing tasks are vastly different and require a whole different set of procedures, but that has little to do with the states rights argument. Policing Chicago is vastly different than policing down state, or NYC vs the rest of the state. Somehow they are expected to manage that in this states rights argument but for some reason the federal govt can’t.. I don’t see how having a national standard that police must meet changes much of that. If anything making sure officers aren’t poorly trained and equipped before being thrust into the dangerous solo situations you are talking about makes even more sense. I’m not a cop so my perspective and experience may be off, but I have been shot at for a living and the idea of having my equipment and training kept current doesn’t sound like a bad one.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2017 23:23
|
|
|
How about a standard that as an agent of the state, preservation of life is of the utmost regard in the apprehension of suspected perpetrators except in situations where there is an immediate danger to the life of an officer? Create a higher standard than reasonableness for loving executing someone. That's one I didn't even have to think about
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2017 23:24
|
|
|
RoE: Do not fire until you're really scared. Or really mad. If you're just really mad, I hope the guy you shot was no angel; then you'll be fine.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2017 23:26
|
|
|
windshipper posted:Try running a fire district or a law enforcement district like a business. It works out about as well as running the federal government like a business (which we are currently seeing right now).
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2017 23:27
|
|
|
NUKES CURE NORKS posted:I agree with you, but you asked for an example of applying a standard across the board where things differ from state to state. You absolutely can. But, what I'm getting at is that if you're in a rural deputy department, and your national standards are X - and let's be honest, those will constantly be changing, and probably increasing - but you're tasked with running Y amount of calls a year, so you have to take Z time to train for them, the department is going to be paying overtime for you to take that training off duty or paying for someone to cover your shift hours while you do it on duty (again, overtime). Your budget is fixed. In the district I'm talking about, most of the homeowners, your tax base, are fixed income. Passing a fire levy failed the last time we tried it, and people love firefighters, so now try increasing their taxes for law enforcement to pay for the increased training? I sound like I'm arguing against national standards, and I swear to god, I'm not. I'm for it. There's a story I'd love to tell here with regards to reasons why de-escalation or increased training for psych issues would be a great thing for law enforcement, but I don't want to start telling it here because... well, possible legal reasons down the road. I want to put this out here to you guys though because this is a county that is representative of where the vast majority of law enforcement in the US is stuck. This county sheriff's department actually pays decently too - Last I knew they started at 60k, but they're hurting for people to apply. Richard Bong posted:You aren’t wrong in the sense that big city vs those policing tasks are vastly different and require a whole different set of procedures, but that has little to do with the states rights argument. Policing Chicago is vastly different than policing down state, or NYC vs the rest of the state. Somehow they are expected to manage that in this states rights argument but for some reason the federal govt can’t.. I'm not talking about the states rights argument. I refuse to talk about states rights because most of the time someone brings that up, it's bullshit. I'm talking about national standards, but how those national standards need to be written, interpreted, and applied. They should absolutely be properly trained and equipped. The ones in our county are properly equipped, I think some aspects of training need work on, but as an FF/EMT, I feel comfortable with most of the deputies I work with on scene. There are a few where I would prefer someone else working. I'm talking about application, interpretation, and writing of standards, and I want you guys to understand the depths of the problem that you are talking about. It's easy to say, "We have to do X, because of Y." The only thing I am trying to provide is the Z to all of that, to help provide understanding of the issues we have in getting to the solution. Kawasaki Nun posted:How about a standard that as an agent of the state, preservation of life is of the utmost regard in the apprehension of suspected perpetrators except in situations where there is an immediate danger to the life of an officer? In over three years of working in this fire district, we have not had a deputy fire a round at someone. That said, there was a fatal shooting in their jurisdiction the other day, but that happened AFTER the suspect discharged a firearm and injured someone trying to talk them down. I will poo poo all over these deputies a lot of times, but I trust their judgement more often than not when it comes to something like that. That wasn't in our district either, so I didn't have to deal with it... In addition, I REALLY DO NOT want you to think I'm arguing against national standards of training. It's the getting there that will be difficult, and I'm trying to explain why. I'm not saying it shouldn't be done. I will poo poo all over GA Tech, St. Louis, and the rest all loving day. But understand where the majority of the US stands when it comes to that rear end puckering factor as a law enforcement officer, where it's you and ONLY you for the next 8 hours. That's not to excuse someone executing someone, especially in a major metropolitan area where jesus christ your backup is like 2 minutes away AT MOST, and that's with traffic, and you're holding a loving AK47. windshipper fucked around with this message at 23:40 on Sep 19, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2017 23:34
|
|
|
Maybe places that can’t afford to have a police department shouldn’t have one?
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2017 23:37
|
|
|
In other news, Maria has officially recorded a lower pressure than Irma at peak intensity, and is still deepening. Puerto Rico about to have a real lovely day tomorrow. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2017 23:38
|
|
windshipper posted:You absolutely can. But, what I'm getting at is that if you're in a rural deputy department, and your national standards are X - and let's be honest, those will constantly be changing, and probably increasing - but you're tasked with running Y amount of calls a year, so you have to take Z time to train for them, the department is going to be paying overtime for you to take that training off duty or paying for someone to cover your shift hours while you do it on duty (again, overtime). Your budget is fixed. In the district I'm talking about, most of the homeowners, your tax base, are fixed income. Passing a fire levy failed the last time we tried it, and people love firefighters, so now try increasing their taxes for law enforcement to pay for the increased training? I think we are arguing two different things. Or at least I see what you're talking about as a funding issue, not an accountability issue. I see those two things as different problems (though more funding would mean the ability for individual departments to be more accountable).
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2017 23:39
|
|
|
What about creating some sort of, national policing organization, train them to police the country instead of having a bunch of different underfunded/well funded/undertrained people in fifty different states. Something to guard the citizens of the US, some sort of national...guard.. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2017 23:41
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:Maybe places that can’t afford to have a police department shouldn’t have one? Or we should vote for local government that will properly fund them and at the national level supplement that funding beyond "hey have this big stockpile of military equipment"
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2017 23:42
|
|
|
NUKES CURE NORKS posted:I think we are arguing two different things. Or at least I see what you're talking about as a funding issue, not an accountability issue. I see those two things as different problems (though more funding would mean the ability for individual departments to be more accountable). We are, again, I'm not arguing against national standards, I'm trying to provide context for implementation, writing of them, etc. to the people here who live in major metropolitan areas where funding and personnel isn't an issue. It's easy to say that national standards should be X, when you already live in a situation where X is entirely possible and easy.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2017 23:42
|
|
|
KildarX posted:What about creating some sort of, national policing organization, train them to police the country instead of having a bunch of different underfunded/well funded/undertrained people. Something to guard the citizens of the US, some sort of national...guard.. Hello my name is titles, 10, 32, and 50 and furthermore
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2017 23:42
|
|
|
FastestGunAlive posted:Or we should vote for local government that will properly fund them and at the national level supplement that funding beyond "hey have this big stockpile of military equipment" This. Forever this.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2017 23:44
|
|
|
KildarX posted:What about creating some sort of, national policing organization, train them to police the country instead of having a bunch of different underfunded/well funded/undertrained people in fifty different states. Something to guard the citizens of the US, some sort of national...guard.. It would be amusing to watch the circular logic and justification of conservatives over a national police force. Big government bad but safety from browns good but taxes bad but sheepdogs
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2017 23:45
|
|
|
KildarX posted:What about creating some sort of, national policing organization, train them to police the country instead of having a bunch of different underfunded/well funded/undertrained people in fifty different states. Something to guard the citizens of the US, some sort of national...guard.. Coast Guard but for the land. Hell just rename the Coast guard and give them 10 years to ramp up and take over all Le enforcement in the nation.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2017 23:45
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:Hello my name is titles, 10, 32, and 50 and furthermore
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2017 23:46
|
|
|
FastestGunAlive posted:It would be amusing to watch the circular logic and justification of conservatives over a national police force. Big government bad but safety from browns good but taxes bad but sheepdogs Uh, there are so loving many reasons not to have a national police force going waaaaay back. It's also extremely heavily enshrined in law. Better would be funding cops to be better trained and changing RoE. And also, if the argument is that cops should get to be scared and use their maximum force every time they get scaredy-pants, reduce their level of lethatlity. Alternately, train them better, leave them lethal, but actually and severely punish them when they gently caress up out of being overly scared or malicious. Also a DOJ who's ready to crush them like little babies when they violate the constitutional rights of citizens would be nice.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2017 23:50
|
|
|
 
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2017 23:51
|
|
|
FastestGunAlive posted:Or we should vote for local government that will properly fund them and at the national level supplement that funding beyond "hey have this big stockpile of military equipment" Like, if your town is population 300 with median income under $20,000 maybe you shouldn't have a police department.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2017 23:51
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:Uh, there are so loving many reasons not to have a national police force going waaaaay back. It's also extremely heavily enshrined in law. Better would be funding cops to be better trained and changing RoE. A knife wound can kill you. It's not unreasonable to fear for your life if someone with a knife continually moves towards you while shouting "shoot me". You guys are weird.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2017 23:52
|
|
|
Victor Vermis posted:A knife wound can kill you. It's not unreasonable to fear for your life if someone with a knife [NOT IN THEIR HANDS] continually moves towards you while shouting "shoot me". You are very bad at context.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2017 23:55
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:Uh, there are so loving many reasons not to have a national police force going waaaaay back. It's also extremely heavily enshrined in law. Better would be funding cops to be better trained and changing RoE. Yea I'm well aware; I'm not actual suggesting it as a valid idea, it would just be funny to see the wheels turn. Kind of how I'm seeing people in reaction to this shooting saying "well that's what you get" "just listen to the officer and you'll be fine"- the same people who think the police are gonna confiscate their guns, the authoritarian takeover is gonna happen any time now, etc
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2017 23:55
|
|
|
is the knife gonna shoot you? why are you afraid for your life if someone is drinking bleach and yelling shoot me
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2017 23:55
|
|
|
A single punch can kill you. If someone approaches you and yells "shoot me" I guess cops just gotta do it, no questions asked. If they appear to be a quadriplegic, they might be trying to deceive you, so shoot anyway.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2017 23:57
|
|
|
Or, and this was a core component of my original point, we increase officer pay and funding to solve a lot of these problems. We would need to do this federally and much like anything else requires taxing wealthy people and 
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2017 23:57
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:You are very bad at context. Sorry, I assumed there was a knife in hand because of the repeated commands to "drop the knife". I guess I'm loving retarded.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2017 23:58
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:A single punch can kill you. If someone approaches you and yells "shoot me" I guess cops just gotta do it, no questions asked. If they appear to be a quadriplegic, they might be trying to deceive you, so shoot anyway. Yeah, knives and fists are basically the same thing. That's why you can't fly with hands since 9/11.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2017 23:58
|
|
|
Victor Vermis posted:Sorry, I assumed there was a knife in hand because of the repeated commands to "drop the knife". "Drop the gun!" I yelled at the guy carrying a gun case, closed, with a gun inside. Then I shot him.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2017 23:59
|
|
|
FastestGunAlive posted:Yea I'm well aware; I'm not actual suggesting it as a valid idea, it would just be funny to see the wheels turn. Kind of how I'm seeing people in reaction to this shooting saying "well that's what you get" "just listen to the officer and you'll be fine"- the same people who think the police are gonna confiscate their guns, the authoritarian takeover is gonna happen any time now, etc On one hand the government is really bad and over steps their bounds, but on the other hand government is good and does it matter if a few rights are pushed to the side every so often?
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2017 23:59
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:Or, and this was a core component of my original point, we increase officer pay and funding to solve a lot of these problems. Yep. A lot of people going off the deep end here on both sides. FastestGunAlive posted:Or we should vote for local government that will properly fund them and at the national level supplement that funding beyond "hey have this big stockpile of military equipment" But this is the super tricky part - Voting for local government that will fund them and then supplementing that funding. Getting those local governments to vote for that. Again, the district I've been talking about has a shitton of fixed income people - retirement/social security/poverty line people. There's the part about local government funding them. You have a lot of local governments where people would probably be willing to do that, but the %'s of tax base just don't line up. Then you have the ones where people won't, so.... it comes down to YMMV. The one I've been talking about CAN fund a solid law enforcement district - what's in place is solid. It's when you start talking about increasing training standards and paying for overtime... That gets tricky. I haven't asked about that to the deputies I see regularly, so I don't know. But I know a lot of districts that would be trouble. As far as the one I've been talking about, they can fund decently - case in point - their starting salary is >60k/year. But the finding qualified people who WANT to apply there is the issue. And then you have to talk about training up the people there to the national standards if they're not already there, you need to start talking about paying overtime. IF they have to drop salary to provide more training, due to needing the funding... That just increases the question of who's going to stay there and who's going to want to apply there? windshipper fucked around with this message at 00:05 on Sep 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 00:02
|
|
|
windshipper posted:The district I work in uses the SOPs for EMS from the next door county, due to the fact that 2/3 of the hospitals we transport to are in that county. The third hospital we transport to is in another, nearby, county. On the LE side, it wouldn't make sense to require every officer demonstrate proficiency with the taser and the rifle if not every department issues tasers and rifles. OtspIII posted:Upstate NY gets real rural in plenty of places and would probably need things totally different than the NYPD gets/would have way more in common with the Montana example listed--I don't think those different policies needed actually break down across state lines all that well. Like: Richard Bong posted:I don’t see how having a national standard that police must meet changes much of that. If anything making sure officers aren’t poorly trained and equipped before being thrust into the dangerous solo situations you are talking about makes even more sense. I honestly don't see what relevance this has, other than, "standardizing national requirements is a thing that is possible."
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 00:02
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:To me, that's a perfect argument for devolving training. There isn't any point to extending the National Reg curriculum to require proficiency with supraglottic airways and auto vents if half the counties don't allow EMTs to use them. We don't in my county, and if I move to one that does, I would not be comfortable diving in to using one based on my years-old NREMT training. I'd much rather have the county give me training on the equipment they expect me to use according to their direction. OTOH, one of the nearby counties requires an advanced Hazmat course for all first responders, because apparently they have some facilities that make it a sensible choice. There is no reason for every EMT in the state to sit through that though. If you're talking hazmat ops, that's not advanced at all. I'm not saying I need training on auto vents, but being trained on loving king tubes, LMAs, and all is super basic, super helpful, and not everyone you train is going to work in your county. Not only that, but it helps increase the ability of the EMT to assist the medic on calls where they need to be used. Also holy poo poo the iGel is basically point and place, and you're done. As an EMT, you should be able to listen to lung sounds already, so placing a king tube isn't that much more training beyond practice of proper placement. Not to mention the LMA doesn't even need you to have it in "the right hole," and the iGel, well, it's an LMA, just without an inflatable cuff. Edit: Hazmat Ops is so not advanced, that in WA state, it's required for you to get your FF1.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 00:08
|
|
|
Victor Vermis posted:Yeah, knives and fists are basically the same thing. That's why you can't fly with hands since 9/11. I'm not the guy who decided the standard for shooting someone to death is "they could do a thing physically maybe that could potentially result in a mortal wound." You did. That was my point, not that we should cut hands off. This is not hard.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 00:10
|
|
|
Feeling bad for suicidal deaf people!police posted:6/10 would shoot
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 00:11
|
|
|
like step 1 is police forces accepting responsibility for the environment theyve created and thats never happening so enjoy our low grade, state sponsored terror organizations
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 00:14
|
|
|
Proud Christian Mom posted:like step 1 is police forces accepting responsibility for the environment theyve created and thats never happening so enjoy our low grade, state sponsored terror organizations take it down a notch there buddy
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 00:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 23:43 |
|
|
Q: Would you shoot a man holding a closed up knife saying "shoot me?" A: Even though I am volunteering under no duress to become an agent of the state with a firearm, yes, I would gladly do so because that sounds very scary.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 00:16
|
|