(06-09-2020, 08:00 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: Defunding the police isn't about disbanding police; they are two different movements. Defunding is, as discussed, about diverting resources from police to other community based options for mental health, homelessness, food insecurity, etc. While I think that any police officer would say that they are asked to do a lot of things they are not trained to do like dealing with these social issues, I think we need to think about the competing narratives going on.
There has been a lot of criticism about the length/amount of training required for an officer. It's true that many lower stakes professions require more training for their certification, but in order for us to push for reform and require more training they will need, you guessed it, more funding. That is where a ton of money in police departments is already spent, so attempts to divert funds from police would make the training even less.
Disbanding the police is just stupid. I don't really have much more to say about that. Reforms are needed, but that isn't one of them.
(06-09-2020, 08:00 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: There has been a lot of criticism about the length/amount of training required for an officer. It's true that many lower stakes professions require more training for their certification, but in order for us to push for reform and require more training they will need, you guessed it, more funding. That is where a ton of money in police departments is already spent, so attempts to divert funds from police would make the training even less.
Disbanding the police is just stupid. I don't really have much more to say about that. Reforms are needed, but that isn't one of them.
More attention to hiring might obviate "more training."
Hire people who don't need to be "trained" not to point weapons at children.
So here in Cincinnati we have an increase over last year in complaints filed against the police. And the number one category of complaint, 48 percent, deals with reaction time, 911 calls, etc. I mean that might suggest police are under staffed.
(06-08-2020, 07:26 PM)Ibfine32 Wrote: I guess my point is folks do exactly what they ***** about. Biden has even started it. He recently called Trump's remarks about Floyd and the economy despicable; while they had nothing to with the economy.
"We all saw what happened last week. We can't let that happen. Hopefully George is looking down and saying this is a great thing that's happening for our country. A great day for him. It's a great day for everybody." Mr Trump, a Republican, added: "This is a great, great day in terms of equality. It's really what our Constitution requires and it's what our country is all about. Today is probably, if you stop and think about it, the greatest comeback in American History. But it's not going to stop here. It's going to keep going. We're going to learn whether this is a very big, powerful R word, Recession. Or whether this is a hurricane that we recover from very quickly."
Biden's response: "George Floyd's last words, 'I can't breathe, I can't breathe' echoed all across this nation and quite frankly around the world. For the president to try to put any other words in the mouth of George Floyd I frankly think is despicable."[/i] https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-52941258
Trump goes from 'what our Constitution requires' and 'great day' to 'greatest comeback in American history' almost in the same breath. It is unclear what is "happening" that makes it all "a great day for [Floyd]. . . in terms of equality." The protests which require the military to "dominate the streets??
Ambiguity or no, Biden is right. He is not "starting" anything but commenting on Trump's absent sense of appropriateness.
Trump's speech is not about civil rights. So this is not "folks doing exactly what they ******about" or "folks seeing what they want to see" or any other equivocations.
It IS despicable to pull Floyd onto the Trump bandwagon in a speech taking credit for "the greatest comeback in American History."
(06-09-2020, 10:41 AM)Dill Wrote: More attention to hiring might obviate "more training."
Hire people who don't need to be "trained" not to point weapons at children.
It might, but you know what also needs funding? A well staffed and trained HR department to do that hiring.
In addition, officers will be more likely to turn to their weapon if they are not confident enough in their abilities to de-escalate a situation and/or go hands on with someone. Those things require training, a lot of it, and from what I have heard from officers is that while these things are touched on they aren't given nearly enough focus.
"A great democracy has got to be progressive, or it will soon cease to be either great or a democracy..." - TR
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
(06-09-2020, 10:53 AM)Goalpost Wrote: So here in Cincinnati we have an increase over last year in complaints filed against the police. And the number one category of complaint, 48 percent, deals with reaction time, 911 calls, etc. I mean that might suggest police are under staffed.
& so far this year.
CPD records show 23 homicides this year. That's up from 12 in 2019. There have been 101 shooting in 2020 compared to 73 in 2019. Robberies are up 42%: 234 in 2020, 165 in 2019.Apr 14, 2020
(06-09-2020, 11:23 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: It might, but you know what also needs funding? A well staffed and trained HR department to do that hiring.
In addition, officers will be more likely to turn to their weapon if they are not confident enough in their abilities to de-escalate a situation and/or go hands on with someone. Those things require training, a lot of it, and from what I have heard from officers is that while these things are touched on they aren't given nearly enough focus.
I am certainly no expert on police reform but I would think that moving funds to programs for people to deal with incidents at schools and mental health checks, even if that is away from the police purchasing program, would be good.
Someone shared this with me earlier today.
Watch this super interesting conversation with the former police chief of Camden, NJ.
In Camden, city leaders dissolved the entire police department in 2012 and fully rebuilt it to focus on community policing.
(06-09-2020, 08:00 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: Defunding the police isn't about disbanding police; they are two different movements. Defunding is, as discussed, about diverting resources from police to other community based options for mental health, homelessness, food insecurity, etc. While I think that any police officer would say that they are asked to do a lot of things they are not trained to do like dealing with these social issues, I think we need to think about the competing narratives going on.
There has been a lot of criticism about the length/amount of training required for an officer. It's true that many lower stakes professions require more training for their certification, but in order for us to push for reform and require more training they will need, you guessed it, more funding. That is where a ton of money in police departments is already spent, so attempts to divert funds from police would make the training even less.
Disbanding the police is just stupid. I don't really have much more to say about that. Reforms are needed, but that isn't one of them.
I read an article today about Camden, NJ, a city that actually did disband their department. I've been to Camden a few times. It's across from Philadelphia and the last time I was there (15 years or so), it wasn't exactly considered to be "safe".
Anyway, the article basically stated that they disbanded the existing department and administration, started a new department (with some of the staff from the old one), and changed the way they operate in civil matters.
(06-08-2020, 02:49 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Guess why he tweets on everything? He know it will get overblown attention by both sides. The next tweet I read from the original source will be my first.
Burying your head in the sand does not mean those tweets no longer exist. The comments of the leader of the most powerful country on earth are ALWAYS important.
(06-08-2020, 02:49 PM)bfine32 Wrote: None of that changes my original assertion that if Biden wins there will be a lot more threads dedicated to the actual matter instead of looking for 6 degrees of Kevin Bacon.
There is no "six degrees". What we talk about are direct quotes from Trump. There is no "separation".
But I agree that there will be a lot less discussion about the massive lies and crazy shit being spewed by the President.
(06-09-2020, 02:39 PM)samhain Wrote: I read an article today about Camden, NJ, a city that actually did disband their department. I've been to Camden a few times. It's across from Philadelphia and the last time I was there (15 years or so), it wasn't exactly considered to be "safe".
Anyway, the article basically stated that they disbanded the existing department and administration, started a new department (with some of the staff from the old one), and changed the way they operate in civil matters.
EDIT: Dammit, Dino, you beat me to it.
Sorry!
Yeah I don't anything about the place other than what I read. Seems they didn't try to change the department they just rebuilt it from the ground up.
Your anger and ego will always reveal your true self.
(06-09-2020, 02:40 PM)fredtoast Wrote: There is no "six degrees". What we talk about are direct quotes from Trump. There is no "separation".
But I agree that there will be a lot less discussion about the massive lies and crazy shit being spewed by the President.
You are partly right about this.
Hopefully if the guy wins he can just get the exec and our foreign policy back on track, and re-instate or revise and improve Obama's policies where possible. Starting with the CDC and Consent Decrees.
Fox and the right wing echo machine will be all over this agenda, churning out faux scandal after faux scandal about Biden and his son, calling for Ukraine hearings and the like. So there will still be "massive lies and crazy shit." It just won't be true and won't be emanating from Biden. It will be as it was during the Obama years, with frothing articles about salutes with a coffee cup, insults to the police, and other "divisiveness."
They'll be selling "Miss me yet?" t-shirts with pictures of Trump by April 2021, but some 55% of Americans will still be able to tell the difference between grounded and ungrounded accusations, and between an elderly man's occasional misstatement and 24 hour cycle of vulgar and childish insults.
(06-09-2020, 03:09 PM)Dill Wrote: Good for politicians to think votes.
And the photograph tells us these politicians are listening to BLM and the movement for police reform.
Their opponents will send an altogether different signal, expecting to reach different voters.
In the words of one particular person of color I follow on social media, "I'm not sure if it's racist, but it really doesn't feel right." That's the general consensus I'm getting from those that know about it; they feel like it was at the very least racially insensitive.
"A great democracy has got to be progressive, or it will soon cease to be either great or a democracy..." - TR
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
(06-09-2020, 06:29 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: In the words of one particular person of color I follow on social media, "I'm not sure if it's racist, but it really doesn't feel right." That's the general consensus I'm getting from those that know about it; they feel like it was at the very least racially insensitive.
In common lingo... They should stay in their lane.
I'm gonna break every record they've got. I'm tellin' you right now. I don't know how I'm gonna do it, but it's goin' to get done.
(06-09-2020, 10:41 AM)Dill Wrote: More attention to hiring might obviate "more training."
Hire people who don't need to be "trained" not to point weapons at children.
I don't think you were posting in P&R back when I made the point, several times, that LEO's back east are woefully under-trained. Right now you're getting exactly what you asked for in this post with many, if not most, departments. The focus right now in those cases is largely on the hiring process. Once hired they are not trained properly. As for the circumstance you described, you cannot know how a person is going to respond in an extreme situation like the current protests, riots and looting until it happens. You can certainly weed out individuals who are obviously unsuited, but there is no possible way to weed out everyone who will react badly under those circumstances. Also, such circumstances are exceedingly rare, so you have very few chances to find this out.
In a combat environment, the unsuitable people tend to die quickly, so the military suffers far less from this problem. In law enforcement, this is not the case. I know things may look patently obvious to you, and others, watching these situations from the comfort of you couch, it's quite another thing to be immersed in them for twelve plus hours at a time. Even a generally good officer can succumb to fatigue and stress and make a poor decision. Guess what though, more, and better, training, will help alleviate that. Defunding will definitely not help achieve what you profess to desire.
(06-09-2020, 11:23 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: It might, but you know what also needs funding? A well staffed and trained HR department to do that hiring.
In addition, officers will be more likely to turn to their weapon if they are not confident enough in their abilities to de-escalate a situation and/or go hands on with someone. Those things require training, a lot of it, and from what I have heard from officers is that while these things are touched on they aren't given nearly enough focus.
I see you watched Donut's video on this subject. You should have posted it, as certain people would lend it more credence if you posted it rather than my doing so. But you, and he, are absolutely correct. Here's the video in question for anyone who cares to watch.
(06-10-2020, 11:06 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I see you watched Donut's video on this subject. You should have posted it, as certain people would lend it more credence if you posted it rather than my doing so. But you, and he, are absolutely correct. Here's the video in question for anyone who cares to watch.
Yeah, I highly recommend watching his stuff and this video in particular. I should note that I watched his video and listened to Deray McKesson talk about the 8 Can't Wait stuff, so I'm trying to get a sense from it from multiple angles and I encourage everyone to do something similar.
"A great democracy has got to be progressive, or it will soon cease to be either great or a democracy..." - TR
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
(06-10-2020, 11:06 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I don't think you were posting in P&R back when I made the point, several times, that LEO's back east are woefully under-trained. Right now you're getting exactly what you asked for in this post with many, if not most, departments. The focus right now in those cases is largely on the hiring process. Once hired they are not trained properly. As for the circumstance you described, you cannot know how a person is going to respond in an extreme situation like the current protests, riots and looting until it happens. You can certainly weed out individuals who are obviously unsuited, but there is no possible way to weed out everyone who will react badly under those circumstances. Also, such circumstances are exceedingly rare, so you have very few chances to find this out.
In a combat environment, the unsuitable people tend to die quickly, so the military suffers far less from this problem. In law enforcement, this is not the case. I know things may look patently obvious to you, and others, watching these situations from the comfort of you couch, it's quite another thing to be immersed in them for twelve plus hours at a time. Even a generally good officer can succumb to fatigue and stress and make a poor decision. Guess what though, more, and better, training, will help alleviate that. Defunding will definitely not help achieve what you profess to desire.
LOL I'm not sure "unsuitable people tend to die quickly in a combat environment," though they certainly increase the risk for their team members, innocent civilians and everyone around them.
I understand law enforcement is hard and appreciate your contributions on this topic. While I don't see myself pointing weapons at children, I don't assume that I could keep discipline while people are throwing rocks and spitting on me. Not without a lot of training, anyway. I agree that we can weed out some or many that are unsuited, but not all. Failure to do that often explains individual cases (e.g., Tamir Rice).
Pretty big news, but NASCAR is banning the Confederate flag at all it's events going forward. Good for them, that flag should have been banned over a century ago. But unfortunately that even though the Northern Union armies won the war, they lost the aftermath to the South.
![[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]](https://i.imgur.com/4CV0TeR.png)
![[Image: bfine-guns2.png]](https://i.ibb.co/YBkDQJV/bfine-guns2.png)
![[Image: giphy.gif]](https://media0.giphy.com/media/1kwsTjL8BNqlszNtnCE/giphy.gif)
