The Floyd murder case speaks for itself. It sickens us all, as do the mass shootings throughout our lives. I am 71, and am experienced enough to know it is not likely to stop before my death. Yes, I hope it will, and will fight against the slaughter.
As to the coronavirus, I and my wife are fully vaccinated, still wearing masks and ac…
The Floyd murder case speaks for itself. It sickens us all, as do the mass shootings throughout our lives. I am 71, and am experienced enough to know it is not likely to stop before my death. Yes, I hope it will, and will fight against the slaughter.
As to the coronavirus, I and my wife are fully vaccinated, still wearing masks and acting according to CDC guidelines. It is prudent, smart and will help the community to rid ourselves of this menace.
We hope you all feel the same way, because none of us can do this alone!
I too am 71 and fully vaccinated. I am also former law enforcement (FBI) and we are sworn to serve and protect. Officer Chauvin did neither and is a disgrace to his badge and a criminal.
We need serious police reform (not defunding) and major gun control legislation. These are way past due and our country suffers for it.
I agree, but we have had decades of "reform," which usually adds up to some sensitivity training and not much else. Though "defunding" has become an unfortunate target, the intent behind it is sound: to take some of the funds spent on policing and redirect it to interventions that do not involve the police. Eugene, Oregon has a very successful such program, CAHOOTS, which has quietly been saving lives and saving money for 30 years.
But why "take some of the funds spent on policing?"" Why not ADD to the funds spent on public safety to contract with community mental health and other services? We look at this issue as a zero-sum game. Ain't! The very rich pay very little taxes. Time to fund our social services adequately again.
Whereas I agree with you in principle, my thought is that, if you take some of the social service duties out of the police department, they will require fewer cops and a lower budget.
But, a better way would be to offer communities grants for mental health services - written with clear assessment of the problems, outline if goals, and data points to assess for success. Then the picture would be clear, and if the answer is less police officers, it would be gradual with union and community buy in.
This is an incremental approach and I think we are past that point. And the current police unions will never agree. Besides, the groundwork had been done in many communities, most strikingly Eugene, Oregon. We don't need more study, we need action.
The mental health fiasco of Regan continues to haunt the nation. The promise was for community health centers to manage the 'deinstitulization' of the mentally ill. Those centers were never provided, even though the research showed that a friend, a home, and a job (or a reason to be), would create successful transition.
MaryPat, yours is idea worth exploring. Our services have been supplanted by the pay nothing, do nothing unless it makes a dollar system that exists in most states right now.
Ah, the defense department? Eisenhauer advised us to beware of the military industrial complex. We have not done that, nor do I see us doing that in the near future.
We are motivated by fear of the rest of the world invading and overrunning us, or so it seems.
The defense department cannot even pass a simple annual audit. So how do you beat those eggs???? I wonder?
I'm all in favor of funding social services, under the "stitch in time" theory. But I'm guessing most people responsible for municipal budgets do see it as a zero sum situation. Rising taxes is quite the cudgel against "tax-and-spend liberals."
Yes, friend, reform. Sadly the “bumper sticker” people got to the issue first. I have a nephew and a few friends who are on the job. A good start might be to find a way for police to be inside the community, a part of every day life, rather than a flying squad that shows up only when there’s trouble. Maybe I’m a Pollyanna about this, but I want to know the people wearing the badge and not fear the people behind the badge.
Camden, NJ went through a major police reform and restructuring. Afterwards, part of police training was to be dropped in a neighborhood for the day, told to make friends with the locals if they wanted water or access to a bathroom. Then back the next day, same. It seems to have helped. It's not even a radical new idea - remember beat cops?
I just wonder if we have gone too far down the road of militarization and violence for this to be effective now. I suppose it's the difference between pessimism and optimism. I see no signs that there is any will within police departments to even acknowledge the failure of their philosophies and practices, nonetheless work to reform them.
I definitely agree with the over militarization of the police which subconsciously makes them more aggressive. Of course, this is partially the result of our lack of gun control which often led to our police being outgunned. It’s a vicious circle that needs to be broken.
It seems that it ultimately comes down to leadership. Police serve the public, our taxes pay for them. They must follow the public will, but it takes a strong enough person in charge, who has the proper support, to push them in the right direction.
It's a tall order though, because if the police don't like what they're told, they just have to drag their feet a little and crime goes up. It's a little but of a devil's bargain with them, and a tough nut to crack.
In my suburb I knew quite a few local policemen by name, they have known my children and my neighbors children, attended the mayor's cookout, patroled daily and waved and stopped to introduce themselves. We knew our local cop so well he would knock on the door to chat, stop and get out of his patrol car to greet kids playing together, or get a drink of water (just like you say) and was a part of high school graduation parties and still keeps in touch on Facebook. In the past twenty years I have seen this sense of community drastically decline which I partly blame on the new recruits that have replaced the retired gentlemen I knew and/or their training. They really need to step up the community involvement.
I have also seen some young people who want guns to feel that power. Two young men I know want to be cops because they want to carry a Glock. One of them is a young man of color who is 18 and bought one the day of his birthday. He and his friend were messing with it in their apartment and shot it off. It went through the wall into the apartment next door where there was a baby. No one was hurt, but they were scared to death.
You have to take lessons and a test to get a license to drive a car, a dangerous 1-2 ton vehicle. The same should be required of a gun-- you should have to take lessons in safety and maintenance, operate under a supervisor for a certain period of time, and take a test.
There is absolutely no reason to have WMDs as civilians.
And they don't need to all carry guns all the time. British cops (in a society with just as much racism and possibly an even worse classism) do not habitually carry guns. This means they are more likely to engage with the public in a less confrontational, less aggressive, more communicative fashion. Sure, there are power-drunk assholes among the British police, too, but fewer fatalities at their hands. It takes a lot more effort to murder a citizen that pisses you off or scares you if you only have a truncheon. Altogether too easy with a gun. Of course, then we have the lethal chokehold - I confess I don't know any figures on that in the UK.
I have watched many police shows from the UK and noticed how often they don't go into a crime scene with guns drawn or even guns on their person. I often wondered if that were try to life. It really stands out and seems to keep the calm. Of course it also helps if the perpetrator is also assumed to probably not be armed.
I'm happy that you had this experience with the police, but it is not the norm and never has been. I assume you are white; people of color do not have this kind of relationship with the police and never have. And the idea that "community involvement" can in any way ameliorate what ills American policing is analogous to recommending aspirin for stage 4 cancer; we need surgery and chemotherapy, not palliatives.
I understand that it is not the norm. I know it is a bandaid. It is a place to begin and something that should be a common effort by the police and fire departments. My neighborhood is 60/40 white and POC. I am just stating that I noticed the decline in the community involvement in my neighborhood. It was a good thing and it did make a difference in the attitudes toward the police and from the police. The respect for each other has to begin somewhere. If they were part of the community they were policing it would be the seeds for more empathy and compassion to grow. The actual reforms are so much more vital and important, but the little things can grow. Just like mandatory mental health training and assessment, making community involvement mandatory is a small start.
I think this is, indeed, a Pollyanna take, unfortunately. We have gone too far down the road of authoritarians with guns believing they can exert their power and control over lower caste people. We need to entirely rethink policing in our country or this will continue to happen.
Perhaps it begins with recruitment and socialization. Military veterans are trained in warfare but not policing. They are very different skills. And once out of the police academy, who is training them on the job? What behaviors are rewarded by the respect and friendship of colleagues? It is a huge problem, no doubt, but one that will eventually tear our country apart if we don’t work to fix it. And no, it will not be easy, but all the “easy” things have been done and haven’t worked very well. So now it’s time for adult solutions to a societal problem.
I am retired nurse, and have always said that the compulsive personality of nurses is hardwired into us long before we choose a profession that treasures it. I believe the same is true of police recruits and violence as a solution. I agree that it is a culture problem, but rooting it out would require a resolve I have yet to see and a systemic change beyond anything ever attempted.
Another retired RN, nursing school was an indoctrination into a powerful culture. Police academy is the same. The mores and local inculturation can be insidious. Resistance brings retribution until one falls in line. Teaching in these locations may allow the resistor to create spaces for a radical understanding by students. Of course the dominant culture presents challenges to continued resistance.
Reid, we have already had a systemic change. It was slow and inexorable. Now that we have had it and seen what it has wrought, perhaps, it is time to change again?
Given the concurrent crisis for AAPI people, indeed anyone who values justice, we should be able to say that All Lives Matter. But that decent sentiment has, outrageously, been hijacked by people for whom it signifies nothing. Its effective meaning is Black Lives Don't Matter, or Only White Lives Matter.
Complexities and nuances don’t make for bumper sticker facility. The shallow nature of this public ‘discourse’ damages the potential for meaningful conversation. Sad and frustrating.
Thanks for posting this as a former FBI agent. My husband is a former police officer. His natural inclination is to support the police. But he realizes now how often the police abuse their authority and fail to “serve and protect”. He gets so angry at those officers who not only commit these horrendous acts, but at the ones who cover them up. You know the old saying “there’s nothing worse than a reformed smoker”. Well, there’s nothing “worse “ than a reformed police officer. I say that not to be funny, but once they see for their own eyes how awful this behavior is, look out!
Yes, if indeed they witnessed or knew about it. But remember, there ARE many good police officers with integrity. If they conducted themselves with dignity and fairness, and didn't see anything to report, it isn't fair to paint them with that broad brush of "too little, too late".
Reid, you are right. The problem shows itself every time there is an officer, or officers who decide that it is time to show everyone that they can take care of the problem whether the victim is black, asian, white or any other type of mixture. Murder is never the answer and this was murder.
No doubt, there are good police officers with integrity, though exactly how many relative to the "bad apples" is unknown, as many cases of police abuse are never even reported, and those that are go mostly unpunished. The 3 officers assisting Derek Chauvin with the "arrest" of George Floyd were not among the good apples, and there is no broader brush than racism.
I think our point of disagreement is the "bad apple" argument as opposed to systemic rot, which is what I believe we have. There is a culture of silence, the "thin blue line" philosophy, which is pervasive and toxic in policing, even among "good" cops.
The brotherhood of police is strong and it needs to be. Their dedication and sacrifice is keeping our society together. That said, we all know right from wrong and a bad cop reflects on all of them and needs to be weeded out.
Sorry, no. No excuses, please. The brotherhood of police is too strong and it doesn't need to be. What do they sacrifice other than time and rest, and what are they dedicated to? Maintaining their own power, allowing them to get away, literally, with murder. How can we fixate on "a bad cop" when the system produces so many? Can we expect anything beyond bad apples when the whole tree is rotten? The mere existence of the Blue Wall of Silence (with go-along prosecutors) makes every cop complicit whenever one is accused, however justly. It all but ensures that police will not know right from wrong, or not act appropriately when they do.
I am so tired of America SVCKING. America at its worst simply svcks.
One can’t throw out the good with the bad. Think about our society without the police. Change needs to happen and in a big way but blowing everything up is not the answer.
No one is saying to blow everything up. And no cities burned down last summer. Not one. Please spare us the fallacy of the excluded middle, a false choice posing two extreme alternatives with only one acceptable. Other alternatives are possible.
I have a lifelong very close friend who's career was in many roles in law enforcement including a Chief of Police who is now an adjunct professor at a law enforcement college. He has made a point of always advocating that law enforcement should train policy, procedures, and technique, but hire for character. He believes you cannot train character. He believes that most of the “bad apple” incidents can be traced to those character flaws and they could have been identified in the hiring and screening processes before employment and during training.
I don't think the history of policing in this country supports this sanguine view, though. Police culture is steeped in bigotry and stereotypes and reinforced by our society's entrenched and systemic racism. The rot goes deep, and people like your friend with good intentions, while I don't doubt his basic integrity, are imagining that the problem is one of individual character rather than societal culture. There is no evidence I can find that he is right.
I agree that we, citizens and voters who comprise the society you speak of, tolerate if not even encourage the systemic poor character that may pervade some or even many policing organizations. That is the systemic, societal rot you speak of. That can only be changed by educating and convincing society that the problem exists and needs to be addressed. However, if that is successful there will need to be actions taken within law enforcement to accomplish the necessary change. Simple condemnation is not correction. So let's look at the correction actions. Simply denying funding is punitive not corrective. My friend's suggestions are corrective but only a start. I am sure there are more. If you have thoughts on corrective measures to contribute, please offer them. If we agree there is a problem, let's try to correct it not just scream it's broken.
But we have to, as a society, agree that it's broken before we can fix it. And I am under no obligation to come up with solutions in order to point out the problem--that's a false premise. I don't have to be able to put out a fire to recognize it and pull the alarm. The idea that we have to "educate and convince" the American people that systemic racism is a problem before we can have systemic change in policing pushes true reform back decades into the future, because we are extremely skilled in turning a blind eye to racism and have been doing so for 450 years. We don't need incremental change, we need radical change, and we need it now.
As far as solutions, three are easy fixes: demand that the police are held to the same standards as the rest of us as far as use of force goes, with some allowance made for the job they have to do but none when their use of force goes beyond what is called for; to that end, qualified immunity must go unless it has very strict limits. Second, decertify police unions that act in bad faith to protect their membership to the exclusion of the people they are supposed to serve. Third, institute a social services and mental health intervention group in every city and town, and fund them adequately. Do NOT send police out with them, but allow them to intervene in cases where appropriate. I worked in a county hospital with hundreds of mentally ill and potentially dangerous clients and did not have to kill a single one; I was trained in de-escalation techniques that really work.
Defund the Police has become a catchphrase that doesn't properly convey the details of the idea that police have become the catchall for multiple societal ills that would be better addressed by shifting funding to social service agencies.
Unfortunately the “defunding” sound bite mischaracterizes what is needed. Public safety generally should deploy the most appropriate resources to address public safety calls. Sending the fire department to respond to burger alarms or the police to respond to a fire alarm clearly makes no sense. Far too many public safety incidents would be better served by more appropriate public safety resources than an armed police patrol officer. That should be obvious to all. Why do we not describe both the problem and obvious solution better?
That's the point I was (ineptly) trying to get across. The desire for improvement is best communicated clearly and completely. The "defund" is a bumper sticker or meme, and does little to advance improvement. Your examples are clear and apt; I'd argue in addition to more community policing which can recognize potential problems and defuse them as an alternative to always sending in combat troops to respond to things that could have been avoided.
Having a defined link to social services and mental health professionals could be a good idea in the context of community policing. There's more, to be sure, but we have to start somewhere.
Yes, I agree entirely, though with one caveat: social service agencies can't "accompany" police because the person with a gun is always in charge and their very presence can cause escalation when the opposite is what is called for. Where appropriate, social services must be the first and only responders. Once again, I hold the CAHOOTS program in Eugene, Oregon up as exhibit A. This system of intervention has been highly successful and they only rarely have to call for police backup.
Because "send a social worker or mental health professional instead of a cop" just isn't as catchy.
Seriously, though, those who take the refunding slogan literally are being disingenuous and intentionally obfuscating. They don't even want to engage in the conversation.
To put in a word for the much maligned "defunding" movement - many of us who want defunding are asking for a parallel refunding (or even funding for the first time) of the many support services that have been depleted or disbanded or never funded that would take duties from the police that they are not trained to perform, but are nevertheless expected to. If there is a dearth of extra money in a local government's coffers after covering law enforcement, we believe that reducing the police budget should be used to transfer many duties to mental health, drug rehabilitation, education, and other services that would be better and more competently performed by experts trained in those areas, not by police officers. I have had conversations with local officers and former officers in my city and from their descriptions of their training at police academy, it is clear they are daily sent into situations for which they have absolutely no tools. That is the reasoning behind defunding. Put the money where it will do the most good; and rather than asking police to do things for which they do not have the training, knowledge, or experience to handle, let's get in those who do have that training, knowledge, and experience.
The problem with the "defunding movement" is not it's prescription for what needs to be done to end police violence against BIPOC and anyone else, for that matter. It's the word "defunding" for goodness sake! White people who have either never needed police assistance or - more likely - have had a positive experience when they have needed it, mostly see the police as protectors of them and their property. And even if they are tuned in to the George Floyd killing and its repercussions and are aware of and worried about repeated unwarranted violence against BIPOC and see this as a problem and are offended by the injustice and immorality of it, they can still imagine situations in their own admittedly privileged and usually safe lives when a cop might really come in handy.
Is this fair? No, of course not. Are most white people going to support lower spending on what they view as an essential government service? No, probably not. Can they be convinced to support real police reform at the polls? Why not if they are convinced it is in everyone's interest? Will the worst racists and insurrectionists support it? Never in a million years.
Clearly the hiring of police needs to be more selective, training needs to be re-imagined and greatly improved, jobs now dumped on the police because no one else is willing or able to do them should be farmed out to unarmed, well-trained specialists, police unions need to be reined in and laws regarding the use of force need to be changed in favor of less force, to be used only when all other alternatives have been exhausted. The police need to be demilitarized. There should not be the cozy relationship between police and DAs that makes police misconduct nearly impossible to sanction. If I knew more about this issue, I'm sure I could go on, but I do know that the term "defunding" is totally, even naively, counterproductive if we want the violence against BIPOC to end. Things will never change if we are always having to explain exactly what we mean by "defunding" instead of laying out a comprehensive reform of policing which - when all is said and done - could require more money to run than the present system. So be it, money well spent.
You are correct about the fear using this word engenders. But I contend that the expansion of policing in our lifetimes into an instrument of social control has created many more problems than it has solved. Policing has always been about serving the interests of the propertied and the powerful; and modern police, when they harass, bully, and murder in order to "teach lessons", are performing exactly the way they are meant to. Sure, there are individual "good cops", but there is systemic rot in policing - which is why many of us want to see reform go down to the bone.
A very good book on policing - not only in America, but elsewhere, too - is "The End of Policing", by Alex S. Vitale, in which the author recounts the origins of policing and the many efforts at reform that have failed over and over again. His argument that the problem is not training, diversity, or methods, but that the ongoing expansion and support of police authority works against community adhesion, creates social injustice and actively harms the public.
Lanita, I agree with you 100%, but the changes we both want will not come either quickly or easily. Most Americans -- for reasons that have a lot to do with our economic system and traditional moral values you and I may or may not share with them -- like the idea of being able to call for a cop when they hear someone trying to break into the house at 3 in the morning, or if they have just been mugged, or had their car stolen, or witnessed some act of violence. Some Americans have preferred to arm themselves to the teeth to deal with these situations, including BIPOC who know that police response can be slow and unpredictable -- to say nothing of deadly -- but this clearly leads to more violence. The proliferation of arms in the general population is part of the reason we now have SWAT teams dressed - and armed -- like Star Wars stormtroopers responding to domestic disputes. The whole situation is totally insane, but it is part of the general insanity in a world where nearly 8 billion people are competing with one another for goods and services and destroying the environment as a consequence. It is unsustainable, as is the American model of policing.
But, as we humans are intelligent beings, we should be able to change anything about our society, including policing, so that it serves everyone equally, even if this means fundamentally rethinking the whole purpose of the police. But the political slogan "defund the police" will no more help accomplish positive change than "defund the military" will end war or "defund hospitals" will improve healthcare. Any institution can be reformed and improved if enough voters want that to happen, but perhaps the first reforms should be to our democracy, to our schools, to our absurdly regressive income taxes, to our tolerance for other people's suffering, to our stunted empathetic imaginations.
Policing as it is done today should become unthinkable, but "defunding" it, as the average person is likely to understand the concept, will just create further anxiety and division. It was an unfortunate choice of a word to attach to a worthy cause, has already done more harm than good and needs to be jettisoned ASAP.
And I have friends who have been in the police and one of them I love like a brother. But I am very glad he is no longer in the force because I don't like how his mind was being twisted in order to defend the brotherhood.
Understood, but the messaging is terrible and gave the Right a talking point that resonated in a very negative way. That is the problem, not the concept as you have presented it which is very necessary. The message is important, however and this one was a disaster.
Do you have a reference or link showing direct protection from getting or infecting others with the vaccine. I can’t find one anywhere and up to this date, I have not heard that assurance coming from any of the medical people. I’d be very happy to read something like that or hear it. Thank you.
Oh gosh I didn’t mean that. That’s been out for a while. I mean actual results based on real people. The testing they did before they let this vaccine out to the public was incomplete. Generally vaccines are tested for a much longer time on a larger population. I’m looking for documentation of actual cases. That’s what I thought you were talking about.
Check the CDC and/or NIH web sites, or state Health Dept sites (at least those in blue states with honest record-keeping). The Covid vaccines will receive as much scrutiny and documentation as any in history, probably more, with so much at stake.
The Floyd murder case speaks for itself. It sickens us all, as do the mass shootings throughout our lives. I am 71, and am experienced enough to know it is not likely to stop before my death. Yes, I hope it will, and will fight against the slaughter.
As to the coronavirus, I and my wife are fully vaccinated, still wearing masks and acting according to CDC guidelines. It is prudent, smart and will help the community to rid ourselves of this menace.
We hope you all feel the same way, because none of us can do this alone!
I too am 71 and fully vaccinated. I am also former law enforcement (FBI) and we are sworn to serve and protect. Officer Chauvin did neither and is a disgrace to his badge and a criminal.
We need serious police reform (not defunding) and major gun control legislation. These are way past due and our country suffers for it.
I agree, but we have had decades of "reform," which usually adds up to some sensitivity training and not much else. Though "defunding" has become an unfortunate target, the intent behind it is sound: to take some of the funds spent on policing and redirect it to interventions that do not involve the police. Eugene, Oregon has a very successful such program, CAHOOTS, which has quietly been saving lives and saving money for 30 years.
But why "take some of the funds spent on policing?"" Why not ADD to the funds spent on public safety to contract with community mental health and other services? We look at this issue as a zero-sum game. Ain't! The very rich pay very little taxes. Time to fund our social services adequately again.
Whereas I agree with you in principle, my thought is that, if you take some of the social service duties out of the police department, they will require fewer cops and a lower budget.
But, a better way would be to offer communities grants for mental health services - written with clear assessment of the problems, outline if goals, and data points to assess for success. Then the picture would be clear, and if the answer is less police officers, it would be gradual with union and community buy in.
This is an incremental approach and I think we are past that point. And the current police unions will never agree. Besides, the groundwork had been done in many communities, most strikingly Eugene, Oregon. We don't need more study, we need action.
The mental health fiasco of Regan continues to haunt the nation. The promise was for community health centers to manage the 'deinstitulization' of the mentally ill. Those centers were never provided, even though the research showed that a friend, a home, and a job (or a reason to be), would create successful transition.
Yes, that is the ideal.
MaryPat, yours is idea worth exploring. Our services have been supplanted by the pay nothing, do nothing unless it makes a dollar system that exists in most states right now.
Time for the upper 10% to pay their way.
And defund the bloated defense dept. that alone would change everything
Ah, the defense department? Eisenhauer advised us to beware of the military industrial complex. We have not done that, nor do I see us doing that in the near future.
We are motivated by fear of the rest of the world invading and overrunning us, or so it seems.
The defense department cannot even pass a simple annual audit. So how do you beat those eggs???? I wonder?
I'm all in favor of funding social services, under the "stitch in time" theory. But I'm guessing most people responsible for municipal budgets do see it as a zero sum situation. Rising taxes is quite the cudgel against "tax-and-spend liberals."
Yes, friend, reform. Sadly the “bumper sticker” people got to the issue first. I have a nephew and a few friends who are on the job. A good start might be to find a way for police to be inside the community, a part of every day life, rather than a flying squad that shows up only when there’s trouble. Maybe I’m a Pollyanna about this, but I want to know the people wearing the badge and not fear the people behind the badge.
Camden, NJ went through a major police reform and restructuring. Afterwards, part of police training was to be dropped in a neighborhood for the day, told to make friends with the locals if they wanted water or access to a bathroom. Then back the next day, same. It seems to have helped. It's not even a radical new idea - remember beat cops?
I just wonder if we have gone too far down the road of militarization and violence for this to be effective now. I suppose it's the difference between pessimism and optimism. I see no signs that there is any will within police departments to even acknowledge the failure of their philosophies and practices, nonetheless work to reform them.
I definitely agree with the over militarization of the police which subconsciously makes them more aggressive. Of course, this is partially the result of our lack of gun control which often led to our police being outgunned. It’s a vicious circle that needs to be broken.
It seems that it ultimately comes down to leadership. Police serve the public, our taxes pay for them. They must follow the public will, but it takes a strong enough person in charge, who has the proper support, to push them in the right direction.
It's a tall order though, because if the police don't like what they're told, they just have to drag their feet a little and crime goes up. It's a little but of a devil's bargain with them, and a tough nut to crack.
And don't forget the unions, which have effectively shielded criminal police officers from justice.
Syd, it is a tough nut to crack, but it is worth doing and if not us, then who?????
In my suburb I knew quite a few local policemen by name, they have known my children and my neighbors children, attended the mayor's cookout, patroled daily and waved and stopped to introduce themselves. We knew our local cop so well he would knock on the door to chat, stop and get out of his patrol car to greet kids playing together, or get a drink of water (just like you say) and was a part of high school graduation parties and still keeps in touch on Facebook. In the past twenty years I have seen this sense of community drastically decline which I partly blame on the new recruits that have replaced the retired gentlemen I knew and/or their training. They really need to step up the community involvement.
Countless Black Americans would be happy to have similar relations with local police, but they are denied the chance.
This is what happens when a ruling minority party tries to drown government in a bathtub.
I have also seen some young people who want guns to feel that power. Two young men I know want to be cops because they want to carry a Glock. One of them is a young man of color who is 18 and bought one the day of his birthday. He and his friend were messing with it in their apartment and shot it off. It went through the wall into the apartment next door where there was a baby. No one was hurt, but they were scared to death.
You have to take lessons and a test to get a license to drive a car, a dangerous 1-2 ton vehicle. The same should be required of a gun-- you should have to take lessons in safety and maintenance, operate under a supervisor for a certain period of time, and take a test.
There is absolutely no reason to have WMDs as civilians.
And they don't need to all carry guns all the time. British cops (in a society with just as much racism and possibly an even worse classism) do not habitually carry guns. This means they are more likely to engage with the public in a less confrontational, less aggressive, more communicative fashion. Sure, there are power-drunk assholes among the British police, too, but fewer fatalities at their hands. It takes a lot more effort to murder a citizen that pisses you off or scares you if you only have a truncheon. Altogether too easy with a gun. Of course, then we have the lethal chokehold - I confess I don't know any figures on that in the UK.
I have watched many police shows from the UK and noticed how often they don't go into a crime scene with guns drawn or even guns on their person. I often wondered if that were try to life. It really stands out and seems to keep the calm. Of course it also helps if the perpetrator is also assumed to probably not be armed.
I'm happy that you had this experience with the police, but it is not the norm and never has been. I assume you are white; people of color do not have this kind of relationship with the police and never have. And the idea that "community involvement" can in any way ameliorate what ills American policing is analogous to recommending aspirin for stage 4 cancer; we need surgery and chemotherapy, not palliatives.
I understand that it is not the norm. I know it is a bandaid. It is a place to begin and something that should be a common effort by the police and fire departments. My neighborhood is 60/40 white and POC. I am just stating that I noticed the decline in the community involvement in my neighborhood. It was a good thing and it did make a difference in the attitudes toward the police and from the police. The respect for each other has to begin somewhere. If they were part of the community they were policing it would be the seeds for more empathy and compassion to grow. The actual reforms are so much more vital and important, but the little things can grow. Just like mandatory mental health training and assessment, making community involvement mandatory is a small start.
https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2020/06/12/camden-policing-reforms-313750
I think this is, indeed, a Pollyanna take, unfortunately. We have gone too far down the road of authoritarians with guns believing they can exert their power and control over lower caste people. We need to entirely rethink policing in our country or this will continue to happen.
Perhaps it begins with recruitment and socialization. Military veterans are trained in warfare but not policing. They are very different skills. And once out of the police academy, who is training them on the job? What behaviors are rewarded by the respect and friendship of colleagues? It is a huge problem, no doubt, but one that will eventually tear our country apart if we don’t work to fix it. And no, it will not be easy, but all the “easy” things have been done and haven’t worked very well. So now it’s time for adult solutions to a societal problem.
I am retired nurse, and have always said that the compulsive personality of nurses is hardwired into us long before we choose a profession that treasures it. I believe the same is true of police recruits and violence as a solution. I agree that it is a culture problem, but rooting it out would require a resolve I have yet to see and a systemic change beyond anything ever attempted.
Another retired RN, nursing school was an indoctrination into a powerful culture. Police academy is the same. The mores and local inculturation can be insidious. Resistance brings retribution until one falls in line. Teaching in these locations may allow the resistor to create spaces for a radical understanding by students. Of course the dominant culture presents challenges to continued resistance.
Reid, we have already had a systemic change. It was slow and inexorable. Now that we have had it and seen what it has wrought, perhaps, it is time to change again?
Given the concurrent crisis for AAPI people, indeed anyone who values justice, we should be able to say that All Lives Matter. But that decent sentiment has, outrageously, been hijacked by people for whom it signifies nothing. Its effective meaning is Black Lives Don't Matter, or Only White Lives Matter.
Complexities and nuances don’t make for bumper sticker facility. The shallow nature of this public ‘discourse’ damages the potential for meaningful conversation. Sad and frustrating.
Thanks for posting this as a former FBI agent. My husband is a former police officer. His natural inclination is to support the police. But he realizes now how often the police abuse their authority and fail to “serve and protect”. He gets so angry at those officers who not only commit these horrendous acts, but at the ones who cover them up. You know the old saying “there’s nothing worse than a reformed smoker”. Well, there’s nothing “worse “ than a reformed police officer. I say that not to be funny, but once they see for their own eyes how awful this behavior is, look out!
Sorry, but too little, too late. Anyone who witnessed or knew about abuse (which was essentially every cop) and said nothing is complicit.
Yes, if indeed they witnessed or knew about it. But remember, there ARE many good police officers with integrity. If they conducted themselves with dignity and fairness, and didn't see anything to report, it isn't fair to paint them with that broad brush of "too little, too late".
Reid, you are right. The problem shows itself every time there is an officer, or officers who decide that it is time to show everyone that they can take care of the problem whether the victim is black, asian, white or any other type of mixture. Murder is never the answer and this was murder.
No doubt, there are good police officers with integrity, though exactly how many relative to the "bad apples" is unknown, as many cases of police abuse are never even reported, and those that are go mostly unpunished. The 3 officers assisting Derek Chauvin with the "arrest" of George Floyd were not among the good apples, and there is no broader brush than racism.
He was “teaching “ those junior officers...
Chauvin had a history with Mr. Floyd.
The submission of the junior officers is a systematic problem
I think our point of disagreement is the "bad apple" argument as opposed to systemic rot, which is what I believe we have. There is a culture of silence, the "thin blue line" philosophy, which is pervasive and toxic in policing, even among "good" cops.
The brotherhood of police is strong and it needs to be. Their dedication and sacrifice is keeping our society together. That said, we all know right from wrong and a bad cop reflects on all of them and needs to be weeded out.
Sorry, no. No excuses, please. The brotherhood of police is too strong and it doesn't need to be. What do they sacrifice other than time and rest, and what are they dedicated to? Maintaining their own power, allowing them to get away, literally, with murder. How can we fixate on "a bad cop" when the system produces so many? Can we expect anything beyond bad apples when the whole tree is rotten? The mere existence of the Blue Wall of Silence (with go-along prosecutors) makes every cop complicit whenever one is accused, however justly. It all but ensures that police will not know right from wrong, or not act appropriately when they do.
I am so tired of America SVCKING. America at its worst simply svcks.
Sorry, back.
One can’t throw out the good with the bad. Think about our society without the police. Change needs to happen and in a big way but blowing everything up is not the answer.
No one is saying to blow everything up. And no cities burned down last summer. Not one. Please spare us the fallacy of the excluded middle, a false choice posing two extreme alternatives with only one acceptable. Other alternatives are possible.
D Fischer, Historians' Fallacies
I don’t see anyone suggesting blowing everything up. I think change is what is being suggested
No need for euphemism. SUCKING and sucks. Concise and appropriate. And I agree with you.
Thanks, DH. You should hear me say it in person. My personal rule = no profanity here in LFAA, but creative misspellings do well enough.
I totally hear THAT!
I have a lifelong very close friend who's career was in many roles in law enforcement including a Chief of Police who is now an adjunct professor at a law enforcement college. He has made a point of always advocating that law enforcement should train policy, procedures, and technique, but hire for character. He believes you cannot train character. He believes that most of the “bad apple” incidents can be traced to those character flaws and they could have been identified in the hiring and screening processes before employment and during training.
I don't think the history of policing in this country supports this sanguine view, though. Police culture is steeped in bigotry and stereotypes and reinforced by our society's entrenched and systemic racism. The rot goes deep, and people like your friend with good intentions, while I don't doubt his basic integrity, are imagining that the problem is one of individual character rather than societal culture. There is no evidence I can find that he is right.
I agree that we, citizens and voters who comprise the society you speak of, tolerate if not even encourage the systemic poor character that may pervade some or even many policing organizations. That is the systemic, societal rot you speak of. That can only be changed by educating and convincing society that the problem exists and needs to be addressed. However, if that is successful there will need to be actions taken within law enforcement to accomplish the necessary change. Simple condemnation is not correction. So let's look at the correction actions. Simply denying funding is punitive not corrective. My friend's suggestions are corrective but only a start. I am sure there are more. If you have thoughts on corrective measures to contribute, please offer them. If we agree there is a problem, let's try to correct it not just scream it's broken.
But we have to, as a society, agree that it's broken before we can fix it. And I am under no obligation to come up with solutions in order to point out the problem--that's a false premise. I don't have to be able to put out a fire to recognize it and pull the alarm. The idea that we have to "educate and convince" the American people that systemic racism is a problem before we can have systemic change in policing pushes true reform back decades into the future, because we are extremely skilled in turning a blind eye to racism and have been doing so for 450 years. We don't need incremental change, we need radical change, and we need it now.
As far as solutions, three are easy fixes: demand that the police are held to the same standards as the rest of us as far as use of force goes, with some allowance made for the job they have to do but none when their use of force goes beyond what is called for; to that end, qualified immunity must go unless it has very strict limits. Second, decertify police unions that act in bad faith to protect their membership to the exclusion of the people they are supposed to serve. Third, institute a social services and mental health intervention group in every city and town, and fund them adequately. Do NOT send police out with them, but allow them to intervene in cases where appropriate. I worked in a county hospital with hundreds of mentally ill and potentially dangerous clients and did not have to kill a single one; I was trained in de-escalation techniques that really work.
Defund the Police has become a catchphrase that doesn't properly convey the details of the idea that police have become the catchall for multiple societal ills that would be better addressed by shifting funding to social service agencies.
Unfortunately the “defunding” sound bite mischaracterizes what is needed. Public safety generally should deploy the most appropriate resources to address public safety calls. Sending the fire department to respond to burger alarms or the police to respond to a fire alarm clearly makes no sense. Far too many public safety incidents would be better served by more appropriate public safety resources than an armed police patrol officer. That should be obvious to all. Why do we not describe both the problem and obvious solution better?
That's the point I was (ineptly) trying to get across. The desire for improvement is best communicated clearly and completely. The "defund" is a bumper sticker or meme, and does little to advance improvement. Your examples are clear and apt; I'd argue in addition to more community policing which can recognize potential problems and defuse them as an alternative to always sending in combat troops to respond to things that could have been avoided.
Having a defined link to social services and mental health professionals could be a good idea in the context of community policing. There's more, to be sure, but we have to start somewhere.
Yes, I agree entirely, though with one caveat: social service agencies can't "accompany" police because the person with a gun is always in charge and their very presence can cause escalation when the opposite is what is called for. Where appropriate, social services must be the first and only responders. Once again, I hold the CAHOOTS program in Eugene, Oregon up as exhibit A. This system of intervention has been highly successful and they only rarely have to call for police backup.
Thanks for some actual facts! I wonder what other successful programs are now in use.
Because "send a social worker or mental health professional instead of a cop" just isn't as catchy.
Seriously, though, those who take the refunding slogan literally are being disingenuous and intentionally obfuscating. They don't even want to engage in the conversation.
How about Public Safety Should Use the Right Tool For the Job
Oops, defunding.
To put in a word for the much maligned "defunding" movement - many of us who want defunding are asking for a parallel refunding (or even funding for the first time) of the many support services that have been depleted or disbanded or never funded that would take duties from the police that they are not trained to perform, but are nevertheless expected to. If there is a dearth of extra money in a local government's coffers after covering law enforcement, we believe that reducing the police budget should be used to transfer many duties to mental health, drug rehabilitation, education, and other services that would be better and more competently performed by experts trained in those areas, not by police officers. I have had conversations with local officers and former officers in my city and from their descriptions of their training at police academy, it is clear they are daily sent into situations for which they have absolutely no tools. That is the reasoning behind defunding. Put the money where it will do the most good; and rather than asking police to do things for which they do not have the training, knowledge, or experience to handle, let's get in those who do have that training, knowledge, and experience.
The problem with the "defunding movement" is not it's prescription for what needs to be done to end police violence against BIPOC and anyone else, for that matter. It's the word "defunding" for goodness sake! White people who have either never needed police assistance or - more likely - have had a positive experience when they have needed it, mostly see the police as protectors of them and their property. And even if they are tuned in to the George Floyd killing and its repercussions and are aware of and worried about repeated unwarranted violence against BIPOC and see this as a problem and are offended by the injustice and immorality of it, they can still imagine situations in their own admittedly privileged and usually safe lives when a cop might really come in handy.
Is this fair? No, of course not. Are most white people going to support lower spending on what they view as an essential government service? No, probably not. Can they be convinced to support real police reform at the polls? Why not if they are convinced it is in everyone's interest? Will the worst racists and insurrectionists support it? Never in a million years.
Clearly the hiring of police needs to be more selective, training needs to be re-imagined and greatly improved, jobs now dumped on the police because no one else is willing or able to do them should be farmed out to unarmed, well-trained specialists, police unions need to be reined in and laws regarding the use of force need to be changed in favor of less force, to be used only when all other alternatives have been exhausted. The police need to be demilitarized. There should not be the cozy relationship between police and DAs that makes police misconduct nearly impossible to sanction. If I knew more about this issue, I'm sure I could go on, but I do know that the term "defunding" is totally, even naively, counterproductive if we want the violence against BIPOC to end. Things will never change if we are always having to explain exactly what we mean by "defunding" instead of laying out a comprehensive reform of policing which - when all is said and done - could require more money to run than the present system. So be it, money well spent.
You are correct about the fear using this word engenders. But I contend that the expansion of policing in our lifetimes into an instrument of social control has created many more problems than it has solved. Policing has always been about serving the interests of the propertied and the powerful; and modern police, when they harass, bully, and murder in order to "teach lessons", are performing exactly the way they are meant to. Sure, there are individual "good cops", but there is systemic rot in policing - which is why many of us want to see reform go down to the bone.
A very good book on policing - not only in America, but elsewhere, too - is "The End of Policing", by Alex S. Vitale, in which the author recounts the origins of policing and the many efforts at reform that have failed over and over again. His argument that the problem is not training, diversity, or methods, but that the ongoing expansion and support of police authority works against community adhesion, creates social injustice and actively harms the public.
Lanita, I agree with you 100%, but the changes we both want will not come either quickly or easily. Most Americans -- for reasons that have a lot to do with our economic system and traditional moral values you and I may or may not share with them -- like the idea of being able to call for a cop when they hear someone trying to break into the house at 3 in the morning, or if they have just been mugged, or had their car stolen, or witnessed some act of violence. Some Americans have preferred to arm themselves to the teeth to deal with these situations, including BIPOC who know that police response can be slow and unpredictable -- to say nothing of deadly -- but this clearly leads to more violence. The proliferation of arms in the general population is part of the reason we now have SWAT teams dressed - and armed -- like Star Wars stormtroopers responding to domestic disputes. The whole situation is totally insane, but it is part of the general insanity in a world where nearly 8 billion people are competing with one another for goods and services and destroying the environment as a consequence. It is unsustainable, as is the American model of policing.
But, as we humans are intelligent beings, we should be able to change anything about our society, including policing, so that it serves everyone equally, even if this means fundamentally rethinking the whole purpose of the police. But the political slogan "defund the police" will no more help accomplish positive change than "defund the military" will end war or "defund hospitals" will improve healthcare. Any institution can be reformed and improved if enough voters want that to happen, but perhaps the first reforms should be to our democracy, to our schools, to our absurdly regressive income taxes, to our tolerance for other people's suffering, to our stunted empathetic imaginations.
Policing as it is done today should become unthinkable, but "defunding" it, as the average person is likely to understand the concept, will just create further anxiety and division. It was an unfortunate choice of a word to attach to a worthy cause, has already done more harm than good and needs to be jettisoned ASAP.
And I have friends who have been in the police and one of them I love like a brother. But I am very glad he is no longer in the force because I don't like how his mind was being twisted in order to defend the brotherhood.
Understood, but the messaging is terrible and gave the Right a talking point that resonated in a very negative way. That is the problem, not the concept as you have presented it which is very necessary. The message is important, however and this one was a disaster.
Brian I’m 71 too and heeding all the warnings. Considering the big picture of how many have died it’s the least we can do to prevent more deaths
Me too! Approaching 70 and never felt younger!
I have about 2 months left of my 60’s ! I guess we’ll be toasting each other soon!
Me too! 64 and so not yet eligible in my state. I am very anxious to get the vaccine. My husband has had his two shots - I'm ready.
Definitely with you, Brian.
🙏
Right there with you Brian
Do you have a reference or link showing direct protection from getting or infecting others with the vaccine. I can’t find one anywhere and up to this date, I have not heard that assurance coming from any of the medical people. I’d be very happy to read something like that or hear it. Thank you.
New study out yesterday of 3000 health care workers shows clear efficacy (~90%).
Can I get reference for that? Do you have a copy or a link or anything like that?
https://www.statnews.com/2021/03/29/real-world-study-by-cdc-shows-pfizer-and-moderna-vaccines-were-90-effective/
Oh gosh I didn’t mean that. That’s been out for a while. I mean actual results based on real people. The testing they did before they let this vaccine out to the public was incomplete. Generally vaccines are tested for a much longer time on a larger population. I’m looking for documentation of actual cases. That’s what I thought you were talking about.
Check the CDC and/or NIH web sites, or state Health Dept sites (at least those in blue states with honest record-keeping). The Covid vaccines will receive as much scrutiny and documentation as any in history, probably more, with so much at stake.
That is what this is. Look closer.