Defund the Police?

[Onward Allusion]

Defunding the police is not the same as eliminating the police. Defunding reallocates funds from the existing police structure and assigns it to root causes of crime and social issues. It's not like we will overnight be in a "Purge" society.

I was thinking more about this last night. The Gun Control crowd has always claimed that assault weapons belong only on the battlefield. Why do our police departments who are suppose to protect civilians have weapons of war, including armored personnel carriers, grenade launchers, or full auto rifles. I didn't realize that my suburban home was in the middle of a war zone.

[Sharkbite]

The Gun Control crowd has always claimed that assault weapons belong only on the battlefield. Why do our police departments who are suppose to protect civilians have weapons of war, including armored personnel carriers, grenade launchers, or full auto rifles. I didn't realize that my suburban home was in the middle of a war zone.

The “gun control crowd” claims many things that are not based in fact.

My little “sleepy” Colorado mountain towns PD has a SWAT team and short barreled M-4 type rifles. It also has a former Mil MRAP vehicle...why? So that if they have to respond to an active shooter at one of our schools, they can approach the building with protection.

Meth and Heroin are actually readily avail on our sleepy streets those drugs bring a violent and well armed criminal element. I absolutely WANT our PD equipped to handle these problems.

Now, take that problem into Chicago, Los Angeles, Miami or other large urban environments. The Police do work in semi war zones. Talk to a cop that works south central LA or Miami gardens. I want them to have the tools needed to do the job as efficiently and SAFELY as possible.

Nobody complains when that Armored Bearcat or MRAP responds to a school shooting, when the officers inside hit the ground with M4’s and hard armor. In fact if the police DIDNT respond that way, peolle would ask “why not?”

Its like the police should be kept in a glass box with “break in case of a bad guy”. It doesnt work that way. Police NEED to be out training with their tools to build proficiency. They need to be out in the communities WITH those tools, ready to respond QUICKLY to tragic and violent events.

I see a LEO bail out of his/her patrol car with a Rifle responding to a violent call. GOOD. I would think the folks on this forum would understand that taking a pistol into a shots fired call is not optimal. A Rifle is a much better tool.

In order for that to happen, the Rifle needs to be avail...RIGHT NOW.

[44 AMP]

I see a LEO bail out of his/her patrol car with a Rifle responding to a violent call. GOOD.

Sure, that's a good thing. Now, how about the other side of the coin, when a an armored commando team with machineguns breaks into the wrong house at o'dark thirty and guns down the homeowner because he was holding the TV remote, and they thought he had a weapon?

Its a perception issue, as much as anything, and right now, what the people are seeing is legally sanctioned murder. Or so it seems.

Sure, people recognize cops are human and do make mistakes. However there are limits to how many, and what kind of "mistakes" we will tolerate, and for many, we're past that point.

The problems with "Defund the Police" are multiple and varied, not the least of which is, while the idea is under discussion, some politicians are already lining up to spend that former police money on their pet social programs, which, as far as I can see, don't do what they are claimed to do.

Defund the Police does mean NO police to some people. People who can only deal in extremes, and who's answer to a systemic problem is to abolish the system completely, without thought to the consequences and without offering any kind of replacement.

They want to punish (by defunding or abolishing) the police for the bad actions of a tiny percentage of officers. Once again, its the same, EVERYONE is "guilty" because a few break the law...

Its rather like racial profiling, only the "race" is everyone in the police...Some are bad, therefore all are bad, or at the very least, suspect...

If its not right to do it to a specific racial or ethnic group, its not right to do it to the Police, either...

DO we need to do something? Clearly we do. But what? Tearing down the system is always an option, an extreme option, and it seems to me there are better options that should be explored, first.

[Sharkbite]

when a an armored commando team with machineguns breaks into the wrong house at o'dark thirty and guns down the homeowner because he was holding the TV remote, and they thought he had a weapon?

The facts are, those incidents are SO few and far between as to be statistically almost zero. How many MILLION contacts did Police make with citizens in this country last year? How many unjustified killings did this result in? The odd of this happening are so small as to be ridiculous

Its the same argument that the Anti-gun crowd makes about guns in the home being dangerous and quoting statistics that include criminal violence in those stats.

The Washington Post released the numbers of “unarmed” people killed by police last year. Even their skewed reporting shows the numbers to be extremely small. Now, before someone says im insensitive, any death is tragic. I get that, i truly do. But more people will die TODAY texting while driving, then were killed unjustifiably by Police all of last year.

We are in the middle of a forest but only see one tree.

Now look at the number of police killed by violent criminals last year. Look at the number of JUSTIFIED shootings LEO’s were involved in. Hell, how many ASSAULTS on LEO’s took place last year? It becomes pretty clear, the LE community is doing a pretty good job in threat discrimination and discretionary decision making.

So, what does “defunding the Police” actually give us? More defensive use of firearms by private citizens? Fewer numbers of less trained Officers on the streets? How does that solve anything?

Heck, increase funding. Put mental health professional out with some of the patrol officers. Not in every car, but a percentage. Give the dispatchers the ability to send the appropriate resources to the calls for assistance that require that type of response

[HiBC]

Excellent point of view,Sharkbite!!


For the decades of my younger life,and before,The LEO preferred,and often required instrument of deadly force was a Colt or S+W DA revolver.
In some cases,a 357 was allowed,in others "The Magnum" was considered poor PR,and police were restricted to 38 SPL.
They might have a shotgun in the trunk.
And they carried dimes to use the phone booth to call dispatch.

Andy Griffin replaced Marshal Dillon as the ideal cop

Days of "Leave It to Beaver" Sort of. Some folks were having crosses burned in their front yard,or worse.

A large portion of America was pretty comfortable with that...up through American Graffiti and Forrest Gump

But lets not forget Capone,Dillinger,Bugsy,and Thompson SMG's. Things got bigger and bloodier over prohibition.

Once again,times have changed.

The judge told a lot of American young men "You can go to jail or enlist"
Folks of all races went and fought,bled,died...and many wondered "For what?" They did not come home WW2 Heros.

Many learned about pot and harder drugs. They learned about AK-47s ,M-16's. Came home to same old same old ....some angry,after surviving mud and blood and not necessarily ready to go back to submission to BS. You don't necessarily burn a cross in a Khe San Veteran's front yard.

They came home disillusioned. where there was a mix of race riots and anti-war demonstrations. Kent State,Chicago 68,JFK,RFK,MLK....J Edgar Hoover.
LBJ,with what may be the "Unintended Consequences"of the War on Poverty and Great Society"
SDS,Weathermen,Black Panthers..."Rules for Radicals" "The Anarchist Cookbook"
Rodney King. LA Riots. Oh, Whitman in the Tower. Might as well throw in Waco and Ruby Ridge.
Columbine We have lived in interesting times.

13 year olds with a Glock in their hand in Chicago.

That old reliable Model 10 K-frame S+W just might not have been real comforting. Or adequate.

There is a fork in this road. The mass shooting and terrorists......And the War on Drugs.

I don't think folks get too put off by an Armored Car and A SWAT team showing up at a school shooting...As long as they don't spend too much time outside figuring out what to do.

The War on Drugs.....???. IMO...That,like Prohibition,is tough on Police Relations with civilians.

Nobody wants crack houses and street corner dealers and junkies burglarizng for fix money or young addicts turning to prostitution or syringes in the 7-11 restrooms or OD bodies in the alley.
Drugs are a destructive element. IMO,some form of control is necessary.

Cartels and gangs have money and every form of weapon.

Terrorists and Los Vegas snipers.add another level of requirements to PD's.

This stuff can happen anywhere,anytime,...and without quick response...

All you can do is count bodies and transport wounded.

In these cases,IMO,the public is happy for armor,long rifles,M-4,s, and highly trained teams.

But the public does not like to see them for no-knock drug raids on the wrong house. Especially if some guy gets shot because his remote seemed like a gun.

And folks don't necessarily think every tail light out should end up as a consumer level drug bust that escalates to a father doing 20 years or being shot dead.

I'm saying the general public does not necessarily consider LEOs on the street hunting for people to bust for small quantities of drugs a good thing.

There are a whole lot of folks who have,or do,smoke pot. Many of them grow a "Us versus them" view of cops,which can lead to cop hate.

Add to that busting people for "Driving while black"....and the machine that fills our prisons with young minority men.....

I get "Don't do the crime if you can't do the time"

But which comes first? The chicken or the egg? What causes the citizens to view cops as enemy? Shooting the family dog in the back yard does not help.

Yet I feel for the cop who has to walk into a war zone every day.

No,I don't have the answer.

I agree,if anything,we might need to spend more on training and another path besides incarceration for drug and mental health issues.

[Colorado Redneck]

Lots of good thoughts and opinions. Above all, bad cops need to not be cops. Bad policy, like no knock raids, need to be reviewed and either modified or eliminated. There are thousands of life and death decisions made by law enforcement every day. More training, more training, and more training. And when things do go wrong...and they damn sure will, be up front and honest. The public perception of law enforcement is diminished every time a cop violates the law and it is swept under the rug.

[44 AMP]

The public perception of law enforcement is diminished every time a cop violates the law and it is swept under the rug.

What worries me more than a "swept under the rug" case are the ones that aren't, but find the officer(s) "acted properly" when from all the evidence we get to see they did not.

Police camera footage not released in a timely manner and often some of it "has gone missing..."

It may not be some level of cover up, but the perception is, it's suspicious.

and, the tv shows "teach" us that cops do this all the time, nearly every episode there's something going on that would get real cops fired or in jail if they got caught doing it...

and so, we figure the real cops must be doing it, too, they just rarely get caught doing it, and when they are, tis a rare thing for the public to see their punishment, or remember it if they do...

[Sharkbite]

Bad policy, like no knock raids, need to be reviewed and either modified or eliminated.

Ive heard this a couple times in this thread and others.

I would bet that most people talking about “no knock raids” dont know the process surrounding them. So, here goes....

In order to get a warrant (any warrant) the Police go to a Judge and lay out the justification for the warrant. You must lay out additional justification to serve that warrant at night. Some exigent circumstance must exist just to serve it at night. To get a “no knock warrent” you must have evidence that there is SO MUCH risk in knocking, that the Judge agrees to issue a “no knock warrant”

So, its not Joe Cop deciding he want to just bust in a door. A court/Judge has agreed to the circumstances being SO dire that the 4th amendment has been satisfied. Not the Police...a COURT.

[Ton]

I cannot tell you how ecstatic I would be if tomorrow I could go back to work wearing a Smith and Wesson 66, a speedloader, a flashlight, cuffs, and a button up shirt. Or if our department suddenly ordered a stop on proactive enforcement efforts. Or if our policies changed to allow us to arrest and issue citations for less things.

Kevlar vests are hot and heavy. I have worn one 4 days a week 10 hours a day for the past 6 years and every year between April and October Im at constant war with heat rashes. The weight of my belt constantly chafes my hips and has left me with lower back issues. I do NOT enjoy making arrests in the majority of domestic violence issues, and usually feel that it's a waste of time. There is a potential danger in every stop, and I have a family to take care of, so why should I put the possibility of catching some low level criminal ahead of that?

For those who have never spent any time on the Officer Down Memorial Page I'd recommend it, especially in light of recent events. If you asked 99.9% of the people marching right now, they could rattle off 6 to 12 names of victims in their cause, but they couldn't give you a SINGLE name of one of 58 officers who were intentionally murdered last year, let alone the other 89 who died in separate duty related incidents.

I was a gun owner long before I was LEO. I will be a gun owner and support legal gun ownership long after.

But it's not 1950 anymore. Population density has increased in most urban and suburban areas to the point where Officer Friendly being on a first name basis with everybody in his beat is just plain not feasible. Anti government sentiment as grown. Anti police sentiment has grown. Weapons to easily match what the police have access to are cheap and accessible. Body armor is cheap and accessible.

If the police were truly "militarized", a few thousand unarmed protesters and rioters would not be taking over cities in a matter of days, requiring the ACTUAL military to step in to put a stop to it. There are more than 1,000 citizens per patrol officer were I work. We are absolutely NOT, in ANY WAY, capable of true "control" of the city, nor do we aspire to be. And I find these numbers to hold true in most places.

The Yankee Marshall said something during an anti police rant that made me laugh out loud. He said that in a survey, police and military personell were asked if they would fire on civilians if ordered to, and that while military declined the police stated they would. I'm not going to comment on military hiring or training since I haven't been through it. What I will say is #1, A police officer cannot be "ordered" to shoot someone. The standard is, and has always been that an officer has to have reasonable belief that there is a threat of serious bodily injury or death to the officer or others. Words out of another officers mouth, regardless of rank, will not satisfy that requirement. #2 Every officer I know in my department either lives in our city or in surrounding cities suburbs. They have friends and family who live in the city. #3 we are not contractually obligated to do anything, we are, as several like to point out, technically civilians. We are employees of the state, county, or city governments, usually paid hourly. If one day we wake up and decide we don't want to play anymore we can drive to the station, dump the departments gear, tender a resignation and leave with no fear of criminal recourse.

Maybe the war on drugs needs to end. I really don't know. I know drugs are bad (mmkay?). We respond to plenty of violent calls which would not have happened minus serious drug intoxication. A significant amount of theft and burglary, arguably the majority, occurs in order to generate money to feed drug addiction. We respond to several OD calls involving opiates monthly. We carry narcan but still have plenty of deaths. On the other hand there are what you would call more "responsible" drug users, who are able to maintain a fairly normal life despite occasional drug use. Maybe it's an education thing, again, I don't know.

My patrol car had 120k on it and I share it with another officer. My computer freezes almost daily. Our station has cockroaches and for some reason always smells like cat urine when it rains. I get 8 to 10 hours of in service training per YEAR. If we have been over funded I would absolutely hate to see what regular funded looks like.

There have been, and will continue to be, ugly, unjustified cases of excessive force and abuse of power. Because police are people, who are susceptible to every bad thing that every other person is.

But the reality is that the VAST majority of officers are good people who don't want anything except to make the community they serve a better place. Period. And we the majority would absolutely love if we were not continually held responsible for every improper or criminal action taken by every individual who also wears a badge.

IA investigations take place every day. Cops are fired every day. Charges are filed more often than people realize. Despite assertation that we are a tightly knit brotherhood who will protect our own at all costs, the opposite is often true. Nobody wants to work side by side with some one who is eventually going to get them dragged through an internal investigation or named on a lawsuit and more often than not those problems are worked out.

Finally, I'll leave you with this because I believe people wildly overestimate the frequency of police shootings due to the mainstream media. If every citizen in the country were to line up single file (with an appropriate social distance of 6 feet between them of course), the line would circumnavigate the Globe 15 times. If you were to walk alongside that line. You would statistically encounter a citizen who would be killed by the police every 310 miles. Even if you believed that 10% of these killings were unjustified (a wild exaggeration imho) that would mean you would only encounter a "murder" victim every 3100 miles.

[stinkeypete]

Ton, there is no doubt that the vast majority of police officers are good and well meaning professionals. But that distracts us from the problem: There Is A Problem!

There is a problem with The Police, The Schools, The Neighborhoods, The Healthcare, The Economic System, and in my opinion we’ve lately seen senior military officials taking moral stands against higher authorities to do the right thing, maintain doing the right thing, and progressing to internal improvement.

In my city, there is one cop per car- cost savings. I bet you’d like immediate expert help from social workers when you need them. I bet you would like immediate expert help from drug and alcohol professionals. I bet it would be great if you had professional psychologists on hand to help with distressed people and councilors to de escalate conflicts.

I bet you’d like to see people in trouble getting effective help to keep you from seeing them again next month.

I bet you’d like a clear statement as to what the heck your job is, rather than broad general and sometimes contradictory expectations as to how you are supposed to accomplish the impossible.

I’m a retired teacher. In my field, cost cutting has cut reading specialists, social workers, psychologists, librarians and nurses. I was supposed to deal with all those needs with an increased student load while trying to teach teenagers abstract mathematics. Something had to give- you can’t put fifteen pounds of poop in a ten pound bag.

Like the police today, all of society’s problems are because of the teachers last month.

The solution is ... I don’t know. Thinking of very different ways of doing all of our institutions is worth a look.

If we walk along your unfortunate line of death, a black person is shot every 310 miles and a white person is shot every 775 miles. Which line do you want to stand in?

Simply blaming the police is pointless. Like all of our institutions, it’s holistically intertwined with all our other institutions- racism, class-ism, poverty, history, you name it.

What am I doing to try to help? We’ve got everyone on the street of our block on an email list. We just started having “social distance parties” Sunday evenings. We’re learning the names and faces and kids and dogs of everyone on the street, sharing gossip and expertises and opportunities such that if anyone needs help from getting a kitten out of a tree to more serious things, everyone will feel more comfortable to simply ask neighbors for help. It’s a start.

Wouldn’t it be cool if we knew our police and firefighters in the same way?

[BarryLee]

I read something a week or so ago and I think it was in the Wall Street journal, but could be mistaken. The writer suggested that Police Unions are part of the problem and that the unions work very hard to protect bad cops. I have family that work in the education field and they have stated that the teachers unions/organizations often do more to protect bad or more often mediocre teachers than to work for positive improvement.

It seems a lot of our problems stem from our growing tribalism and the fact that we see each other as members of groups and not individuals. Police may develop an "us versus the world" mentality which would be understandable, but that might lead to tolerance or outright cover-up of bad behavior. Maybe eliminating unions and forming an ombudsman type system that would investigate complaints, but also work for Officer's rights as well.

[Ton]

Well, my line wasn't segregated, and that math is wrong anyway. The 310 mile statistic was based in a PERSON shot by the police, and was based off 1200 people killed a year (it's actually dropped recently so that may not be totally accurate), which encompasses all Americans regardless of race. And it wasn't meant to be a "line of death", it was meant to illustrate the extreme margin, that with all averages blended together, 1 in 273,000 Americans is likely to be killed by the police. And again if we hypothetically say that 10% are unjustified, which I believe is a serious exaggeration, 1 in 2.7 million is likely to be killed by the police.

Basically what I'm saying is that in 2017, you were 47 times more likely to kill yourself than to be killed by the police. You were 6 times more likely to have a car run you over while you were walking and kill you than to be killed by the police. I could go on and on.

There is no "peril". For anyones. Regardless of race, if you fear death, you have a long, long, long list of risk mitigation before you will reach "how to mitigate risk of being killed by police". More important questions might be: What will I eat today? How can I exercise today? What kind of safety ratings does my car have? How long is my commute and how many intersections are there? How is my self esteem today?

I do believe Sharkbite highlighted a huge part of the problem, which is a lack of effective continued training. 20 to 30 year police careers begin with a lengthy, intensive hiring process (usually 3 to 12 months), a gruelling 4 to 8 month paramilitary academy, and usually 6 months of field training. And after that . . . . . . . . . whatever. No physical standards. No health standards. No mental health checkups. A day or two of in service training a year. During hiring they hook you up to a polygraph to ask you about your drug use but when you watch a 12 year old die after getting run over by a truck walking home from school somebody just pats you on the shoulder and says "you good bro?" And that kids family buries him. And you remember his name. But nobody else does. Nobody marches for him. No mention on social media. Meanwhile thousands of 20 year olds invoke the name of a man they've never met as they torch buildings, assault and kill people, vandalize and steal property, disgrace your title and hold you accountable for wrongs you've never committed and always stood against.

To answer your question about social workers, addiction recover specialist, psychologists, etc, the short answer is that we have them. We have mobile response teams and we have centers we will transport people to. The problem is that 4 out if 5 people who would seriously benefit from their assistance refuse it. Many would rather go to jail for a night than talk to someone who would turn them inward to confront their own problems.

Police standards need to be higher. They need more training. They need more support. To defund the police is not going to fix the "probelm" it's going to exacerbate it. I can guarantee that a lower quantity of cheaper officers would result in a higher quantity of violent confrontations.

[Ton]

Barrylee,

I believe you are absolutely right about society separating farther and farther into groups and that being one of the primary roots of the problem. However I feel that ties into the political realm and for the legitimacy of this thread I won't dive into it.

As far as police unions go, their job is to protect the rights of and ensure due process for officers. Policing, as we see over and over, is a career heavily affected by the political climate, and depending on the temperature and the political aspirations of chiefs, mayors, county attorneys, etc, the water can become muddy. So yes more often than not police unions are highlighted when officers are accused of misconduct.

Now into one of my pet peeves, the "good cop" and "bad cop" debate. There are bad cops. Real ones. Cops who rip off drug dealers. Cops who accept bribes, who coerce people into sexual encounters, who lie on reports and in court, etc. Those officers, in this day and age, tend to have very short careers, and as Ive already said, there are more former police officers in prison than people would think. But those aren't the kind of "bad" cops we are asking about right? We are interested in excessive force. We are interested in the Derek Chauvins. Derek Chauvin may have done any of those real bad cop things, I don't know. I havent seen any evidence that he has. He apparently has 18 complaints. Which would be a little less than 1 a year in his 19 year career. If he took 80 hours of vacation and 40 hours of sick a year then he probably spent around 37,000 hours doing police work. Was he just doing "bad cop" stuff that entire time? Like your classic Hollywood corrupt cop? I doubt it. I'd wager a guess that the majority of his career he spent doing what he believed to be the right thing. I'm sure he made mistakes. I'm sure he pissed a lot of people off. He also probably helped a lot of people. He also probably saved a few people's lives. But then he did something horrible. So at what point did he become a "bad cop"? Should his actions have been predictable? Should he have been fired a long time ago? I really wish I knew. Not much to say about it now. George Floyd is dead. His life is over. The lives of his squad mates are over. The careers of his entire department may well be over. And myself and other LEO nationwide will suffer the backlash of his actions.

[Aguila Blanca]

Now into one of my pet peeves, the "good cop" and "bad cop" debate. There are bad cops. Real ones. Cops who rip off drug dealers. Cops who accept bribes, who coerce people into sexual encounters, who lie on reports and in court, etc. Those officers, in this day and age, tend to have very short careers, and as Ive already said, there are more former police officers in prison than people would think. But those aren't the kind of "bad" cops we are asking about right? We are interested in excessive force. We are interested in the Derek Chauvins. Derek Chauvin may have done any of those real bad cop things, I don't know. I havent seen any evidence that he has. He apparently has 18 complaints. Which would be a little less than 1 a year in his 19 year career. If he took 80 hours of vacation and 40 hours of sick a year then he probably spent around 37,000 hours doing police work. Was he just doing "bad cop" stuff that entire time? Like your classic Hollywood corrupt cop? I doubt it. I'd wager a guess that the majority of his career he spent doing what he believed to be the right thing. I'm sure he made mistakes. I'm sure he pissed a lot of people off. He also probably helped a lot of people. He also probably saved a few people's lives. But then he did something horrible. So at what point did he become a "bad cop"? Should his actions have been predictable? Should he have been fired a long time ago? I really wish I knew. Not much to say about it now. George Floyd is dead. His life is over. The lives of his squad mates are over. The careers of his entire department may well be over. And myself and other LEO nationwide will suffer the backlash of his actions.

I know officers who retired after more than 20 or 25 years and who had zero complaints against them. One a year is too many by far. When did Derek Chauvin become a "bad cop"? The first time he did a bad cop thing. And his union helped to protect him from the consequences he should have (but didn't) suffer.

[HiBC]

There is a lot of bi-lateral dehumanization going on. Tribalism is an accurate term.
Those not of my tribe are less than human.

Interestingly,chants like "Pigs in a blanket,fry them like bacon" would tend to band those in blue into a more tightly knit group,relying on each other for survival in a hostile environment.
And it would be natural to percieve the chanting faces as a threat,and "different than we are" Throw bottles,etc,and YES!! The Human Beings holding the line are subject to the same thoughts that took over at Kent State and Mi Lai
As Humans we all have a Shadow side that will briefly consider many options,some dark.
But then most of us reject nearly all of the options,and focus on the rational ones.

Now,it IS a two way street. Over history,many Black parents have lived with having to advise their children how to avoid trouble with the police.
Stories like Emmet Thill,lynchings,Rodney King...on and on,some just plain true,some less true and embel;ished,have become part of Black History and Oral tradition.
There is,as far as I know,a strong sense of Black Unity.Which is tribalism.

Sadly...it happens that when a young Man is dead on the street..whether for fear of retaliation by the killers,or mistrust/animosity toward law enforcement,no one sees anything.

As cops,over time,are Human Beings...you emotionally burn out,or become jaded.

These issues are bigger than "The Cop" Its not politically correct to say so,but no matter what the cops do,they do not have the power to make all the changes.
If the cops want a better community,practice a bit more minimum impact police work at times. Yes,a tail light CAN take a dangerous drunk driver off the road,or shut down a meth dealer,etc. I'm good with that. Carry on.
But SOME LEO's fish for chicken poop. And they over react to the citizen getting PO'd about being profiled.

And Citizens!! If you want better police,don't taunt them!

Last night,youtube,I observed a Fla police encounter.

It was a Black man walking down a major road.He was stopped by two Women cops.The intro said he had some cognitive disability.
Cops ask for ID He said I'm not carrying my wallet. He is walking! Its Gestapo to demand papers. He does not need to carry or produce ID.

Asked ,ore questions.he said I left my friends and I'm walking home. I'm not hurting anyone. I'm not bothering anyone.

Cop says its midnight,and a high drug and prostitution area. Fine.We live where we live.He was walking alone.There was no mention of him talking with anyone who could have been a protitute or drug transaction.
THe cops made the initial transgression.No probable cause,profiling,and his 4th amendment be demanding ID.

Now,our subject makes an error.He gives correct first name,but a different last name. Cop #2 asks why? Who knows? He does easily concede his true last name is Smith.So the cops now have his true name.
No indication of warrants,weapons,anything else.

Initial cop goes ballistic,draws tarer,starts screaming get on the groun,I'm going to tase you,explective,explective.

Our subject is getting annoyed his dignities are being stepped on.Hes not violent.He'snot running.Bt the cops have nothing legit on him and he refuses to submit to cuffs. No struggle,he just stands. He says I'm sorry,can we talk.
Then he says "I'm going to call my Mom" They near shoot him for reaching for his phone.

Male backup arrive. For walking while black he is tased,slammed to the ground,and tased some more.

This old man was weeping and saying "Im sorry"
Except for the initial Wonan cop,the looks on the cops faces was shame and sickened by what they did.
The male cop was fired and charged with a felony. IMO,he was mostly OK. He was called for backup not knowing what was going on,he got business done.

Its the initial stop and attitude that was wrong.

What happened to presumtion of innocence??? PAPSR!! PAPERS!! I must see your papers! Now!!! ??? Really?
That Old Man,all his family and friends,and decendants will hate cops forever.

And 100 good cops will never make up for it.

[SHR970]

The following is intended to be on point for Law based on two important SCOTUS decisions and the following of these decisions. Even though politics are involved this is an apolitical personal viewpoint on one way to deal with this subject:

I see an opportunity for LEO's to abide by case law AND allow the politicians to feel the pain that they are going to inflict on their constituants by these silly moves. Under SCOTUS ruling in Castlerock vs. Gonzalez in 2005 SCOTUS ruled that the police have no duty to protect an individual citizen and this was an extension of Warren vs. District of Columbia 1981. Therefore any LEO assigned to a protection detail should refuse on the grounds that a politician is no different than any other citizen. Should their CoP ORDER them to comply they should develop a case of Blue Flu and let their Union deal with it.

That would leave the Politi9cians to resort to Private Security. EVEN if paid for by taxpayer dollars they now have additional issues including but not limited to liability, lack of qualified immunity, laws in many / most states providing that Private Security is not LEO and exactly the same as a common citizen, licensing issues, uniform requirements, and NO ARREST authority above that of any other citizen. They will be required in most instances be required by law to send the contract out for bid which results in the lowest bidder getting the contract. Now they get to be "guarded" by someone making just above minimum wage in most instances.

If the CoP were to order this in respect to his officers it would be a simple reallocation of funds by the PD to provide the best policing possible with the now more limited funds available to the department after they spend lots of money replacing their fleet of vehicles which have been destroyed during these unpleasantries amongst all of their other replentishment expenses.

[Ton]

I know officers who retired after more than 20 or 25 years and who had zero complaints against them.

But they weren't you were they? The most common denominator I've observed by people who make statements like this is that they've never worn a badge. I'm sure you LEO friends whose disciplinary records you thoroughly reviewed were exemplary public servants.

You do understand that people don't like receiving tickets right? They don't like being arrested. In general, a very good portion of the time they do not like do admit that what they did may have been the wrong thing? And if they believe there is a chance that making a phone call might mean they don't have to take responsibility for their mistake, they are happy to do it?

Now I don't know what they are considering a "complaint". I've had citizens call and complain to my boss for all sorts of mundane things such as citing them for committing a traffic violation which resulted in an accident when they felt the other driver was a fault, etc. I have however never been subject to an internal affairs investigation, because I am honest and do my job to the best of my ability and without bias. I also believe my religious use of my body camera has a lot to do with complaints not getting traction.

Again, how a complaint evolves into an internal affairs investigation is hugely dependent on individual agencies policies.

18 documented complaints in 19 years does seem like a lot to me. But I'm fortunate to work in a place where the majority of the population does not hate police. When you work in a place where children have been raised to hate police since they were infants and the cycle goes back generations, you are going to get more complaints.

And again, you oversimplify "bad cops". Lets say its 2010, before mass use of body cameras, and Jake Officer and Joe Officer respond to a a shoplifting call at the supermarket. A suspect description is given, and as the officers arrive on scene they see Joe criminal, who matches the description, exiting the store. As soon as he sees them Joe Criminal runs. They give Chase. Jake Officer is fresh out of the police academy and in better shape than Joe Officer and as they round the corner of the store Jake Officer is closing on Joe Criminal but Joe Officer is 15 yards behind. Jake Officer sees that Joe Criminal briefly glances back at him, then reaches for the front of his waistband while beginning to blade his body back at him. Joe Officer, fatigued and far behind, can't see this more subtle movements. Jake Officer, recognizing from his police training that Joe Criminal may be reaching for a weapon, removes his taser and tases Joe Criminal. Joe Criminal falls and hits his head on the curb, which begins profusely bleeding. They quickly handcuff him and call for medical attention. The object he was reaching for was a packaged cell phone in his waistband, which he was hoping to ditch before he was caught and thus avoid charges. He is eventually transported to the hospital and receives several stitches in his head. He calls and files a complaint. A supervisor reads Jake Officer's report. Jake Officer, while excellent in foot pursuits, is not the most articulate in his use of force reporting, and as the agency use of force policy clearly states there must be "active aggression" or "imminent active aggression" in order to utilize a taser, the complaint is sent to internal affairs. Now both Jake and Joe Officer and called in for interviews in regards to the incident. Joe Officer, being too far away and undergoing too much adrenaline at the time to notice the smaller details, concedes he did not see anything happening except Joe Criminal running. Jake Officer, who during the incident made the choice to utilize his taser with full confidence, is now feeling uncomfortable and questioning whether or not he made the right decision. He is also facing suspension of the complaint is substantiated. He calls his union representative, who contacts a use of force expert and reviews the incident with him, as well as the report. As Jake recalls the incident, the use of force expert breaks down down Jake's micro observations and help mentally work through the incident. He explains to him that writing "he appeared to be reaching for a weapon so I tased him" is not sufficient articulation in a report, and important factors, such and the brief rear glance, the fact that most weapons are concealed in the waistband, the slight blading of the body, need to be included when writing a use of force report. Jake, along with his representative, go to the interview. Jake is able to satisfactorily explain his actions and the complaint is found to be unsubstantiated.

So is Jake a "bad cop"? Is what he did a "bad cop" thing? To Joe Criminal, yes. How is it fair that he just tries to grab a cell phone and the cops split his head open and he has to get stitches? Is Joe Officer complicit, for not being sure exactly what happened, even though he was "right there?". Is the union rep at fault, for helping Jake?

Is a criminal defense attorney at fault for trying to get their client acquitted when they know their client is guilty?

Tennesee vs Garner gives officers the ability to a shoot a fleeing suspect if the officer had probable cause to believe the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others. There could be a clear cut incident in which this case fully justified an officers actions and do you know what the body camera would show? A cop shooting a guy in the back.

THESE are the reasons that many agencies will not release evidence, such as body camera videos, until cases are adjudicated.

I've told people this several times. You can find ANYTHING you want to see on the internet, there are hundreds of videos of cops behaving inappropriately. Because if someone pulled out a cell phone every time a cop was doing the right thing there would be billions of videos posted that noone cares about.

HiBC I don't know if I've seen that video but it sounds unfortunate and you are right about 100 good officers not making up for one bad experience. What I always tell people who are concerned about being a victim of excessive force is that if that truly happens to you, you are going to get very rich very quickly, so count yourself lucky.

[44 AMP]

Tennesee vs Garner gives officers the ability to a shoot a fleeing suspect if the officer had probable cause to believe the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others. There could be a clear cut incident in which this case fully justified an officers actions and do you know what the body camera would show? A cop shooting a guy in the back.

THESE are the reasons that many agencies will not release evidence, such as body camera videos, until cases are adjudicated.

Understood, and, agreed. Now, how do you convince the public that there's no cover up with a billion yammerheads twittering that there is??

Or the root cause of that, some "official" news group only showing and telling PART of the story, and doing it 24/7 ??

Where is the movement to defund MSNBC or the rest of them when someone working for them screws up??

"Fake news" is NOT a modern issue, its been with us as long as we have had news. And it will be an issue as long as there is someone who decides what we see and what we don't.

This used to be taught in school, in history class specifically. But I suppose it no longer is, like a lot of things today...

SO, what is the real issue with defunding the police? Radicals want all the money stopped, so the "bad cops" go away. More rational people want SOME of the money taken away, in order to "force" the police to only spend money on the "important things", which they believe include teaching and policing the police so that they aren't "bad".

Its a nice dream, but to date, the real world hasn't worked that way, and I don't see a "sea change" from just defunding some things.

The people who demand "defunding" apparently don't realize that even if they get what they say they want, they won't have a voice in HOW it gets done. That, if it happens will be done by the politicians, bureaucrats and bean counters currently in control of (and possibly responsible for) the whole mess we're in now.

[HiBC]

Ton: Here is the video.

I'm not anti-cop. I do not advocate defunding.

IMO,there was no reason for the LEO's to stop this guy.

Admittedly,he COULD have been more compliant, but lets not forget the Constitution.

I'll say again,I don't personally fault the male backup officer,and he is the one who was fired and charged.

The first Woman officer that was doing the talking violated that Gentleman and I understand his refusal.

This is what generates anger and hate. Its like Police State BS with no Constitution. Maybe training that is necessary is "These are the Constitutional Rights of Citizens you WILL NOT violate,or YOU will go to jail.
https://youtu.be/idEyEWLWfyM

[bamaranger]

I encourage anybody interested in the PD, pro or con, to participate in any "ride along" program that their local LE may offer. If you can't find one locally, consider driving a bit to to locale that does. Do it more than once, and on a couple of different shifts, with different officers if possible. Multiple jurisdictions would be good too. My experience and observations have been that many everyday folks have no idea of the nature of the work and the span of violence and crime in their areas.

I cannot understand the comments and complaints registered in this post regards police/LE firearms ("military weapons") and the wearing of body armor. Police have "military weapons" to respond to incidents and criminals similarly armed. Would folks rather have the officers responding to the active shooter at their church, school, concert, etc, with a 2" .38 and 12 extra rounds? Are officers effecting a warrant at a gang or drug location where subjects are known to be armed and violent expected to be so armed as well? The upgunning of LE is a result of the criminal element upgunning as well.

Police have been wearing body armor since the 1970's. Soft armor, under or over a uniform shirt, or external plates, is hot, uncomfortable and expensive, and certainly not worn for appearance and to intimidate. Body armor has saved MANY officers lives since it's adoption and development.

BDU's, and external vests are a move towards practicality and comfort. Apparel in policework has changed over the years, just as other professions have as well. Nurses now wear scrubs, pastors seem to rarely wear a collar, and teachers seldom wear a tie.

Times have changed, and this ain't Mayberry.

[CowTowner]

Simple statement here - right or wrong.
I believe part of the issue with police "acting out" is that they have forgotten they are civilian law enforcement officers not occupying military.

[thallub]

Nobody complains when that Armored Bearcat or MRAP responds to a school shooting, when the officers inside hit the ground with M4’s and hard armor. In fact if the police DIDNT respond that way, peolle would ask “why not?”

What matters is the response once the cops boots hit the ground. Will they engage the shooter/s or will they wuss around like the cops at Parkland?

[Sharkbite]

What matters is the response once the cops boots hit the ground. Will they engage the shooter/s or will they wuss around like the cops at Parkland?

But, that is EXACTLY the point!!!! The cry today is that Police are too heavy handed. Yet when they dont respond they are vilified as well.

Its a “damed if you do, damed if you don't” scenario.

[thallub]

Yet when they dont respond they are vilified as well.

What is so wrong about criticizing cops who fail to protect kids?

[44 AMP]

Its a “damed if you do, damed if you don't” scenario.

I think its dammed if you do, dammed if you don't, thing when they act improperly.

Here's a couple points to consider,
While there is clearly a need and a use for SWAT, we have a problem with it being overused. As often stated, when your tool is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.

Justified or not, there is a belief that when you equip the cops as soldiers, and train the cops as soldiers, you get soldiers more than you get cops. And, when you give them those tools, they will use them.

and not always where that use is justified. Screwups may be statistically rare, but they happen enough to be big news and major talking points, and attitude changers.

30 years of COPS on tv, teaching us that any backtalk or failure to do what the cop says instantly, gets you slammed on the hood of a car then handcuffed. While no doubt selected for its "entertainment" value, it is real footage of real events.

Don't think this plays a part in the attitudes we're seeing today?? Think again.