In Los Angeles I see so many cops driving black mustang cars, a predator style car. As if they enjoy their predator status and want to express and enforce their masculinity on the community. Every time I see a cop car it makes me nervous just by the sight of it.
I think its time we give them Pink colored bug beetle cars. That will remind them they are here to protect the community, not be a hero in an action movie.
You get so used to aggressive police cars in the US. I found myself wondering why police cars looked so small, simple and not intimidating while overseas until I realized. Also, wearing black uniforms is ridiculous.
I recall a quote some years back, from a veteran police officer. I think it was in Chicago, but I'm not sure. To paraphrase, he said that people didn't realize that the police were the biggest and most organized gang.
Certainly, a lot of their behavior appears to bear this observation out.
P.S. Like other areas where we have problems, policing needs to be transparent, accountable (including and especially fully audit-able), and proportional.
Arising from the community, and not imposed upon them. If you can't make this happen, you've already failed.
"The striking thing about the footage is, again, the utter mundanity of the raid. A family was just violently raided over an immeasurable amount of pot. A man was arrested over that pot. The money he needed for his business was taken from him. Yet there’s no shame or embarrassment from the officers. There’s no panic that the whole thing was captured on video. That’s when it hits you. They don’t think they’ve made a mistake. This is what they do."
Ultimately this type of behavior erodes all trust in law enforcement in the communities where this kind of policing is practiced. A vicious cycle is amplified whereby residents learn to put little trust in police and in turn police decide to use more and more force, believing those (untrusting) residents would use violence against them.
As a side note, why don't police approach dangerous criminals the way radiological workers approach "hot" material. I'm not sure how "danger" should be enumerated but I'd imagine it decreases with the square of the distance. Unless there are other bystanders nearby who might be hurt, closing the distance to suspects seems to be one of the more dangerous things an officer could do. Seems like containing someone and letting them cool off is safer for both parties.
This. It could be argued that most police don't even need a firearm if their role is not suppressive. In fact, a better division of labor based on a better rules of engagement may even negate the need for the concept of a generalist police officer. Large numbers of containment and assessment roles could largely clear (of bystanders in danger) and control an area until the situation can be assesed properly. Maybe engagement is required and maybe its not. In the event it is, only a small pool of highly trained officers need be draw from to apply lethal force. If its not and an arrest can be made peacefully, then yet another class of police could handle the actual arrest and custody.
Dividing the process across different roles should help reduce the spillover of tension and aggression from one phase to the next.
The problem with US police is that they now want to behave like deployed military troops without any of the risk. They want to play with all these "cool toys", and pretend they are raiding some compound in Fallujah or something, but they refuse to risk their life.
That's how they end up killing people who are fetching their ID in their pocket, or people carrying a black book, or really just standing there. The excuse is always the same: I feared for my life. And their superiors always back them up: The officer thought he was in danger, police officers have the right to use lethal force if they think their life is in danger. I remember reading an amazing post by a vet who joined the force, and he was totally baffled to see that his new coworkers were more agressive than his platoon in Irak.
Guess what, real military troops accept the fact that sometimes they'll get shot and die. They always make sure that the guy on the other side is actually shooting at them before they open fire. And when they don't, they're punished. Severely.
I know it's not a popular opinion in a country where cops are called heroes. But I'd rather see 10 dead cops than a single innocent citizen shot. It sucks, it's a lot to ask for, but it comes with the job. When you're a cop you have to put the life of others before your own. Otherwise become an accountant.
I get your point about the relative discipline of actual soldiers, but in Iraq it seems likely that at least 100 noncombattants died for every soldier who was killed.
And how many members of that family will EVER call the police to report anything short of a murder - if that - out of concern of being charged with it because they were convenient?
"In the Jude study, researchers found data suggesting people withdraw from the system after an incident of police violence. Papachristos said the study shows that police violence and other misconduct hurts officers' ability to work with communities and may result in a deepening of so-called "legal cynicism" — the idea that police are either unable or unwilling to help — within communities. That dynamic can perpetuate crime and distrust."
In Dennis Smith's memoir, "Report from Engine Co. 82", he wrote that in South Bronx people would call the fire department instead of the police, because they didn't trust the police.
Nowadays cops are a lot less likely to tussle and mix it up. It's all a sort of antiseptic interaction where commands are shouted from afar.
It used to be cops were willing to take a punch and punch back at someone who didn't cooperate. If that happens now it's resisting arrest, assaulting an officer, etc.
Not sure if it's a legacy of needles and aids which lead police to avoid any physical contact with a suspect or perp. It's a change that has led to much less "give" on the part of cops.
I think the general public is unaware of how dangerous physical altercations are. The antisepsis of staged fight scenes on TV make it seem like any well-trained person can recover from a tussle and be back to normal by the next scene. In the real world, it only takes seconds for a struggle to turn fatal, even discarding the presence of any other weapons.
In the case of a police officer carrying a gun, all physical fights have to be assumed to be fights to the death. If the officer gets knocked out, there is now a loaded weapon on the table that is no longer under the control of the officer.
I think "assaulting an officer" happens even when you don't throw a punch. I've certainly seen enough videos where it was charged and I saw nothing like a punch.
One point that I don't see discussed often, is the background of police officers. How many are Iraq vets that apply in America's streets the exact same methods that made Iraq hell on earth... And why could anyone think applying occupation tactics to domestic law enforcement was remotely a good idea...
I've heard the opposite hypothesis. Previously police departments had a much higher percentage of vets. After having experienced the horrors of war, they had no need nor no desire to play soldier on the street. Also they would have calibrated their us versus them response. The criminals they encounter on the street are the same people they were defending and fighting with at war.
I really doubt it has anything to do with them being vets. In Iraq and Afghanistan you can't shoot until you are fired upon but in the US it's shoot first and ask questions later.
I used to walk past the parking lot for Border Patrol at the Rainbow Bridge (US-Canada crossing in Niagara Falls), and 80% of the cars for the US Border Patrol had bumper stickers all over them stating that they were veterans. One of the stickers was even "Vietnam Vets Aren't "Fonda" Jan Fonda" (or something like that).
You could usually tell which ones were probably vets too. For example, during one crossing, the Border Patrol guy started trying to have a "sensible chuckle" with me over the fact that some guy had committed suicide on the casino floor (couple of blocks away) the previous day. He even made a fake "hand gun" to mouth motion.
Military vets are vastly better trained than the kind of police discussed in this article and most importantly have an understanding that a. This is not a game b. The relative level of danger in these drug raid situations is usually vastly smaller than what warrants a militarized approach and c. American citizens are supposed to be the "good guys" in any case
Post Vietnam, in the eighties, almost half of US were veterans.
This has been going down ever since. At least in my area, new officers are usually straight out of college with a criminal justice major and no military service. (Though I do know several officers who have joined the national guard or the reserves later on.)
We have military hardware and military guns. We have an institution of filled with arrogance and the instillation of fear ("Contempt of cop" is a real thing.) Even in this article, they talk about how the sheriff's swat team has a logo featuring a human skull. Not exactly in the "protect and serve" department, but more much more "I'm gonna fuck someone up" department. Civil forfeiture. Targeting communities for fines. Broken windows policing. A privatized prison system. Policing as a money maker.
This is contemporary police culture, and it is dysfunctional.
I've said this multiple times, but the older I get, the more I see the wisdom in NWA[0].
Give everyone:
1. Food
2. Clean, safe and warm shelter, doesn't need to be fancy
3. A little money to spend (just a little! There still needs to be incentive to go out and work!)
4. Free and good quality education
What pisses me off most about this is that people say the cops need these tools, etc. Well, how come the cops suck so much at their jobs?! No, I'm serious. My local PD is in the midst of a crime wave. They take many hours to respond, never actually catch anyone, catch the wrong people, act like idiots.
this is the reality in our black communities. night raids, arbitrary detention, brutality, denigration. the police fight a war against the poor.
if they behave like an occupying army, they should not be so offended when they are fought like an occupying army. the black communities will continue to be oppressed, and so there will be more incidents like the slaughter in dallas. everyone will say "oh, the humanity" or similar, but nothing will change until public policy tightens the leash on the cops.
until we start taking officer safety more seriously and hobble their ability to abuse the public, we should expect continued violence against the police. to improve officer safety, the police need to be stripped of their weapons, armor, and legal leeway to abuse. it's simple: violence begets violence. rather than doubling down, pull back. unless the lives of police don't matter-- then by all means, let the police try continuing with the shootings until the morale of the black community improves.
under the best circumstances, the black community won't trust the police for another generation or two, provided that the police stop doing damage now. we need to aim for the children of their children being able to trust the institutions that are there for their benefit... or we could keep beating/shooting/stealing from/raiding them for another 20 years, and cause peace to be that much farther off.
That's why I'm leaning more and more towards the idea that paying taxes is immoral and wrong in our current system.
And that is because a good chunk of the taxes we pay go towards arming young people and sending them to kill other young people - military/war/defence.
Another chunk goes towards arming your own people against your own people, thus making dissent and protest hard and dangerous.
And another chunk goes towards maintaining big and powerful institutions, like the IRS, threatening us with violence if we don't pay up.
Centralised taxation systems should be replaced with citizen crowdfunding, in which everyone can choose where his tax money goes.
I'm curious if we'd still be spending as much on police and military if we could choose how we spend our taxes.
There are many parts of government that I disagree with, including many that I consider immoral. That's why it's important to participate in the political process. Government and law can be changed; it's a slow process and it requires a lot of work, but it's possible.
Picking and choosing where your taxes go a terrible idea, because government isn't à la carte[1]. Everybody has their own opinion on what they don't want to pay for, such as the religious fanatics that don't want to cover certain medical items (e.g. some types of birth control). The "market" is not a law of nature that fixes everything, so you're really advocating for a failed government where nothing is properly funded.
We probably wouldn't be paying so much towards the military, but god only knows what idiocy would be receiving the money instead. The whims of the people would probably deliver super-unstable funding, making it confusing as to what programs really were effective and which ones just became scapegoats. Hard to say if that system would be more or less wasteful, especially with the low bar of what's currently happening.
Honestly, there's a leadership gap right now, but I'm not convinced that that means leadership as an institution is dead. We need good leadership that people can respect, which does it's job, and is ultimately accountable without endless redirection and blame for "the other guy being the bad one"
These are all from different countries. Just a quick image search. Would a visitor from another planet be entirely wrong to deduce that local regime propaganda aside, all governments have assumed a paramilitarized posture towards their citizens?
We don't know the context these photos were taken in though. Might have been during riots, or a terrorist alert. I'd personally want the cops to look like that if there was a nutter on the loose with a machine gun.
>Would a visitor from another planet be entirely wrong to deduce that local regime propaganda aside, all governments have assumed a paramilitarized posture towards their citizens?
Yes. Most of those (if not all) are from riots and such loaded scenes.
The "shoot first, ask questions later", or the "Send SWAT team because some guy sells marijuana" (or even lesser stuf) is 90% US (and some developing countries).
It's been a few years that Terry Gilliam's Brazil movie got upgraded to 'mostly documentary' status. At the time, 1985, it seemed only a dark comedy / cautionary tale.
(Well, the caution against ugly tech seems to have worked. Architecture and policing, not so much.)
The author might be right about some things, but he is also clearly exaggerating toward his narrative in some others.
It wasn't the "Ferguson Protests" as the author is trying to put it, it was the "Ferguson Riots", there was looting, violence amongst the people and destruction of public property all around, you can't expect the police to show up in their blue uniform armed only with a baton in those cases.
Ferguson involved both protests and riots. More people were involved in the former than the latter.
Quoting M. L. King's "The Other America":
> These conditions are the things that cause individuals to feel that they have no other alternative than to engage in violent rebellions to get attention. And I must say tonight that a riot is the language of the unheard. And what is it America has failed to hear? It has failed to hear that the plight of the negro poor has worsened over the last twelve or fifteen years. It has failed to hear that the promises of freedom and justice have not been met. And it has failed to hear that large segments of white society are more concerned about tranquility and the status quo than about justice and humanity. - http://www.gphistorical.org/mlk/mlkspeech/
I can expect the police to not yell out "Bring it, all you fucking animals! Bring it!".
Contextually, the employment of literally hundreds of armed troopers in anti-riot gear occurred before any violence at the protests, and the local and state authorities ratcheted up the response in the intervening days. Violence and looting within protest actions is definitely a problem, but it can't be considered in isolation from the behavior of the government towards protesters of all kinds.
[+] [-] byebyetech|9 years ago|reply
I think its time we give them Pink colored bug beetle cars. That will remind them they are here to protect the community, not be a hero in an action movie.
[+] [-] simlevesque|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] cylinder|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pasbesoin|9 years ago|reply
Certainly, a lot of their behavior appears to bear this observation out.
P.S. Like other areas where we have problems, policing needs to be transparent, accountable (including and especially fully audit-able), and proportional.
Arising from the community, and not imposed upon them. If you can't make this happen, you've already failed.
[+] [-] Zigurd|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] grkvlt|9 years ago|reply
What happened first, though? Was the [Ford Mustang/Dodge Charger] a 'predator style' car first, or is it so, because cops drive them?
[+] [-] messick|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] joveian|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] torpfactory|9 years ago|reply
As a side note, why don't police approach dangerous criminals the way radiological workers approach "hot" material. I'm not sure how "danger" should be enumerated but I'd imagine it decreases with the square of the distance. Unless there are other bystanders nearby who might be hurt, closing the distance to suspects seems to be one of the more dangerous things an officer could do. Seems like containing someone and letting them cool off is safer for both parties.
[+] [-] dmd|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ende|9 years ago|reply
Dividing the process across different roles should help reduce the spillover of tension and aggression from one phase to the next.
[+] [-] dudul|9 years ago|reply
That's how they end up killing people who are fetching their ID in their pocket, or people carrying a black book, or really just standing there. The excuse is always the same: I feared for my life. And their superiors always back them up: The officer thought he was in danger, police officers have the right to use lethal force if they think their life is in danger. I remember reading an amazing post by a vet who joined the force, and he was totally baffled to see that his new coworkers were more agressive than his platoon in Irak.
Guess what, real military troops accept the fact that sometimes they'll get shot and die. They always make sure that the guy on the other side is actually shooting at them before they open fire. And when they don't, they're punished. Severely.
I know it's not a popular opinion in a country where cops are called heroes. But I'd rather see 10 dead cops than a single innocent citizen shot. It sucks, it's a lot to ask for, but it comes with the job. When you're a cop you have to put the life of others before your own. Otherwise become an accountant.
[+] [-] rz2k|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] fencepost|9 years ago|reply
I'll throw in a relevant quote from this week's Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel article about the 20% decline in 911 calls over the year following news of a beating by off-duty officers: (http://www.jsonline.com/story/news/investigations/2016/09/29...)
"In the Jude study, researchers found data suggesting people withdraw from the system after an incident of police violence. Papachristos said the study shows that police violence and other misconduct hurts officers' ability to work with communities and may result in a deepening of so-called "legal cynicism" — the idea that police are either unable or unwilling to help — within communities. That dynamic can perpetuate crime and distrust."
The Harvard study in question: "Police Violence and Citizen Crime Reporting in the Black Community" https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3114813-Jude-911-Cal...
edit: rearranging URLs
[+] [-] dalke|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mc32|9 years ago|reply
It used to be cops were willing to take a punch and punch back at someone who didn't cooperate. If that happens now it's resisting arrest, assaulting an officer, etc.
Not sure if it's a legacy of needles and aids which lead police to avoid any physical contact with a suspect or perp. It's a change that has led to much less "give" on the part of cops.
[+] [-] mrestko|9 years ago|reply
In the case of a police officer carrying a gun, all physical fights have to be assumed to be fights to the death. If the officer gets knocked out, there is now a loaded weapon on the table that is no longer under the control of the officer.
(Edited to fix typos.)
[+] [-] e40|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|9 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] brohee|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bryanlarsen|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] friendlygrammar|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pyre|9 years ago|reply
You could usually tell which ones were probably vets too. For example, during one crossing, the Border Patrol guy started trying to have a "sensible chuckle" with me over the fact that some guy had committed suicide on the casino floor (couple of blocks away) the previous day. He even made a fake "hand gun" to mouth motion.
[+] [-] zzzeek|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] danielvf|9 years ago|reply
This has been going down ever since. At least in my area, new officers are usually straight out of college with a criminal justice major and no military service. (Though I do know several officers who have joined the national guard or the reserves later on.)
[+] [-] humanrebar|9 years ago|reply
...the suicide bombings, beheadings, religious wars, and terrorist organizations had something to do with that as well.
[+] [-] kingkawn|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Clubber|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jonathankoren|9 years ago|reply
We have military hardware and military guns. We have an institution of filled with arrogance and the instillation of fear ("Contempt of cop" is a real thing.) Even in this article, they talk about how the sheriff's swat team has a logo featuring a human skull. Not exactly in the "protect and serve" department, but more much more "I'm gonna fuck someone up" department. Civil forfeiture. Targeting communities for fines. Broken windows policing. A privatized prison system. Policing as a money maker.
This is contemporary police culture, and it is dysfunctional.
I've said this multiple times, but the older I get, the more I see the wisdom in NWA[0].
[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tke_27wbW-0
[+] [-] uhtred|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] uhtred|9 years ago|reply
And legalise drugs.
No more need for warrior cops.
[+] [-] acaciapalm|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] cryoshon|9 years ago|reply
if they behave like an occupying army, they should not be so offended when they are fought like an occupying army. the black communities will continue to be oppressed, and so there will be more incidents like the slaughter in dallas. everyone will say "oh, the humanity" or similar, but nothing will change until public policy tightens the leash on the cops.
until we start taking officer safety more seriously and hobble their ability to abuse the public, we should expect continued violence against the police. to improve officer safety, the police need to be stripped of their weapons, armor, and legal leeway to abuse. it's simple: violence begets violence. rather than doubling down, pull back. unless the lives of police don't matter-- then by all means, let the police try continuing with the shootings until the morale of the black community improves.
under the best circumstances, the black community won't trust the police for another generation or two, provided that the police stop doing damage now. we need to aim for the children of their children being able to trust the institutions that are there for their benefit... or we could keep beating/shooting/stealing from/raiding them for another 20 years, and cause peace to be that much farther off.
[+] [-] delegate|9 years ago|reply
And that is because a good chunk of the taxes we pay go towards arming young people and sending them to kill other young people - military/war/defence.
Another chunk goes towards arming your own people against your own people, thus making dissent and protest hard and dangerous.
And another chunk goes towards maintaining big and powerful institutions, like the IRS, threatening us with violence if we don't pay up.
Centralised taxation systems should be replaced with citizen crowdfunding, in which everyone can choose where his tax money goes.
I'm curious if we'd still be spending as much on police and military if we could choose how we spend our taxes.
[+] [-] pdkl95|9 years ago|reply
Picking and choosing where your taxes go a terrible idea, because government isn't à la carte[1]. Everybody has their own opinion on what they don't want to pay for, such as the religious fanatics that don't want to cover certain medical items (e.g. some types of birth control). The "market" is not a law of nature that fixes everything, so you're really advocating for a failed government where nothing is properly funded.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSQCH1qyIDo#t=170
[+] [-] awinder|9 years ago|reply
Honestly, there's a leadership gap right now, but I'm not convinced that that means leadership as an institution is dead. We need good leadership that people can respect, which does it's job, and is ultimately accountable without endless redirection and blame for "the other guy being the bad one"
[+] [-] nilved|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] eternalban|9 years ago|reply
http://media.presstv.com/photo/20160325/1bd21648-c58b-4d39-a...
http://media.presstv.com/photo/20160323/f17b570b-68b6-4d7d-9...
http://media.presstv.com/photo/20150519/76bdc4b0-98ca-42b1-b...
http://www.abc.net.au/reslib/200704/r137524_467947.jpg
http://worldnews.indywatch.org/archiver/worldnews.indywatch....
[+] [-] uhtred|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jordanb|9 years ago|reply
The second photo does not show any militarism.
The third photo is, sadly, from the USA.
The fourth photo is from a police state (Russia).
I don't know the context of the fifth photo but it looks like it may also be from the USA.
[+] [-] coldtea|9 years ago|reply
Yes. Most of those (if not all) are from riots and such loaded scenes.
The "shoot first, ask questions later", or the "Send SWAT team because some guy sells marijuana" (or even lesser stuf) is 90% US (and some developing countries).
[+] [-] JadeNB|9 years ago|reply
> http://media.presstv.com/photo/20160323/f17b570b-68b6-4d7d-9...
It actually looks pretty unmilitaristic to me. (The others are horrifying.)
[+] [-] unknown|9 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] B1FF_PSUVM|9 years ago|reply
(Well, the caution against ugly tech seems to have worked. Architecture and policing, not so much.)
[+] [-] lifeisstillgood|9 years ago|reply
It is the civil forfeiture thing with the lawnmowers that was a light bulb moment for me.
[+] [-] jbmorgado|9 years ago|reply
It wasn't the "Ferguson Protests" as the author is trying to put it, it was the "Ferguson Riots", there was looting, violence amongst the people and destruction of public property all around, you can't expect the police to show up in their blue uniform armed only with a baton in those cases.
[+] [-] dalke|9 years ago|reply
Quoting M. L. King's "The Other America":
> These conditions are the things that cause individuals to feel that they have no other alternative than to engage in violent rebellions to get attention. And I must say tonight that a riot is the language of the unheard. And what is it America has failed to hear? It has failed to hear that the plight of the negro poor has worsened over the last twelve or fifteen years. It has failed to hear that the promises of freedom and justice have not been met. And it has failed to hear that large segments of white society are more concerned about tranquility and the status quo than about justice and humanity. - http://www.gphistorical.org/mlk/mlkspeech/
I can expect the police to not yell out "Bring it, all you fucking animals! Bring it!".
[+] [-] HillRat|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] musha68k|9 years ago|reply
Civilized and creative diplomacy more often than not leads to better results than setting the stage with an atmosphere of violence.
Also wasn't that incident of escalating violence triggered by executive failure in the first place?
Back in school we learned that the separation of powers is one of the defining attributes of a functioning democracy...