You can pick and choose what you see from the audit (though in no circumstances is it an astounding success).
The general points i'm trying to get across is
- Responder safety/back-up needs mean you can’t fully “swap out” police. This program still needed to bring in police most of the time.
- Coverage and scale are hard in an actually big city, like NYC. (also why denver's success in a tiny city is sort of a useless comparison)
So why not just equip police to better handle mental health cases instead of creating a different task force which doesn't have any of structure the police already has? This isn't rhetorical - the reason is idealogical stubbornness, there are better solutions for achieving mamadanis goals.
mmooss|3 months ago
Could you point out if I'm missing something?
abe94|3 months ago
The general points i'm trying to get across is
- Responder safety/back-up needs mean you can’t fully “swap out” police. This program still needed to bring in police most of the time. - Coverage and scale are hard in an actually big city, like NYC. (also why denver's success in a tiny city is sort of a useless comparison)
So why not just equip police to better handle mental health cases instead of creating a different task force which doesn't have any of structure the police already has? This isn't rhetorical - the reason is idealogical stubbornness, there are better solutions for achieving mamadanis goals.