Ferguson conflict - What is the problem, and how to solve it?

[waitforufo]

Perhaps if instead they were trained to deescalate situations, seek ways to calm tensions and mitigate stressors, and find clever ways to avoid the death of free citizens we'd have fewer deaths at their hands, less public outrage, and greater trust in their authority.

The only part of the above that I disagree with is the word "instead." Replace that with "in addition to firearms training" we are on the same page. I'm sure however that the police, particularly in big cities receive such training. Also, all the shooting incident reporting and investigations are designed to strongly discourage shooting.

 

The police in the US carry firearms. To do so they must be range qualified. This qualification is in the interest of public safety. If the police hit their targets, innocent bystanders are less likely to be injured. Police firearms training is also in part designed to reduce police fatalities. In the not too distant past police were trained to unholster there weapon, aim, fire two shots, reload if necessary, holster their weapon, evaluate, and repeat. Two shots because they were armed with six shot revolvers. This training was designed improve both speed and accuracy in the entire weapon use process. This training was changed after an FBI study on police fatalities found that a significant number of dead police officers had holstered weapons including two spent cartridges. So they changed the training to unholster, aim, shoot until empty, reload, evaluate, holster their weapon, and repeat. This new training reduced police fatalities and injuries.

 

Finally, we want the police to win gunfights. They are the good guys.

[iNow]

The only part of the above that I disagree with is the word "instead." Replace that with "in addition to firearms training" we are on the same page.

That's fine. I was largely following on to the point you made about people doing what they're trained to do in high stress situations, often automatically and without thinking. For that reason, I'm recommending greater training be placed on deescalation and mitigation of tensions than is placed on use of lethal force.

 

Finally, we want the police to win gunfights. They are the good guys.

Except when they're not, of course. I support our police, but I'm also realistic enough to realize there are good and bad ones just like any other occupation.

 

Another important point, and it's one that I think this thread revolves around, is that police are winning these quote unquote "gunfights" even when the citizen on the other side of the equation is completely unarmed, doesn't have a gun, or is even running in the opposite direction away from the officer in a nonthreatening way.

Edited June 3, 2015 by iNow

[StringJunky]

That's fine. I was largely following on to the point you made about people doing what they're trained to do in high stress situations, often automatically and without thinking. For that reason, I'm recommending greater training be placed on deescalation and mitigation of tensions than is placed on use of lethal force.

Yes, a policeman's job is to keep the peace, not push it over the top.

[dimreepr]

Absolute power doesn’t corrupt but the corrupt do seek power; in a perfect world anyone who wants to be a policeman should be denied automatically, just saying.

 

 

Edit/ that’s not too exclude the possibility of an honourable man seeking to better his world (of which I'm sure they are numerous); but as a generalisation it’s not so far off the mark.

I’m sorry my initial post was a little flippant and my subsequent edits haven’t clarified anything very well.

 

So let me try again:

 

Absolute power doesn’t corrupt but the corrupt and corruptible do seek power; in a perfect world anyone who wants to be a policeman/woman should be rigorously vetted with that in mind.

Edited June 3, 2015 by dimreepr

[overtone]

 

 

In the not too distant past police were trained to unholster there weapon, aim, fire two shots, reload if necessary, holster their weapon, evaluate, and repeat. Two shots because they were armed with six shot revolvers. - - - - So they changed the training to unholster, aim, shoot until empty, reload, evaluate, holster their weapon, and repeat. This new training reduced police fatalities and injuries.

So the new training had them firing six shots from a revolver before re-evaluating. Then they went to twelve+ round magazines in semiautomatics, without changing the "empty the magazine" protocol.

 

So we had, in Ferguson, twelve shots fired in three groups, only four of which solidly hit an unarmed target the shooter described as 1) not evasive 2) very large, and 3) so close as to pose an immediate threat to the shooter's life. Of the remaining eight: one buried in a car door, and seven distributed at approximately shoulder height in various directions into a densely populated residential neighborhood (two after passing through a small amount of tissue on the target.) And that was described by the police and local authorities as the actions of a trained officer following procedure.

 

 

Finally, we want the police to win gunfights. They are the good guys.

There was no gunfight in Ferguson. Or New York. Or Baltimore. Or Tulsa.

 

At what point do the police lose their presumptive status as the good guys?

[waitforufo]

 

At what point do the police lose their presumptive status as the good guys?

 

When that point is reached, we will have anarchy.

[overtone]

 

 

At what point do the police lose their presumptive status as the good guys?

 

When that point is reached, we will have anarchy.

We have many historical examples of police losing their presumptive good guy status under circumstances quite different from anarchy - chaotic, oppressive, or both. .

[iNow]

When that point is reached, we will have anarchy.

Nobody is saying the police should stop preventing murders. People are saying the police should stop being murderers. No anarchy required.

[StringJunky]

Nobody is saying the police should stop preventing murders. People are saying the police should stop being murderers. No anarchy required.

This is mostly from my own, possibly faulty, memory but it occurred to me that UK people tend to talk of "keeping the peace" or "maintaining law and order", whereas the US uses "enforce the law" a lot. Do you think this reveals a difference in attitude?

[iNow]

It might play a role, but I doubt it's the primary factor. Other things like having so many ex-military and having so much war-oriented equipment (tanks and assault rifles, etc.) all coupled with the constant fear propaganda we see on 24-hour news that keeps people consistently on edge... the stories on social media about predators and child molesters and ISIS and and and ad infinitum... I suspect those things play a bigger role than calling them "law enforcement" instead of "peace officers."

[swansont]

Absolute power doesn’t corrupt but the corrupt do seek power; in a perfect world anyone who wants to be a policeman should be denied automatically, just saying.

 

The ones who do get corrupted have a disproportionate effect on those who may not be. There is a strong tendency to get away with things because other cops won't snitch on you; the perceived duty to have your partner's back outweighs the sworn duty to uphold the law. It can be small, like not giving traffic/parking tickets to fellow officers, or big, like faking evidence or backing up a BS statement

 

I'm a black ex-cop, and this is the real truth about race and policing

 

On any given day, in any police department in the nation, 15 percent of officers will do the right thing no matter what is happening. Fifteen percent of officers will abuse their authority at every opportunity. The remaining 70 percent could go either way depending on whom they are working with.

…

About that 15 percent of officers who regularly abuse their power: a major problem is they exert an outsize influence on department culture and find support for their actions from ranking officers and police unions

 

Possibly related: the bystander effect. Even around strangers, how we act is influenced by how others around us act, or fail to act. (Inverted, i.e. in the context of actions, this is probably the same as mob mentality). I think this gets significantly amplified when people around you aren't strangers, and there would be repercussions if you went against the grain.

[Ten oz]

Unarmed people have been killed. People who were not even charged with a crime have been physically accosted. These are obviously bad things. While the feeling that police have a difficult job may be true it is also clear that justice is not administered equally. The last 3 presidents of the United States and almost everyone current running has admitted to prior drug use yet a million people sit behind bars because of drugs today. Walk on to any college campus and you can smell marijuana burning in the air. No massive police raids of these colleges. It is viewed as normal. A right of passage. We (usa) have a selective enforcement policy. Certian groups are entitled to more leeway. Tamir Rice gets killed playing with a toy gun and people comment that he should have known better. Meanwhile across the country gun advocates are walking into airports and Applebees with real high powered assualt weapons as an expression of freedom. First step towards fixing a problem is acknowledging that there is a problem.

[StringJunky]

....First step towards fixing a problem is acknowledging that there is a problem.

Hi, my name's Melvin and I'm an addict...

[Ten oz]

Hi, my name's Melvin and I'm an addict...

We are happy to have you here Melvin. So tell us, when was the first time you defended the right of a police office to physical assualt or kill an unarmed citzened not convicted of any crime?

[Harold Squared]

I guess I am just depressed as it shouldn't matter whether law enforcement comes out full battle rattle or with nothing more than a uniform and a smile.

It was no policeman who first observed, "You can get more with a gun and a kind word than you can with a kind word alone." I forget the year that the famous British bobbies armed themselves with pistols but I don't expect them to give those up any time soon, despite gun control laws in the UK.

 

Brixton, September 28, 1985.

We are happy to have you here Melvin. So tell us, when was the first time you defended the right of a police office to physical assualt or kill an unarmed citzened not convicted of any crime?

In Ferguson and in most jurisdictions a police officer has the right and the responsibility to retain control of his sidearm. The "unarmed man" in question was determined not to remain so and assaulted the officer in an attempt to acquire the weapon involved.

[StringJunky]

.... I forget the year that the famous British bobbies armed themselves with pistols but I don't expect them to give those up any time soon, despite gun control laws in the UK.

Bobbies are not armed in the UK. It's nice to be able to say "Don't be absurd!"

 

 

A firearms unit is an armed unit within each territorial police force in the United Kingdom.^[1] For the most part, the police forces of the United Kingdom are unarmed; however, all have firearms units to provide the police force with the capability to deal with armed criminals. A police officer cannot apply to join the firearms unit without first finishing their two-year probationary period, with a further two years in a core policing role.^[2] Firearms unit is the most common name outside of the capital, while that of London's Metropolitan Police Service is called the Specialist Firearms Command, or SCO19. Within the media it is sometimes compared to the SWAT units of the United States.

 

Criminals are less likely to carry firearms due to United Kingdom gun laws,^[3] and the presence of an armed officer can often be enough to negotiate their surrender. One particular British police force has only used a firearm against a suspect once in its entire history.^[4]

 

Only three forces in the United Kingdom routinely arm officers due to the nature of their work; the Ministry of Defence Police who are responsible law enforcement on MOD property, the Civil Nuclear Constabulary who guard civil nuclear facilities, and the Police Service of Northern Ireland.^[5][6][7]

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firearms_unit

Edited July 4, 2015 by StringJunky

[Harold Squared]

Unarmed people have been killed. People who were not even charged with a crime have been physically accosted. These are obviously bad things. While the feeling that police have a difficult job may be true it is also clear that justice is not administered equally. The last 3 presidents of the United States and almost everyone current running has admitted to prior drug use yet a million people sit behind bars because of drugs today. Walk on to any college campus and you can smell marijuana burning in the air. No massive police raids of these colleges. It is viewed as normal. A right of passage. We (usa) have a selective enforcement policy. Certian groups are entitled to more leeway. Tamir Rice gets killed playing with a toy gun and people comment that he should have known better. Meanwhile across the country gun advocates are walking into airports and Applebees with real high powered assualt weapons as an expression of freedom. First step towards fixing a problem is acknowledging that there is a problem.

Yah, but we ain't lynching people the way we used to. Where were the media when that was going on? Today it is reversed, if that guy in Ferguson or that petty criminal Trayvon Martin had been white you never would have heard about either of them. Today's media is always ready to play the race card in the name of ratings.

 

What is gratifying about the response to the church shootings has been markedly less violent in the wake of a true injustice.

 

Those college potheads have a rude awakening coming when they get to the job market, I know of no drug testing program that isn't color blind. Same is true if they get into a traffic accident, so they are gambling with higher stakes than they realize.

 

Of course the criminal justice system in this country bites, how can it not when so few people get their day in court thanks to plea bargaining? If you think a white guy in America can't get a raw deal I have news for you, too, buddy.

Bobbies are not armed in the UK. It's nice to be able to say "Don't be absurd!"

 

I never claimed that every British policeman was armed, just that there was a time when fewer were so equipped. I read that article too, before posting. Sorry for not making it more clear.

 

There is evidence that the practice is becoming more widespread in Old Blight to the consternation of the populace.

 

Brixton, September 28, 1985

[MigL]

OK, but is your name really Melvin ?

[Ten oz]

Yah, but we ain't lynching people the way we used to. Where were the media when that was going on? Today it is reversed, if that guy in Ferguson or that petty criminal Trayvon Martin had beoen white you never would have heard about either of them. Today's media is always ready to play the race card in the name of ratings.

"Petty criminal Trayvon" So in your judgement Trayvon's crimes which you openly acknowledge were

"Petty" justifies death? His life was that valueless and his crimes that egregious? Just a teenage punk that got what was coming?

 

What is gratifying about the response to the church shootings has been markedly less violent in the wake of a true injustice.

 

More people died in that church than have in all the various "violent" protests this year. More unarmed people have been shot and killed in the last couple months than have died in every riot collectivily going back decades. It seems like protestors breaking windows at a corner market offends you more than people being killed.

 

Those college potheads have a rude awakening coming en they get to the job market, I know of no drug testing program that isn't color blind. Same is true if they get into a traffic accident, so they are gambling with higher stakes than they realize.

I don't understand what point you are trying to make here? The last 3 presidents of the united states have admitted to drug use. It is not something that is more prevalent amongst one race than another. The enforcement is but the actual use is not.

[imatfaal]

Not Ferguson but a continued part of the story of how a nation deals with the disproportionate number of black men killed by police officers. We hope that Alabama will prepare the case for the Grand Jury with a bit more vigour and rigour than Missouri did

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/03/us/white-officer-in-alabama-is-arrested-in-killing-of-black-man.html?rref=us

[iNow]

Trump'll fix it.

[StringJunky]

Trump'll fix it.

By getting rid of the non-whites.

[CharonY]

But who do you blame if this does not result in a sudden utopia?

[waitforufo]

George Bush

[iNow]

Not Ferguson but a continued part of the story of how a nation deals with the disproportionate number of black men killed by police officers. We hope that Alabama will prepare the case for the Grand Jury with a bit more vigour and rigour than Missouri did

It's going to be mayhem if they don't.