"Militarization" of the police

[aphid 0]

rehmwa

***That "militarization of the police" is even a topic of discussion among sane people is indicative that the US government has completely lost its way.

true - in many other countries the government would just shut that dialogue down completely before the uppity populace gets out of line thinking they can talk about whatever they like instead of topics approved by big brother

Measurement against Third World cesspools or dictatorships is hardly a defense. Many countries do not shut down the uppity populace for dissenting dialogue. Aren't those the types of societies you'd prefer to be measured by?

[wmw999 2,150]

Jon Stewart on the topic
Yeah, he's a comedian, but I'll bet it's true, too

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[rehmwa 2]

aphid

******That "militarization of the police" is even a topic of discussion among sane people is indicative that the US government has completely lost its way.

true - in many other countries the government would just shut that dialogue down completely before the uppity populace gets out of line thinking they can talk about whatever they like instead of topics approved by big brother

Measurement against Third World cesspools or dictatorships is hardly a defense.

yes third world only...of course...none other.

he can continue his stock and boring and typical US bash


you kind of missed my point - He bashes the US because we have the ability and freedom to have any dialogue. I find that idiotic

I guess I'm measuring his comment against those 3rd world countries you talk about.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[champu 1]

masterblaster72

That "militarization of the police" is even a topic of discussion among sane people is indicative that the US government has completely lost its way.

That something is discussed, particularly in the age of the internet, is indicitive of nothing. There was an aritcle on Discovery.com about crickets (yes... the insects) two days ago, and by the third comment the term "Obama Regime" had been invoked.

The "among sane people" qualifier is just a No-True-Scotsman fallacy.

[turtlespeed 212]

wmw999

Jon Stewart on the topic
Yeah, he's a comedian, but I'll bet it's true, too

Wendy P.

Absolutely, the space thing gives mounds of cred.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[aphid 0]

Here are some officers offering up a little push-back.
(source: http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2024465395_lawsuitfundraisingxml.html)

A Seattle police officer suing to block new use-of-force policies has set up an Internet fundraising page to help pay for the legal fight, calling the federally mandated reforms “the greatest threat to the city’s public safety in our time.”

The use-of-force policies, which went into effect Jan. 1, grew out of a U.S. Department of Justice investigation that found Seattle police had routinely used excessive force and displayed disturbing, if inconclusive evidence, of biased policing.

The lead plaintiff seems to have made the news previously.
(source: http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2009161180_spdappeal02m.html)

Mahoney's case also illustrates the difficulty of carrying out tougher police-accountability rules adopted by the city last year, which included a presumption that officers will be fired for dishonesty in their official duties. Dishonesty was defined as intentionally providing false or incomplete information about material facts.

[Boomerdog 0]

Quote

The warrior mentality has a place in modern police work, the only problem is many don't understand it.

Uh no! Of all the places the "warrior mentality DOES NOT belong is in police work. The following are warriors:

Members of:
The Army
The Marines
The Navy
The Air Force ...and lest I forget
The Coast Guard.

Those are the only warriors I know of and should legitimately hold that title and mentality.

[skycop 0]

You are simply wrong, and I'll tell you why.

When I first started in training they called it "Tombstone Courage". Running into a potentially deadly situation (mainly involving firearms), when it could be isolated and contained was frowned upon and discouraged in training. That's what the SWAT team is for was the genre.

In 1999 that training formula was turned on it's head. The responding officers and command staff adhered to the way they were trained and several people lost their lives at Columbine High School because of it. The responding agencies and officers were sued, called cowards, and dragged through the mud by the fledgling 24hour news/internet cycle.
Several officers/teams wanted to make entry at Columbine, but were denied by command staff.

Because of this incident and several other similar incidents, officers now immediately rush to the sound of the gunfire to actively engage the suspect(s) by whatever means necessary. That is a military tactic requiring a warrior mindset. I never, ever thought I'd see suppressive fire as an acceptable police tactic. During an active shooter scenario everything is on the table, much like it wasn't at Columbine. The same goes for acceptable casualties, we were trained there were never acceptable casualties because a situation can be contained and isolated. I don't know one cop who would not take a bullet for your kid.

We now train very hard for an active shooter scenario, whether it's a school or a work place. We had one recently and it ended quick when the bad guy realized the cops were coming immediately, he killed himself.

I wore one of those uniforms you mentioned for many, many years.
There is a vast different difference in military vs. police tactics, as there should be. But there are (unfortunately) a limited amount of circumstances where the two may meet.

"Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!"

[Boomerdog 0]

Quote

I wore one of those uniforms you mentioned for many, many years.

So did I! Twenty-two years to be exact.

I'm not going to write a long dissertation. I'll only state this, your perspective is a problem, a very serious problem! You can discount Radley Balko and You Tube Videos all you like on this matter, but the fact is this, you are losing support out there, you are losing hearts and minds. I tend to take a Conservative view of things that does not endear me to many here but that's OK, I've got big broad shoulders. And if you and your badged brethren are losing my heart and mind, you've got a problem.

[Amazon 7]

Boomerdog

Quote

I wore one of those uniforms you mentioned for many, many years.

So did I! Twenty-two years to be exact.

I'm not going to write a long dissertation. I'll only state this, your perspective is a problem, a very serious problem! You can discount Radley Balko and You Tube Videos all you like on this matter, but the fact is this, you are losing support out there, you are losing hearts and minds. I tend to take a Conservative view of things that does not endear me to many here but that's OK, I've got big broad shoulders. And if you and your badged brethren are losing my heart and mind, you've got a problem.

+1
And they are doing everything they can to lose the moderates as well.... "acceptable casualties"... he has gotta be fucking joking.

[wolfriverjoe 1,353]

skycop

...Because of this incident and several other similar incidents, officers now immediately rush to the sound of the gunfire to actively engage the suspect(s) by whatever means necessary. That is a military tactic requiring a warrior mindset. I never, ever thought I'd see suppressive fire as an acceptable police tactic. During an active shooter scenario everything is on the table, much like it wasn't at Columbine. The same goes for acceptable casualties, we were trained there were never acceptable casualties because a situation can be contained and isolated. I don't know one cop who would not take a bullet for your kid.

We now train very hard for an active shooter scenario, whether it's a school or a work place. We had one recently and it ended quick when the bad guy realized the cops were coming immediately, he killed himself.

I wore one of those uniforms you mentioned for many, many years.
There is a vast different difference in military vs. police tactics, as there should be. But there are (unfortunately) a limited amount of circumstances where the two may meet.

I agree that there are times (as you said, limited amount of circumstances) where military tactics and the "Warrior Mentality" are appropriate for civilian cops.

An active shooter situation is certainly one. It's a situation where neutralization of the bad guy takes priority over just about everything else, including "collateral damage," because of the amount of damage the shooter is capable of doing.

BUT (and it's a HUGE "But") outside of those very rare and limited circumstances, the "Warrior Mentality" is totally wrong. Unacceptable. Unprofessional.

The recent case in Florida, where a "Man with a Gun" call ended up with a lot of shots fired and a dead bystander (from police bullets) is a good example.
The one in New York City, where there were something like 9 people shot (including ricochets and fragments), all of them from the cops is also a good one.

The "Warrior Mentality" needs to be left behind almost all of the time. And it's not happening.

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[skycop 0]

Quote

And they are doing everything they can to lose the moderates as well.... "acceptable casualties"... he has gotta be fucking joking.Mad

Acceptable causalities among LEO's, genius...........
A perfect example of people only seeing what they want to see.

"Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!"

[skycop 0]

Quote

BUT (and it's a HUGE "But") outside of those very rare and limited circumstances, the "Warrior Mentality" is totally wrong. Unacceptable. Unprofessional.

The recent case in Florida, where a "Man with a Gun" call ended up with a lot of shots fired and a dead bystander (from police bullets) is a good example.
The one in New York City, where there were something like 9 people shot (including ricochets and fragments), all of them from the cops is also a good one.

The "Warrior Mentality" needs to be left behind almost all of the time. And it's not happening.

I couldn't agree more,
If you look at the big picture over the last few years, crime is nearing all time lows, as a whole officers are better trained and educated than ever before BUT;
If you talk to police trainers many will tell you young people coming into the job are ill prepared in one area.
The use of force, and it comes from before they were officers.

Many young people today are far removed from physical confrontations, it's starts early and is reinforced over and over, especially in school.
Some, and I say some, younger officers will go from zero to one hundred too fast when faced with a physical confrontation.

Old crusty guys like me would fight at the drop of a hat growing up, at times it would be encouraged to solve problems after school. I won some and I lost some, but I learned some valuable lessons. Now it's completely different.

If you ask many young people if they have ever been in a fight, you'd be surprised how many say no. It sounds like a small thing, but it's been identified as a potential trend in training. Replicating it in training is difficult, even the military has become somewhat risk averse when it comes to training. So has law enforcement, and that is a shame. One of the only ways to overcome this situation is to train very hard and realistically and that causes injuries.

In the real world training injuries should not be a major factor, but in the new PC world they are, take my word for it.

I never claim the police are always right, but there is ALOT of misinformation, especially on the internet. It has made everyone an armchair expert.

When it comes to Ferguson, no one really knows the facts, and it's my hunch they will surprise people. But it's too late, most various forms of media have made up their minds.

"Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!"

[skycop 0]

Quote

You can discount Radley Balko and You Tube Videos all you like on this matter, but the fact is this, you are losing support out there, you are losing hearts and minds

If you have time to watch youtube and read Radley Balko, I suggest you take the time to contact your local PD. If they offer a citizens police academy, attend it. Some departments also offer ride-alongs.
After doing these things make an informed decision, if you still feel the local PD is "losing you", engage the leadership, let them know how you feel.
We are all in this together, as corny as that sounds.
The media and internet just hype incidents for any number of reasons, the main one being selling ad space.

"Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!"

[Amazon 7]

skycop

Quote

And they are doing everything they can to lose the moderates as well.... "acceptable casualties"... he has gotta be fucking joking.Mad

Acceptable causalities among LEO's, genius...........
A perfect example of people only seeing what they want to see.

We have seen how many innocent bystanders hit by the excellent marksmen of the men in blue over the last few years????

Look you guys have a difficult job... I for the life of me, can't figure out why you and your fellow officers wish to make it so much harder by stupidity. You have forgotten.. "We the People", you no longer are there to protect and serve us.

[Boomerdog 0]

I'll be the first to tell you in all sincerity that you deserve props and compliments for being a cop and raising the issue and taking the incoming for it.

Even without Balko or You Tube, I can present to you too many cases of stupidity, violation of Constitutional rights, situational escalation when deescalation would have resolved the issue just as easily. The result, some dead cops and too many dead civilians and let's not forget the dogs....dogs shot in an innocent property owner's yard while the cops were chasing a perp, went into a backyard and the dog went protective aggressive (it's what dogs do) and paid the price. Botched raids, poor judgement and dead innocents are resulting in lawsuits settled out of court and the taxpayers...saps like me end up paying the bill.

In the last 12 months there have been a few noticeable articles in National Review Online (NRO), a Conservative web page very critical of cop behavior. Now a lot of people here abhor NRO due to its Conservative viewpoints. But Conservatives tend to be the "law and order types" who are staunch supporters of you LEO's. The articles are very critical and that IS a canary in the coal mine.

[skycop 0]

It's all good, I've been feeling saucey...............

I'm glad you brought up the National Review and the like.
I'm a very conservative guy, but somehow the National Review and Heritage Foundation types think the cops are very different than they actually are.

I called the Heritage Foundation about what they were reporting on the internet in reference to Ferguson. Most of what they were reporting simply wasn't true, it was sensationalized non-factual bullshit, much like the hard left puts out. I had thought about joining the organization numerous times, no way now.

I talked to a guy in the "political action" section or something like that. When I actually confronted him on the phone with factual information, he back pedaled like Obama's Press Secretary.
It's just like when I take our Humvee out to public events, I can see the snipes in the crowd, who will say stuff with a hand over their mouths, but never come over and talk or have the fortitude to ask questions.
There are many people who aren't sure why we would need it, they come over and ask. Once I explain what we use it for, the cost vs. capability, it's actual uses and how we've equipped it, they are nodding their heads in agreement.

As far as dogs, I really hate to say this, but it is nothing new. It's been hyped beyond belief, the dog in Utah was tragic, but they were looking for a lost child with special needs. That is just one example.
I'm a dog/animal lover, I've adopted two greyhounds, also have a golden, and two rescued cats. But I've had to shoot several dogs for a variety of reasons, and I'd do the same again given the situation. When I was supervising, my people had to shoot a couple as well, they were tragic but necessary.
As far as lawsuits go, you do this job, you are going to get sued.
Just remember, for everything you just quoted, there are THOUSANDS, of police contacts that never make the news or the internet. Many of these are under very difficult circumstances, the number that end up in controversy is less than .01%. The sad thing is those are the incidents that sell newspapers and ad space.

"Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!"

[wmw999 2,150]

Just as every job is harder and more complex than it looks from the outside (and thanks for community contact as well as "pure" cop work), so are the situations that many civilians find themselves in when confronted by the police.

Police have to make decisions quickly; it's an essential part of the job. But sometimes, just as non-police need to understand that it's really not simple being a police office, so should police officers understand that they thought had to ignore something to deal with an urgent situation, and maybe they need to follow up or respect it.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[Boomerdog 0]

Careful with the numbers. First, where is that .01% sourced from? Second, assumng that number is credible, it translates to one incdient in 10,000 that ends up in controversy requring post incident investigation. Given the size of this country and the the number of PD's, that's NOT a trivial number.

As for lawsuits, as far as I know, it's the city funds and not the cop that has to pay when the judegment goes against the police. Resigning yourself to that inevitability strongly suggests a desire not to improve your public realtions skill to the populace you serve.

I'm not talking about Ferguson. First off, there's a hell of lot more going on in Ferguson that has yet to come forth. The incidents I am referring, but would take too much space to list and describe are out there on the Internet.

Much of the frustration and resultant anger is the police chief reports that after a thorough police department investigation to which the mechanics and procedures are rarely revealed, the officer(s) involved acted well within the norms of department police and if the DA gets involved, the statement is usually the same and as such reinforced. Simply put, the foxes at the top are telling us that the foxes in their charge used correct procedures in knocking over the hen house and that the rest of the hens in the other hen houses have no need to worry. everything was done according to proper fox procedure. The surviving hens can protest but, investigation over, time to move on. Thus, no transparency and no independent investigation resulting in no independent conclusions. So what we get down to is this, "Who watches the watchers?" Certainly not the FOP and the Police Union. The citizens, supposedly the ones who are supposed to be in charge as the Founding Fathers set it up are politely told to GF themselves. What's wrong with this picture?

Back in the late 90's a couple of F-15's flying over the Balkans mis-identified a helicoplter that was actually a friendly and shot it down killing everyone on board. One of the KIA's was no more than a couple years out of the Air Force Academy and her parents were upset. The Chief of Staff of the Air Force, an idiot four star named Merrill McPeak, authorized an investigation and being a fighter pilot himself, used the "facts" revealed in the investigation to exonerate the pilots with the utmost regret that "these things" sometimes happen. The parents went livid and demanded more and they got more and this spilled over into the lap of the next Chief of Staff, General Ron Fogleman who was also a fighter pilot. Well, more facts came out and not only did it reveal a disregard to rules of engagement, some other procedures were ignored and not forthcoming during the investigation. The pilots involved were grounded, disciplined and dropped from promotion lists...CAREER OVER! Then Fogleman produces a video and ORDERS EVERY MEMBER of the Active Duty, Reserve, and Air Guard Components to view the tape under penalty of courts-martial. Attendance lists WERE taken and FORWARDED uo the Chain of Command. The theme of the video was accountability and integrity and the following phrase has stuck to me to this day. "We must and shall be absolutely accountable and held to the highest standards for the currency of our profession is lethal!"

So if you think I'm dumping all over you, you're right. Things are just not addin' up out there. Something's going on and I file that one in the "JDLR" bin or "Just Doesn't Look Right." We can throw facts at each other back and forth but YOU know and I know something JDLR. And since you guys have the guns and the charter, the burden is on you and you run the risk of a citizen backlash of such proportion, you wish you had never ignored the warnings in the first place.

[normiss 622]

more local wasteful spending
For what?

[cvfd1399 0]

Yea someone should tell them they could just get an mrap from the 1033 program for the cost of shipping and a few dollars!

[normiss 622]

It's just stoopid. The existing TWO they have rarely get used.
Fucking politicians no longer represent anything other than protecting the money machine.

[Amazon 7]

normiss

It's just stoopid. The existing TWO they have rarely get used.
Fucking politicians no longer represent anything other than protecting the money machine.

And the Cops are only there to PROTECT AND SERVE their jobs and themselves and suck money from every "contact" with citizens to make sure their gang is paid and they get more toys.

[skycop 0]

Thanks for the Merrill McPeak lecture, next time save it for someone who didn't live through the TQM era..........

Quote

Careful with the numbers. First, where is that .01% sourced from? Second, assumng that number is credible, it translates to one incdient in 10,000 that ends up in controversy requring post incident investigation. Given the size of this country and the the number of PD's, that's NOT a trivial number.

It's never a trivial number if it invovles you HOWEVER,
There are hundreds of thousands, if not millions of police contacts contacts yearly. Most routine, some not, less than 1% end in controversy. Try telling people what they have to do, when they don't want to do it, over and over and have it work eveytime without problems.
Could improvements be made, hell yes they can, and are ongoing on a daily basis. Again, quit making assumptions based on forms of media and find out for yourself.

Quote

Much of the frustration and resultant anger is the police chief reports that after a thorough police department investigation to which the mechanics and procedures are rarely revealed, the officer(s) involved acted well within the norms of department police and if the DA gets involved, the statement is usually the same and as such reinforced.

You realize if a cop uses deadly force, there is a very high likelyhood he will go infront of a Grand Jury (and rightfully so), even if he/she is justified.

Quote

As for lawsuits, as far as I know, it's the city funds and not the cop that has to pay when the judegment goes against the police. Resigning yourself to that inevitability strongly suggests a desire not to improve your public realtions skill to the populace you serve.

Again, please save the lecture, I've been invloved in Community Policing since the 80's. Talk to any professional who deals with people in crisis, the vast majority get sued, some multiple times, during their professinoal careers. Some are justified, some not, good people make mistakes. In some jobs mistakes can cost lives.

Quote

it's the city funds and not the cop that has to pay when the judegment goes against the police.

If an officer acts outside of established policy or with malice, he/she can be held personally and financially responsible.
There is no nice way to use force, just because it looks bad on the internet, dosn't mean it isn't within proper guidelines.

The one place we find some common ground in retention of officers who may not need to be retained. In large cities, arbitration has kept questionable cops on the street.

Cops make mistakes but there are certain mistakes, which may question the officers ability to do the job. Sort of like telling some students/jumpers politely or not so poliltely, that they should take up bowling as a hobby.

As far as "dumping on me" goes, no biggie, all I'm trying to do is counter the misinformatino and hype currently being put out.

"Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!"

[chutem 0]

skycop

Thanks for the Merrill McPeak lecture, next time save it for someone who didn't live through the TQM era..........

Quote

Careful with the numbers. First, where is that .01% sourced from? Second, assumng that number is credible, it translates to one incdient in 10,000 that ends up in controversy requring post incident investigation. Given the size of this country and the the number of PD's, that's NOT a trivial number.

It's never a trivial number if it invovles you HOWEVER,
There are hundreds of thousands, if not millions of police contacts contacts yearly. Most routine, some not, less than 1% end in controversy. Try telling people what they have to do, when they don't want to do it, over and over and have it work eveytime without problems.
Could improvements be made, hell yes they can, and are ongoing on a daily basis. Again, quit making assumptions based on forms of media and find out for yourself.

***Much of the frustration and resultant anger is the police chief reports that after a thorough police department investigation to which the mechanics and procedures are rarely revealed, the officer(s) involved acted well within the norms of department police and if the DA gets involved, the statement is usually the same and as such reinforced.

You realize if a cop uses deadly force, there is a very high likelyhood he will go infront of a Grand Jury (and rightfully so), even if he/she is justified.

Quote

As for lawsuits, as far as I know, it's the city funds and not the cop that has to pay when the judegment goes against the police. Resigning yourself to that inevitability strongly suggests a desire not to improve your public realtions skill to the populace you serve.

Again, please save the lecture, I've been invloved in Community Policing since the 80's. Talk to any professional who deals with people in crisis, the vast majority get sued, some multiple times, during their professinoal careers. Some are justified, some not, good people make mistakes. In some jobs mistakes can cost lives.

Quote

it's the city funds and not the cop that has to pay when the judegment goes against the police.

If an officer acts outside of established policy or with malice, he/she can be held personally and financially responsible.
There is no nice way to use force, just because it looks bad on the internet, dosn't mean it isn't within proper guidelines.

The one place we find some common ground in retention of officers who may not need to be retained. In large cities, arbitration has kept questionable cops on the street.

Cops make mistakes but there are certain mistakes, which may question the officers ability to do the job. Sort of like telling some students/jumpers politely or not so poliltely, that they should take up bowling as a hobby.

As far as "dumping on me" goes, no biggie, all I'm trying to do is counter the misinformatino and hype currently being put out.



Google "police culture us vs them attitude" for some interesting reading that may explain the mindset many of us in the "them" category are developing. Feel free to tell us it's just a bunch of made up unjustified BS.

If the Police refuse to police the Police we'll need Police Police to police the Police. Until the Police are adequately policed they're "militarization" is not a good idea in my opinion.