We’re Asking the Wrong Ques About Police Shootings

Reply
Highlighted
Valued Social Butterfly
3
Kudos
697
Views

Re: We’re Asking the Wrong Ques About Police Shootings

697 Views
Message 31 of 39

Before assessing the MORALITY of shootings by police, let's take a deep breath and consider what WE have done to the daily job of a police officer in America.

 

1. We armed the bad guys with MUCH more firepower and body armor than the cop on the beat is likely to have in a confrontation with said bad guy. We allow bad guys to own fully automatic weapons, up to and including miniguns - all they have to do is pay a $200 registration fee. For military grade long guns that can fire accuratily 40-50 times a minute for extended periods or in burst of 20 rounds (std clip) in 3 seconds, no registration fee is required. Nor is there a problem buying cop-killer bullets (std military rounds aka "full metal jacket") that can penetrate virtually all body armor. Then we expect the police to deal with these folks with reason and courtesy UNTIL they begin actually shooting people.

 

2. To help pay for Reagan's taxscam, we closed virtually all the Government supported mental health custodial facilities and turned all those who prior to Reagan would've been confined because of severe mental problems out on the street FOR THE POLICE TO DEAL WITH.

 

3. We killed revenue sharing that provided a huge amount of support for State and local law enforcement, and jrbush killed Clinton's modest plan that put an additional 100,000 cops on the beat so the Uberrich could get another tax cut.

 

4. We allowed MILLIONS of good paying jobs to be taken from Americans and given to commie slaves in the name of greater compensation for the senior management, and then wonder why the people who cannot find good jobs wind up doing criminal things to survive, but expect the police to deal with them too.

 

5. We have the most absurd drug laws on the planet, creating a huge criminal class involved in the distribution, sale and use of those drugs, and again expect the police to deal with it. In Afghanistan, we give support to farmers who grow POPPIES, which account for most of the hereon on our streets (because the alternative crop, cotton, would compete with american farmers) and expect the police to deal with that as well.

 

None of those things - 1-5 - and a lot more was NOT part of a cop's job in 1970. Before we get all medieval on the police, let's take a sec and see if there's some things we can do so they DO NOT feel in mortal danger quite so often while protecting and defending US.

Report Inappropriate Content
3
Kudos
697
Views
Highlighted
Treasured Social Butterfly
2
Kudos
696
Views

Re: We’re Asking the Wrong Ques About Police Shootings

696 Views
Message 32 of 39

@rk9152 wrote:

@Centristsin2010 wrote:

@afisher wrote:

  I am currently working on a Free Speech project.   One of my assignments was to review the local  Police Union Contract.    That then expanded to reading Police Union contracts from around the nation.     Few mention Crisis Intervention Training or re-training.

 

   That should be added to all Police Department training and yes citizens should / could be involved by both attending and speaking to this issue so that local and State legislators start hearing that citizens are demanding CIT training and working with National Alliance on Mental Health.  


Thank you for your efforts in this area, afisher.

 

It appears that some believe if someone is in crises, it's best just to shoot them.  And many of these pathetic folks call themselves "Christians"....quite the oxy***ron.

 

We CAN do better....


How do you associate the need for CIT training with an attack on Christians??? It's not an attack on Christians, "rk", it's an attack on CINO's (Christians in name only).  Certainly you understand the difference....don't you?  I agree that it is a valuable tool for police departments but for civil reasons, not Christianity. Really?  First, I agree it's a valuable tool and it's nice to see you believe that as well.  But, aren't Christians supposed to be "civil"?  Can't the reasons be "both"? Remember, we are supposed to separate Church and State. So, you can't expect a City to install CIT training for the police officers for "Christian reasons". No one suggested such, so why create ANOTHER straw argument?


"FAKE 45 #illegitimate" read a sign at the Woman's March in DC, 1/27/2017
Report Inappropriate Content
2
Kudos
696
Views
Highlighted
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
717
Views

Re: We’re Asking the Wrong Ques About Police Shootings

717 Views
Message 33 of 39

@Centristsin2010 wrote:

@afisher wrote:

  I am currently working on a Free Speech project.   One of my assignments was to review the local  Police Union Contract.    That then expanded to reading Police Union contracts from around the nation.     Few mention Crisis Intervention Training or re-training.

 

   That should be added to all Police Department training and yes citizens should / could be involved by both attending and speaking to this issue so that local and State legislators start hearing that citizens are demanding CIT training and working with National Alliance on Mental Health.  


Thank you for your efforts in this area, afisher.

 

It appears that some believe if someone is in crises, it's best just to shoot them.  And many of these pathetic folks call themselves "Christians"....quite the oxy***ron.

 

We CAN do better....


How do you associate the need for CIT training with an attack on Christians??? I agree that it is a valuable tool for police departments but for civil reasons, not Christianity. Remember, we are supposed to separate Church and State. So, you can't expect a City to install CIT training for the police officers for "Christian reasons".

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
717
Views
Highlighted
Treasured Social Butterfly
2
Kudos
729
Views

Re: We’re Asking the Wrong Ques About Police Shootings

729 Views
Message 34 of 39

@afisher wrote:

  I am currently working on a Free Speech project.   One of my assignments was to review the local  Police Union Contract.    That then expanded to reading Police Union contracts from around the nation.     Few mention Crisis Intervention Training or re-training.

 

   That should be added to all Police Department training and yes citizens should / could be involved by both attending and speaking to this issue so that local and State legislators start hearing that citizens are demanding CIT training and working with National Alliance on Mental Health.  


Thank you for your efforts in this area, afisher.

 

It appears that some believe if someone is in crises, it's best just to shoot them.  And many of these pathetic folks call themselves "Christians"....quite the oxy***ron.

 

We CAN do better....


"FAKE 45 #illegitimate" read a sign at the Woman's March in DC, 1/27/2017
Report Inappropriate Content
2
Kudos
729
Views
Highlighted
Valued Social Butterfly
3
Kudos
387
Views

Re: We’re Asking the Wrong Ques About Police Shootings

387 Views
Message 35 of 39

  I am currently working on a Free Speech project.   One of my assignments was to review the local  Police Union Contract.    That then expanded to reading Police Union contracts from around the nation.     Few mention Crisis Intervention Training or re-training.

 

   That should be added to all Police Department training and yes citizens should / could be involved by both attending and speaking to this issue so that local and State legislators start hearing that citizens are demanding CIT training and working with National Alliance on Mental Health.  

PRO-LIFE is Affordable Healthcare for ALL .
Report Inappropriate Content
3
Kudos
387
Views
Highlighted
Treasured Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
385
Views

Re: We’re Asking the Wrong Ques About Police Shootings

385 Views
Message 36 of 39

@NerdyMom wrote:

Yes yes yes!  Our local police department is doing this.   The Chief has said numerous times that just because a killing is lawful doesn't mean there isn't a better way to de-escalate the situation.   

 

It requires so much training, though.  Training to deal with those with autism, developmental disabilities, mental illness, hearing or sight impairment, and other issues that may not be immediately observable to the police officer, who might be expecting a more neurotypical response from a suspect.  

 

That plus the use of less deadly force, like Tasers.  

 

And training not just once, but on a regular basis.  

 

And I'll add this as another way to help reduce risk of death:  several jurisidictions that I know of also co-dispatch both a paramedic unit and police in the event 911 gets a call about someone who may be on drugs or suffering some sort of mental breakdown.   People like this are at heightened risk of dying from Taser use and other uses of force, not just guns.  Having emergency medical care there helps tremendously.  


This is a very doable culture change within police departments, and citizens can demand that police departments look at this, as well as local mayors, city and county councils, and state legislatures.    We need to demand this culture change in places it's not already happening.   

 


Thank you for your excellent post, NerdyMom (though, I bet you're not as Nerdy as you think).  It speaks volumes about your local police chief, police department and City.  More city's are moving in this direction as well....sure makes for a more civil society.

 

Hey, "rk" any thoughts on the topic?

 

@rk9152

 


"FAKE 45 #illegitimate" read a sign at the Woman's March in DC, 1/27/2017
Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
385
Views
Highlighted
Treasured Social Butterfly
3
Kudos
404
Views

Re: We’re Asking the Wrong Ques About Police Shootings

404 Views
Message 37 of 39

Yes yes yes!  Our local police department is doing this.   The Chief has said numerous times that just because a killing is lawful doesn't mean there isn't a better way to de-escalate the situation.   

 

It requires so much training, though.  Training to deal with those with autism, developmental disabilities, mental illness, hearing or sight impairment, and other issues that may not be immediately observable to the police officer, who might be expecting a more neurotypical response from a suspect.  

 

That plus the use of less deadly force, like Tasers.  

 

And training not just once, but on a regular basis.  

 

And I'll add this as another way to help reduce risk of death:  several jurisidictions that I know of also co-dispatch both a paramedic unit and police in the event 911 gets a call about someone who may be on drugs or suffering some sort of mental breakdown.   People like this are at heightened risk of dying from Taser use and other uses of force, not just guns.  Having emergency medical care there helps tremendously.  


This is a very doable culture change within police departments, and citizens can demand that police departments look at this, as well as local mayors, city and county councils, and state legislatures.    We need to demand this culture change in places it's not already happening.   

 

Report Inappropriate Content
3
Kudos
404
Views
Highlighted
Treasured Social Butterfly
3
Kudos
413
Views

Re: We’re Asking the Wrong Ques About Police Shootings

413 Views
Message 38 of 39
I cant find fault with any of this. I do agree its a systemic problem, and approaching the problem by asking different questions ( I like questioning the outcome) is great.

So it begins.
Report Inappropriate Content
3
Kudos
413
Views
Highlighted
Treasured Social Butterfly
2
Kudos
426
Views
38
Replies

We’re Asking the Wrong Ques About Police Shootings

426 Views
Message 39 of 39

We’re asking the wrong question about police shootings

 

The video below depicts the fatal police shooting of 38-year-old Jason Harrison in Dallas last year. Harrison’s mother had told the police that her son had been making threats, and that he was “bipolar schizo.”

 
 

More from the Dallas Morning News:

 

Police officials have previously said the body camera video backs up the officers’ accounts of self-defense, showing a fast-unfolding event in a tightly confined space. They were protecting themselves, police said.

 

Dallas police said Monday the department has completed its internal investigation into whether the officers broke any laws. The department did not make a ruling on that issue and instead forwarded the file to the Dallas County district attorney’s office, said police spokesman Lt. Jose Garcia.
Internal investigators are still reviewing the case to see if the officers violated any policies, Garcia said.

 

The two officers, John Rogers and Andrew Hutchins, are back on full duty and the case is awaiting review by a grand jury. Both officers had been on the force for more than five years at the time of the shooting.

I’d be very surprised if the grand jury indicts these officers. And I’m not sure it should. But the video is a great argument for changing the way we think about killing by police officers. From Eric Garner to Tamir Rice to the countless other shootings and initiations of force to make headlines in recent months, we’ve waited for grand jury investigations to pronounce a shooting legal or illegal, or a DA to pronounce it justified of unjustified, or for an internal investigation to deem it within or outside of a police agency’s policies and procedures.

 

But I recently spoke on a panel at the University of South Carolina with the former police officer and now law professor Seth Stoughton. He made a point that I think is critical in how we think about these incidents: We shouldn’t be asking if the police actions were legal or within department policy; we should be asking if they were necessary. Or if you’d like to use a word with a bit more urgency behind it, we should ask if they’re acceptable.

 

Asking if a police shooting was legal tells us nothing about whether or not we should change the law. Asking whether or not it was within a police agency’s policies and procedures tells us nothing about the wisdom of those policies and procedures. Of course, both of those questions are important if your primary interest is in punishing police officers for these incidents. But while it can certainly be frustrating to see cops get a pass over and over again, even in incidents that seem particularly egregious, focusing on the individual officers involved hasn’t (and won’t) stopped people from getting killed.

 

Let’s go back to that Dallas shooting. Unfortunately, the video camera doesn’t capture the critical moments immediately prior to the shooting. But it does capture the initial police contact with Harrison. Let’s assume for a moment that the police account of the incident is 100 percent true — that Harrison did come at them with the screwdriver. The question we should be asking isn’t whether or not the police decision to shoot Harrison at that moment was justified. The question we should be asking is whether the interaction ever should have reached that moment. Or, to go back to our more basic question: Was this shooting necessary?

 

The video strongly suggests that it wasn’t. Why were two patrol officers responding to a call about a possibly schizophrenic man? Would it be better for a mental health professional to have accompanied them? If Dallas police officers are going to be the first responders to calls about mentally ill people who have possibly become dangerous, are they at least given training on how to interact with those people? Are they taught how to deescalate these situations?

 

From the video, it seems clear that these particular police officers did the escalating, not Harrison. It’s the cops who begin yelling and who take a confrontational stance. Yes, Harrison was holding a small screwdriver. And yes, in the right circumstances, even a small screwdriver can do a lot of damage. That doesn’t mean you pull your gun on everyone who is holding a small screwdriver. Now, there’s probably nothing illegal about a police officer unnecessarily escalating a situation with his words or his body. There’s certainly nothing illegal about his failure to deescalate.

 

But that’s precisely why Was this illegal? is the wrong question. The better question is, Was this an acceptable outcome? And if the answer is no, then the follow-up question is, What needs to change to stop this from happening again?

 

Former Madison, Wis., police chief David Couper recently addressed this topicon his blog.

 

Fixing this system will not be accomplished by investigating and charging bad cops or criminals after the fact. It can only be fixed by looking at how police are trained and led. My analysis is that it is the system that needs fixing and we are fooling ourselves if we look at these incidents singularly and not as a collective example of things gone terribly wrong and in need of immediate repair.

 

I have to add here that the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision, Grahm v. Connor has a lot to do with this problem. Their decision effectively permitted a police officer to legally use deadly force based on whether the officer reasonably believed his or her life was in danger; called “reasonable  objectiveness.” Before this decision, officers were expected to use only the minimum amount of force necessary to overcome resistance. Add to this decision the fear every police officer has that he or she could be disarmed and shot you have a “perfect storm” of police using deadly force in almost any situation involving resistance.

 

Historically, this is not new ground for police leaders. Just because an act is legal, it may not  necessarily be moral. And that’s where leadership comes in. Leaders set the moral standard for police conduct in these situations.

I think the Supreme Court has generally done a pretty lousy job of balancing police powers with constitutional rights, in part because the court has historically been populated by justices who have little to zero experience in criminal law. But Supreme Court rulings only provide a ceiling for police conduct. That is, the court determines only the limits to what the police can do. As a society, as a state, or as a city, we can collectively determine that those legal limits are producing too many outcomes we find morally unacceptable, such as a man getting killed for selling untaxed cigarettes, a boy getting killed for waving a toy gun, or a mentally ill man gunned down for holding a screwdriver.

 

So how do we get there? The most obvious way is to change the laws. That can be difficult, although the political landscape is changing on these issues. But Couper hints at a more accessible route to reform. We need good local leadership. (I should add here that this particular incident notwithstanding, Dallas Police Chief David Brown seems to be one of the better police leaders in the country.) The officials who oversee police policies are far more accountable — and accountable on these particular issues — than your typical state representative or member of Congress. Sheriffs are elected. There’s no reason use of force policy and deescalation training shouldn’t be among the issues discussed in a sheriff’s election. District attorneys can also wield influence over the use of force policies at the police agencies in their districts. Mayors usually pick police chiefs, and city or county councils often have to approve them. The people who run for these offices could certainly be asked to articulate how they would govern on police matters.

 

Over the past year or so, the police reform movement has achieved some enormous success in raising awareness about police brutality, police use of force and police shootings. But if the goal is to prevent unnecessary deaths, the focus needs to shift from demanding indictments of individual cops, filing civil lawsuits and looking for validation from national leaders to electing policymakers who share the reform movement’s goals. Yes, we have some bad cops. And there’s also a problem with the good cops covering for the bad ones. But if the laws and policies that cops are expected to follow — and by which they are evaluated — are flawed, directing reform efforts at punishing bad cops isn’t going to help.

 

We can’t stop after asking, “Was this shooting legal?” and “Was this shooting within department procedures?” The more important question is, “Do we find this shooting morally unacceptable?” If the answer all of these questions is yes, then the problem is much bigger than the cop, the police union or the police department.

 

We’re asking the wrong question about police shootings

 

Sure sounds reasonable to me...  What are your thoughts?


"FAKE 45 #illegitimate" read a sign at the Woman's March in DC, 1/27/2017
Report Inappropriate Content
2
Kudos
426
Views
38
Replies
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Users
Top Authors