Baltimore: The Next Ferguson? (2 Viewers)

[TobiasFunke]

Line of duty officers killed is up 89% in 2014, but 2013 was the lowest in 35 years

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/fbi-report-51-law-enforcement-officers-killed-2014-n357206

The link embedded in the section of the editorial I cited (from the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund) had slightly higher numbers and only a 10% increase from 2013 to 2014, but most importantly shows the same slow and steady decline since the 70s.

Over the same time frame... Haven't incarceration rates also gone up over the same time period? And haven't crime rates gone down? Would it be so surprising if police deaths would also be down?

I'm reading Tso's comments to mean the events since the Ferguson and Garnier controversies, the change in media tone and street protests and the corresponding rise in cop deaths in that time frame.

It just seems like two different issues.

Except that he provided zero evidence to back up a claim like this one and the one statistic he did cite was misleading for the reason that many people have already pointed out. Also the Ferguson and Garner decisions and subsequent outrage didn't occur until very late in that year so even if 2014 did represent a particularly dangerous year for police- which, again, it probably didn't- there's no reason to believe there's a causal link unless all those extra killings happened in December.

 

[jonessed]

Line of duty officers killed is up 89% in 2014, but 2013 was the lowest in 35 years

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/fbi-report-51-law-enforcement-officers-killed-2014-n357206

The link embedded in the section of the editorial I cited (from the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund) had slightly higher numbers and only a 10% increase from 2013 to 2014, but most importantly shows the same slow and steady decline since the 70s.

Over the same time frame... Haven't incarceration rates also gone up over the same time period? And haven't crime rates gone down? Would it be so surprising if police deaths would also be down?

I'm reading Tso's comments to mean the events since the Ferguson and Garnier controversies, the change in media tone and street protests and the corresponding rise in cop deaths in that time frame.

It just seems like two different issues.

Except that he provided zero evidence to back up a claim like this one and the one statistic he did cite was misleading for the reason that many people have already pointed out. Also the Ferguson and Garner decisions and subsequent outrage didn't occur until very late in that year so even if 2014 did represent a particularly dangerous year for police- which, again, it probably didn't- there's no reason to believe there's a causal link unless all those extra killings happened in December.

He provided zero evidence except for the one piece of evidence he provided?There was extensive media coverage and anger over the Garner and Ferguson situations long before the decisions came out. The media was all over it during the summer.

If his point is that the anger over these situations put police officers more at risk then the 2013-2014 year-over-year change would obviously be relevant. The few years leading up to 2013 might also be relevant, but data from anytime before that would be increasingly less relevant. The most relevant data might actually be the first half of 2014 compared to the latter half, but I doubt anyone has that.

There is no way to prove one way or another, but I don't see the problem with his citation as evidence.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

So either we let the police have a free rein, or they become so demoralized that they won't be able to keep the streets safe? Are those really our only two choices?

This seems like an appropriate place to link this article. Very timely, and very correct, IMO.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-watch/wp/2015/05/11/the-increasing-isolation-of-americas-police/?hpid=z3

From the article:

The most recent example comes just today from Baltimore, under the headline, “Violence surges, as Baltimore police officers feel hesitant.”

“In 29 years, I’ve gone through some bad times, but I’ve never seen it this bad,” said Lt. Kenneth Butler, president of the Vanguard Justice Society, a group for black Baltimore police officers. Officers “feel as though the state’s attorney will hang them out to dry.”

Several officers said in interviews they are concerned crime could spike as officers are hesitant to do their jobs, and criminals sense opportunity. Butler, a shift commander in the Southern District, said his officers are expressing reluctance to go after crime.

“I’m hearing it from guys who were go-getters, who would go out here and get the guns and the bad guys and drugs. They’re hands-off now,” Butler said. “I’ve never seen so many dejected faces.

“Policing, as we once knew it, has changed.”

 

[TobiasFunke]

So either we let the police have a free rein, or they become so demoralized that they won't be able to keep the streets safe? Are those really our only two choices?

This seems like an appropriate place to link this article. Very timely, and very correct, IMO.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-watch/wp/2015/05/11/the-increasing-isolation-of-americas-police/?hpid=z3

From the article:

The most recent example comes just today from Baltimore, under the headline, “Violence surges, as Baltimore police officers feel hesitant.”

“In 29 years, I’ve gone through some bad times, but I’ve never seen it this bad,” said Lt. Kenneth Butler, president of the Vanguard Justice Society, a group for black Baltimore police officers. Officers “feel as though the state’s attorney will hang them out to dry.”

Several officers said in interviews they are concerned crime could spike as officers are hesitant to do their jobs, and criminals sense opportunity. Butler, a shift commander in the Southern District, said his officers are expressing reluctance to go after crime.

“I’m hearing it from guys who were go-getters, who would go out here and get the guns and the bad guys and drugs. They’re hands-off now,” Butler said. “I’ve never seen so many dejected faces.

“Policing, as we once knew it, has changed.”

Talk about taking things out of context! Literally the entire premise of that article is that this sentiment is unfounded and irresponsible. The very next paragraph:

So because a prosecutor has charged the six cops who illegally arrested a man and gave him a “rough ride” in the back of a police van that resulted in his death, all Baltimore cops are now afraid to use force. How does this follow? It would be logical if they were now hesitant to give rough rides — and that of a course would be a good thing. But what happen to Gray shouldn’t impact conscientious Baltimore cops in the slightest. There’s no connection between employing extra-judicial punishment by roughing a suspect up after he’s been arrested and cuffed, and using force to stop a violent person from harming innocent people. To argue that accountability in the former will lead to hesitation in the latter is to argue that we can’t have any accountability for any killing by a police officer, because it may cause other officers to hesitate before shooting people.

And later ...

Police interest groups have managed to frame a relentlessly one-sided debate. Any accountability proposals risk making cops hesitate before killing bad guys, they say, thus jeopardizing both cops and the public. Any criticism of excessive force articulated by an elected official is taken as criticism of all police officers. Should some lunatic kill a police officer after that criticism is uttered, that official now “has blood on his hands.” When crime and killings of police officers are down, it means increased militarization, marginal accountability, and non-transparency are all working, therefore we need more of those policies. When crime and killings of police officers are up, it means the criminals are taking over, therefore we also need increased militarization, marginal accountability, and non-transparency, so cops can do their job of getting the bad guys.

It’s hard to think of a profession more sensitive, psychologically isolated, and protective of its own than law enforcement. Imagine if all the doctors in a city refused to treat patients because one doctor was unfairly accused of malpractice. It’s unthinkable. Police advocates say this sort of camaraderie is because cops are bonded by the threats they face. Perhaps. But the profession seems to have gotten more isolated and more protective even as the job of police officer has gotten safer. Combat soldiers also face threats, yet it isn’t at all difficult to find former soldiers who, for example, have been willing to criticize, say, Abu Ghraib or other war atrocities. You just don’t see the same tendency to defend that you see in cops.

 

[Jack White]

Officer cleared in Wisconsin. Protestors

Just as David Simon explained about Baltimore and demonstrated in The Wire.

 

[timschochet]

I agree with you Tobias. I think this is all an excuse. But cops wouldn't get away with it if not for all the conservatives willing to jump on board to defend them no matter what the case.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

So either we let the police have a free rein, or they become so demoralized that they won't be able to keep the streets safe? Are those really our only two choices?

This seems like an appropriate place to link this article. Very timely, and very correct, IMO.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-watch/wp/2015/05/11/the-increasing-isolation-of-americas-police/?hpid=z3

From the article:

The most recent example comes just today from Baltimore, under the headline, “Violence surges, as Baltimore police officers feel hesitant.”

“In 29 years, I’ve gone through some bad times, but I’ve never seen it this bad,” said Lt. Kenneth Butler, president of the Vanguard Justice Society, a group for black Baltimore police officers. Officers “feel as though the state’s attorney will hang them out to dry.”

Several officers said in interviews they are concerned crime could spike as officers are hesitant to do their jobs, and criminals sense opportunity. Butler, a shift commander in the Southern District, said his officers are expressing reluctance to go after crime.

“I’m hearing it from guys who were go-getters, who would go out here and get the guns and the bad guys and drugs. They’re hands-off now,” Butler said. “I’ve never seen so many dejected faces.

“Policing, as we once knew it, has changed.”

Talk about taking things out of context! Literally the entire premise of that article is that this sentiment is unfounded and irresponsible. The very next paragraph:

So because a prosecutor has charged the six cops who illegally arrested a man and gave him a “rough ride” in the back of a police van that resulted in his death, all Baltimore cops are now afraid to use force. How does this follow? It would be logical if they were now hesitant to give rough rides — and that of a course would be a good thing. But what happen to Gray shouldn’t impact conscientious Baltimore cops in the slightest. There’s no connection between employing extra-judicial punishment by roughing a suspect up after he’s been arrested and cuffed, and using force to stop a violent person from harming innocent people. To argue that accountability in the former will lead to hesitation in the latter is to argue that we can’t have any accountability for any killing by a police officer, because it may cause other officers to hesitate before shooting people.

And later ...

Police interest groups have managed to frame a relentlessly one-sided debate. Any accountability proposals risk making cops hesitate before killing bad guys, they say, thus jeopardizing both cops and the public. Any criticism of excessive force articulated by an elected official is taken as criticism of all police officers. Should some lunatic kill a police officer after that criticism is uttered, that official now “has blood on his hands.” When crime and killings of police officers are down, it means increased militarization, marginal accountability, and non-transparency are all working, therefore we need more of those policies. When crime and killings of police officers are up, it means the criminals are taking over, therefore we also need increased militarization, marginal accountability, and non-transparency, so cops can do their job of getting the bad guys.

It’s hard to think of a profession more sensitive, psychologically isolated, and protective of its own than law enforcement. Imagine if all the doctors in a city refused to treat patients because one doctor was unfairly accused of malpractice. It’s unthinkable. Police advocates say this sort of camaraderie is because cops are bonded by the threats they face. Perhaps. But the profession seems to have gotten more isolated and more protective even as the job of police officer has gotten safer. Combat soldiers also face threats, yet it isn’t at all difficult to find former soldiers who, for example, have been willing to criticize, say, Abu Ghraib or other war atrocities. You just don’t see the same tendency to defend that you see in cops.

I just thought the letter was interesting, it provides an insight, that's all. I wasn't making any bigger point.

You're not going to find a bigger proponent for reform. I can just easily point out that this whole discussion, in this thread and in the media, is just complaining about the "problem" without really talking about what will take place to reform it. But the Feds are coming, it's going to be real clear, real soon what will happen. Some things you hear about will surprise you, if we all hang around to hear what's really wrong. I suspect we will all move on after the headlines drop off but Baltimore will be dealing with this for years to come.

Reform does come with costs, lots of them, in several ways. I think you prioritize reform over all that but accept there are indeed costs.

I will also add that every city is different. I don't think it's correct when people frame this as a national problem, because it's not, it's a city by city problem, and it's totally different with every PD. And frankly it's up to the people of each city and town. It was up to the people of Ferguson and it's up to the people of Baltimore.

 

[jonessed]

I agree with you Tobias. I think this is all an excuse. But cops wouldn't get away with it if not for all the conservatives willing to jump on board to defend them no matter what the case.

 

[General Tso]

Line of duty officers killed is up 89% in 2014, but 2013 was the lowest in 35 years

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/fbi-report-51-law-enforcement-officers-killed-2014-n357206

The link embedded in the section of the editorial I cited (from the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund) had slightly higher numbers and only a 10% increase from 2013 to 2014, but most importantly shows the same slow and steady decline since the 70s.

Over the same time frame... Haven't incarceration rates also gone up over the same time period? And haven't crime rates gone down? Would it be so surprising if police deaths would also be down?

I'm reading Tso's comments to mean the events since the Ferguson and Garnier controversies, the change in media tone and street protests and the corresponding rise in cop deaths in that time frame.

It just seems like two different issues.

Except that he provided zero evidence to back up a claim like this one and the one statistic he did cite was misleading for the reason that many people have already pointed out. Also the Ferguson and Garner decisions and subsequent outrage didn't occur until very late in that year so even if 2014 did represent a particularly dangerous year for police- which, again, it probably didn't- there's no reason to believe there's a causal link unless all those extra killings happened in December.

How about this fact then - in the largest city in the country, since December, the number of police killed has exceeded the number of people killed by police - 3 to 1.Look people - there is no doubt that the anti -police climate in this country is having a direct effect on police. You would have to be an idiot not to see this. It's human nature. Cops aren't drawing their weapons as quickly. The number of shootings of civilians is WAY down. 1 person in 5 months in a city of 8.5 million has been shot by a cop, and it was a justified shooting.

Brian Moore, the NY cop killed last week, was at the end of his shift. He saw a guy fidgeting with something in his belt. His instincts told him to check on it. Who knows, maybe 6 months ago he takes a more protective stance and approaches William Blackwell with his gun drawn. What we do know is that he didn't. And we also know that he was shot in the head before he could even react. What are cops going to do going forward? They are going to not say anything when they see a guy fidgeting like that - exactly what the public wants.

The pendulum has swung too far the other way. The police are ultimately to blame for not addressing the very real, very solvable police brutality issue, but I'm afraid we've gone so extreme the other way that we now have an even worse problem. People feel more emboldened to resist arrest, bait police, and use violence. The media is against the cops, and the politicians have jumped ship as well.

Cops are going to do exactly what the public wants - no more stop and frisk, basically less policing. That thin blue line just got a lot thinner, and the people who will bear the greatest brunt of it are the honest law abiding minorities in the inner cities.

 

[Apple Jack]

American Pharoah just got to Pimilico. Preakness should be interesting. And by interesting I mean an even bigger #### show than usual.

 

[General Tso]

I agree with you Tobias. I think this is all an excuse. But cops wouldn't get away with it if not for all the conservatives willing to jump on board to defend them no matter what the case.

Cops are doing exactly what the public wants Tim. Stop and frisk? Hell no - unconstitutional. Profiling? Hell no - racism. Use of deadly force against people resisting arrest or attacking officers? Hell no - "Hands up, don't shoot!".I don't understand what you're pissing and moaning about. What do expect when you implement the public's wishes like this? Crime rates to go down?

 

[tommyGunZ]

Line of duty officers killed is up 89% in 2014, but 2013 was the lowest in 35 years

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/fbi-report-51-law-enforcement-officers-killed-2014-n357206

The link embedded in the section of the editorial I cited (from the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund) had slightly higher numbers and only a 10% increase from 2013 to 2014, but most importantly shows the same slow and steady decline since the 70s.

Over the same time frame... Haven't incarceration rates also gone up over the same time period? And haven't crime rates gone down? Would it be so surprising if police deaths would also be down?

I'm reading Tso's comments to mean the events since the Ferguson and Garnier controversies, the change in media tone and street protests and the corresponding rise in cop deaths in that time frame.

It just seems like two different issues.

Except that he provided zero evidence to back up a claim like this one and the one statistic he did cite was misleading for the reason that many people have already pointed out. Also the Ferguson and Garner decisions and subsequent outrage didn't occur until very late in that year so even if 2014 did represent a particularly dangerous year for police- which, again, it probably didn't- there's no reason to believe there's a causal link unless all those extra killings happened in December.

How about this fact then - in the largest city in the country, since December, the number of police killed has exceeded the number of people killed by police - 3 to 1.Look people - there is no doubt that the anti -police climate in this country is having a direct effect on police. You would have to be an idiot not to see this. It's human nature. Cops aren't drawing their weapons as quickly. The number of shootings of civilians is WAY down. 1 person in 5 months in a city of 8.5 million has been shot by a cop, and it was a justified shooting.

Brian Moore, the NY cop killed last week, was at the end of his shift. He saw a guy fidgeting with something in his belt. His instincts told him to check on it. Who knows, maybe 6 months ago he takes a more protective stance and approaches William Blackwell with his gun drawn. What we do know is that he didn't. And we also know that he was shot in the head before he could even react. What are cops going to do going forward? They are going to not say anything when they see a guy fidgeting like that - exactly what the public wants.

The pendulum has swung too far the other way. The police are ultimately to blame for not addressing the very real, very solvable police brutality issue, but I'm afraid we've gone so extreme the other way that we now have an even worse problem. People feel more emboldened to resist arrest, bait police, and use violence. The media is against the cops, and the politicians have jumped ship as well.

Cops are going to do exactly what the public wants - no more stop and frisk, basically less policing. That thin blue line just got a lot thinner, and the people who will bear the greatest brunt of it are the honest law abiding minorities in the inner cities.

I don't think you realize how your posts read as a basic justification for police brutality and opposition to accountability.

 

[timschochet]

I agree with you Tobias. I think this is all an excuse. But cops wouldn't get away with it if not for all the conservatives willing to jump on board to defend them no matter what the case.

Cops are doing exactly what the public wants Tim. Stop and frisk? Hell no - unconstitutional. Profiling? Hell no - racism. Use of deadly force against people resisting arrest or attacking officers? Hell no - "Hands up, don't shoot!".I don't understand what you're pissing and moaning about. What do expect when you implement the public's wishes like this? Crime rates to go down?

I want them to act responsibly and stop whining about it. I want them to stop doing bad things, and I don't want the crime rates to go up, because the two are not connected. And I want you and conservatives here and elsewhere to stop defending these guys when they don't deserve it. You're enabling them and it's a huge part of the problem.

 

[General Tso]

I keep coming back to solutions...

1. We need federal oversight when it comes to charging cops with crimes. We can't rely on States Attorneys to do it. Too much conflict if interest.

2. Better training, particularly with regard to how, when and where to use deadly force. The current techniques have to change.

3. More cameras. Everywhere. Mandatory body cams on all cops.

4. Police must have a racial makeup that mimics the communities they serve. No more Fergusons. Use short term affirmative action programs if necessary. As much as I hate the race card, it's obvious that people still see in black and white, particularly black people.

5. Revamped drug policy. Legalize pot. Keep the hard stuff illegal but instead of sending users to jail, get them the help they need.

This is a solvable issue. It really is. Number 5 is tough, but still doable. All we need is leadership. Unfortunately that's the one thing we don't have right now.

 

[TobiasFunke]

Line of duty officers killed is up 89% in 2014, but 2013 was the lowest in 35 years

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/fbi-report-51-law-enforcement-officers-killed-2014-n357206

The link embedded in the section of the editorial I cited (from the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund) had slightly higher numbers and only a 10% increase from 2013 to 2014, but most importantly shows the same slow and steady decline since the 70s.

Over the same time frame... Haven't incarceration rates also gone up over the same time period? And haven't crime rates gone down? Would it be so surprising if police deaths would also be down?

I'm reading Tso's comments to mean the events since the Ferguson and Garnier controversies, the change in media tone and street protests and the corresponding rise in cop deaths in that time frame.

It just seems like two different issues.

Except that he provided zero evidence to back up a claim like this one and the one statistic he did cite was misleading for the reason that many people have already pointed out. Also the Ferguson and Garner decisions and subsequent outrage didn't occur until very late in that year so even if 2014 did represent a particularly dangerous year for police- which, again, it probably didn't- there's no reason to believe there's a causal link unless all those extra killings happened in December.

How about this fact then - in the largest city in the country, since December, the number of police killed has exceeded the number of people killed by police - 3 to 1.Look people - there is no doubt that the anti -police climate in this country is having a direct effect on police. You would have to be an idiot not to see this. It's human nature. Cops aren't drawing their weapons as quickly. The number of shootings of civilians is WAY down. 1 person in 5 months in a city of 8.5 million has been shot by a cop, and it was a justified shooting.

Brian Moore, the NY cop killed last week, was at the end of his shift. He saw a guy fidgeting with something in his belt. His instincts told him to check on it. Who knows, maybe 6 months ago he takes a more protective stance and approaches William Blackwell with his gun drawn. What we do know is that he didn't. And we also know that he was shot in the head before he could even react. What are cops going to do going forward? They are going to not say anything when they see a guy fidgeting like that - exactly what the public wants.

The pendulum has swung too far the other way. The police are ultimately to blame for not addressing the very real, very solvable police brutality issue, but I'm afraid we've gone so extreme the other way that we now have an even worse problem. People feel more emboldened to resist arrest, bait police, and use violence. The media is against the cops, and the politicians have jumped ship as well.

Cops are going to do exactly what the public wants - no more stop and frisk, basically less policing. That thin blue line just got a lot thinner, and the people who will bear the greatest brunt of it are the honest law abiding minorities in the inner cities.

How is this problem- if it is a problem- our fault? If our military decided not to fight as hard after their abuses at Abu Ghraib were exposed would you blame the media that reported the abuse or the people who were outraged by it? What if our intelligence services decided that the best way to address their perceived failings in the lead-up to the Iraq war was to just provide our leaders with less information so there would be less chance of them getting something wrong in the future? What if doctors responded to a high-profile malpractice decision they didn't agree with that way?

I can't think of another profession where we'd excuse this sort of whiny, defensive mindset and a related decision to simply not do their jobs properly. Any police officer that responds this way to the recent stories and increased attention paid to police brutality shouldn't be a police officer. You wanna raise my taxes so we can raise their pay enough to attract decent, responsible people to law enforcement, I'm all for it.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Well there's a step in the right direction. Cops will start quitting, yes you will need to pay them to stay and you will have to pay them even more make up for the attrition.

Will Baltimore pay for this? And will the vote for a tax hike? And then will that cause businesses and residents to leave or not come to Baltimore, when it sounds like the city needs to increase its tax base.

Good luck this is a good example of the choices ahead.

 

[timschochet]

I keep coming back to solutions...

1. We need federal oversight when it comes to charging cops with crimes. We can't rely on States Attorneys to do it. Too much conflict if interest.

2. Better training, particularly with regard to how, when and where to use deadly force. The current techniques have to change.

3. More cameras. Everywhere. Mandatory body cams on all cops.

4. Police must have a racial makeup that mimics the communities they serve. No more Fergusons. Use short term affirmative action programs if necessary. As much as I hate the race card, it's obvious that people still see in black and white, particularly black people.

5. Revamped drug policy. Legalize pot. Keep the hard stuff illegal but instead of sending users to jail, get them the help they need.

This is a solvable issue. It really is.

i agree with most of this, except for the first point. I don't perceive any conflict of interest. And I'm a bit surprised you would want the Feds stepping in. As for the rest, this post seems inconsistent with some of your earlier comments but more power to you for changing your mind.

 

[timschochet]

Well there's a step in the right direction. Cops will start quitting, yes you will need to pay them to stay and you will have to pay them even more make up for the attrition.

Will Baltimore pay for this? And will the vote for a tax hike? And then will that cause businesses and residents to leave or not come to Baltimore, when it sounds like the city needs to increase its tax base.

Good luck this is a good example of the choices ahead.

I don't believe most cops will quit and I don't believe we'll have to pay the majority to stay.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Well there's a step in the right direction. Cops will start quitting, yes you will need to pay them to stay and you will have to pay them even more make up for the attrition.

Will Baltimore pay for this? And will the vote for a tax hike? And then will that cause businesses and residents to leave or not come to Baltimore, when it sounds like the city needs to increase its tax base.

Good luck this is a good example of the choices ahead.

I don't believe most cops will quit and I don't believe we'll have to pay the majority to stay.

It happened in NO. Yeah they'll quit.

 

[General Tso]

Line of duty officers killed is up 89% in 2014, but 2013 was the lowest in 35 years

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/fbi-report-51-law-enforcement-officers-killed-2014-n357206

The link embedded in the section of the editorial I cited (from the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund) had slightly higher numbers and only a 10% increase from 2013 to 2014, but most importantly shows the same slow and steady decline since the 70s.

Over the same time frame... Haven't incarceration rates also gone up over the same time period? And haven't crime rates gone down? Would it be so surprising if police deaths would also be down?

I'm reading Tso's comments to mean the events since the Ferguson and Garnier controversies, the change in media tone and street protests and the corresponding rise in cop deaths in that time frame.

It just seems like two different issues.

Except that he provided zero evidence to back up a claim like this one and the one statistic he did cite was misleading for the reason that many people have already pointed out. Also the Ferguson and Garner decisions and subsequent outrage didn't occur until very late in that year so even if 2014 did represent a particularly dangerous year for police- which, again, it probably didn't- there's no reason to believe there's a causal link unless all those extra killings happened in December.

How about this fact then - in the largest city in the country, since December, the number of police killed has exceeded the number of people killed by police - 3 to 1.Look people - there is no doubt that the anti -police climate in this country is having a direct effect on police. You would have to be an idiot not to see this. It's human nature. Cops aren't drawing their weapons as quickly. The number of shootings of civilians is WAY down. 1 person in 5 months in a city of 8.5 million has been shot by a cop, and it was a justified shooting.

Brian Moore, the NY cop killed last week, was at the end of his shift. He saw a guy fidgeting with something in his belt. His instincts told him to check on it. Who knows, maybe 6 months ago he takes a more protective stance and approaches William Blackwell with his gun drawn. What we do know is that he didn't. And we also know that he was shot in the head before he could even react. What are cops going to do going forward? They are going to not say anything when they see a guy fidgeting like that - exactly what the public wants.

The pendulum has swung too far the other way. The police are ultimately to blame for not addressing the very real, very solvable police brutality issue, but I'm afraid we've gone so extreme the other way that we now have an even worse problem. People feel more emboldened to resist arrest, bait police, and use violence. The media is against the cops, and the politicians have jumped ship as well.

Cops are going to do exactly what the public wants - no more stop and frisk, basically less policing. That thin blue line just got a lot thinner, and the people who will bear the greatest brunt of it are the honest law abiding minorities in the inner cities.

I don't think you realize how your posts read as a basic justification for police brutality and opposition to accountability.

Where in there do I justify police brutality? I've called for Officer Shlager to fry for what he did to Walter Scott. Hell, read my very first posts in this thread. When I see police brutality I condemn it. And when I see people going the other way and hating on cops just because they don't like authority, or having totally unreasonable expectations of how to act in life threatening situations, I condemn that too. I think I'm one of the few people in this thread who's been fair on the issue.

 

[timschochet]

Tobias your analogy to Abu Ghraub is a good one because a lot of conservative types, led by the good folks at Fox News, did indeed attack the media and they warned that recruiting would go down, that we were weakening the armed forces by prosecuting those guys, that it would demoralize the troops and cause them to quit and who could blame them because they were targets- all the exact same BS.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Another thing to look forward to - the Feds will get into what the Baltimore PD is paid:

http://www.abc2news.com/news/local-news/investigations/abc2-investigators-find-highest-paid-city-employees-are-everyday-police-officers

ABC2 Investigators find highest paid city employees are everyday police officersThe Baltimore Police Department routinely points to a figure of $23 million dollars as the amount it spends on overtime each year. But ABC2 Investigators found out the actual total spent on OT is much higher, with some officers taking home tens of thousands of dollars in overtime.

But some officers made even more, pulling in upwards of $60,000, $80,000 even $100,000, in overtime, putting them at the top of the list of all city employees.

The Feds did this In NO, and it was one of the first things to go, corruption in side money made by cops. The Feds will likely dig into undue overpaid OT and side businesses where they get paid for private security. This sort of thing can go straight to city hall and all kinds of businesses. This is where most cops make most of their money. It's also a big political tool.

You invite in the Feds and you will get a whole host of things you never thought about.

 

[timschochet]

Well there's a step in the right direction. Cops will start quitting, yes you will need to pay them to stay and you will have to pay them even more make up for the attrition.

Will Baltimore pay for this? And will the vote for a tax hike? And then will that cause businesses and residents to leave or not come to Baltimore, when it sounds like the city needs to increase its tax base.

Good luck this is a good example of the choices ahead.

I don't believe most cops will quit and I don't believe we'll have to pay the majority to stay.

It happened in NO. Yeah they'll quit.

Whoever quits over this shouldn't be a cop in the first place. Society is better off with them removed from this particular profession.

 

[RCon]

Line of duty officers killed is up 89% in 2014, but 2013 was the lowest in 35 years

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/fbi-report-51-law-enforcement-officers-killed-2014-n357206

The link embedded in the section of the editorial I cited (from the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund) had slightly higher numbers and only a 10% increase from 2013 to 2014, but most importantly shows the same slow and steady decline since the 70s.

Over the same time frame... Haven't incarceration rates also gone up over the same time period? And haven't crime rates gone down? Would it be so surprising if police deaths would also be down?

I'm reading Tso's comments to mean the events since the Ferguson and Garnier controversies, the change in media tone and street protests and the corresponding rise in cop deaths in that time frame.

It just seems like two different issues.

Except that he provided zero evidence to back up a claim like this one and the one statistic he did cite was misleading for the reason that many people have already pointed out. Also the Ferguson and Garner decisions and subsequent outrage didn't occur until very late in that year so even if 2014 did represent a particularly dangerous year for police- which, again, it probably didn't- there's no reason to believe there's a causal link unless all those extra killings happened in December.

How about this fact then - in the largest city in the country, since December, the number of police killed has exceeded the number of people killed by police - 3 to 1.Look people - there is no doubt that the anti -police climate in this country is having a direct effect on police. You would have to be an idiot not to see this. It's human nature. Cops aren't drawing their weapons as quickly. The number of shootings of civilians is WAY down. 1 person in 5 months in a city of 8.5 million has been shot by a cop, and it was a justified shooting.

Brian Moore, the NY cop killed last week, was at the end of his shift. He saw a guy fidgeting with something in his belt. His instincts told him to check on it. Who knows, maybe 6 months ago he takes a more protective stance and approaches William Blackwell with his gun drawn. What we do know is that he didn't. And we also know that he was shot in the head before he could even react. What are cops going to do going forward? They are going to not say anything when they see a guy fidgeting like that - exactly what the public wants.

The pendulum has swung too far the other way. The police are ultimately to blame for not addressing the very real, very solvable police brutality issue, but I'm afraid we've gone so extreme the other way that we now have an even worse problem. People feel more emboldened to resist arrest, bait police, and use violence. The media is against the cops, and the politicians have jumped ship as well.

Cops are going to do exactly what the public wants - no more stop and frisk, basically less policing. That thin blue line just got a lot thinner, and the people who will bear the greatest brunt of it are the honest law abiding minorities in the inner cities.

No offense, but this is a terrible post in so many ways.

1) Your "statistic" has no context. What's the historical rate? Also, you're talking about 4 months, a ridiculously small sample size, such that we can't draw any conclusions regardless of historical context. Lastly, it's not appropriate to compare the rate of occurrence of one bad thing (police shooting civilians) versus another bad thing (criminals shooting police). Lowering the rate of either is a good thing! Lowering the rate of one but not the other may make the comparative rate look much different, but it's still a positive that there are fewer occurrences of one of the bad things.

2) You say "The number of shootings of civilians is WAY down" like this is a bad thing. This is very obviously a good thing.

3) Politicians haven't "jumped ship" at all. Bill DeBlasio was more or less forced to toe the police union line.

4) You say "no more stop and frisk" like this is a bad thing. Again, this is very obviously a good thing.

 

[tommyGunZ]

Well there's a step in the right direction. Cops will start quitting, yes you will need to pay them to stay and you will have to pay them even more make up for the attrition.

Will Baltimore pay for this? And will the vote for a tax hike? And then will that cause businesses and residents to leave or not come to Baltimore, when it sounds like the city needs to increase its tax base.

Good luck this is a good example of the choices ahead.

This reads just like something from Hannity; the part about tax hikes scaring businesses away is a nice touch.

 

[jonessed]

Well there's a step in the right direction. Cops will start quitting, yes you will need to pay them to stay and you will have to pay them even more make up for the attrition.

Will Baltimore pay for this? And will the vote for a tax hike? And then will that cause businesses and residents to leave or not come to Baltimore, when it sounds like the city needs to increase its tax base.

Good luck this is a good example of the choices ahead.

I don't believe most cops will quit and I don't believe we'll have to pay the majority to stay.

It happened in NO. Yeah they'll quit.

Whoever quits over this shouldn't be a cop in the first place. Society is better off with them removed from this particular profession.

They aren't going to quit being police. The marketable cops will get jobs outside of Baltimore, the others will likely have to stay.

 

[tommyGunZ]

Line of duty officers killed is up 89% in 2014, but 2013 was the lowest in 35 years

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/fbi-report-51-law-enforcement-officers-killed-2014-n357206

The link embedded in the section of the editorial I cited (from the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund) had slightly higher numbers and only a 10% increase from 2013 to 2014, but most importantly shows the same slow and steady decline since the 70s.

Over the same time frame... Haven't incarceration rates also gone up over the same time period? And haven't crime rates gone down? Would it be so surprising if police deaths would also be down?

I'm reading Tso's comments to mean the events since the Ferguson and Garnier controversies, the change in media tone and street protests and the corresponding rise in cop deaths in that time frame.

It just seems like two different issues.

Except that he provided zero evidence to back up a claim like this one and the one statistic he did cite was misleading for the reason that many people have already pointed out. Also the Ferguson and Garner decisions and subsequent outrage didn't occur until very late in that year so even if 2014 did represent a particularly dangerous year for police- which, again, it probably didn't- there's no reason to believe there's a causal link unless all those extra killings happened in December.

How about this fact then - in the largest city in the country, since December, the number of police killed has exceeded the number of people killed by police - 3 to 1.Look people - there is no doubt that the anti -police climate in this country is having a direct effect on police. You would have to be an idiot not to see this. It's human nature. Cops aren't drawing their weapons as quickly. The number of shootings of civilians is WAY down. 1 person in 5 months in a city of 8.5 million has been shot by a cop, and it was a justified shooting.

Brian Moore, the NY cop killed last week, was at the end of his shift. He saw a guy fidgeting with something in his belt. His instincts told him to check on it. Who knows, maybe 6 months ago he takes a more protective stance and approaches William Blackwell with his gun drawn. What we do know is that he didn't. And we also know that he was shot in the head before he could even react. What are cops going to do going forward? They are going to not say anything when they see a guy fidgeting like that - exactly what the public wants.

The pendulum has swung too far the other way. The police are ultimately to blame for not addressing the very real, very solvable police brutality issue, but I'm afraid we've gone so extreme the other way that we now have an even worse problem. People feel more emboldened to resist arrest, bait police, and use violence. The media is against the cops, and the politicians have jumped ship as well.

Cops are going to do exactly what the public wants - no more stop and frisk, basically less policing. That thin blue line just got a lot thinner, and the people who will bear the greatest brunt of it are the honest law abiding minorities in the inner cities.

No offense, but this is a terrible post in so many ways.

1) Your "statistic" has no context. What's the historical rate? Also, you're talking about 4 months, a ridiculously small sample size, such that we can't draw any conclusions regardless of historical context. Lastly, it's not appropriate to compare the rate of occurrence of one bad thing (police shooting civilians) versus another bad thing (criminals shooting police). Lowering the rate of either is a good thing! Lowering the rate of one but not the other may make the comparative rate look much different, but it's still a positive that there are fewer occurrences of one of the bad things.

2) You say "The number of shootings of civilians is WAY down" like this is a bad thing. This is very obviously a good thing.

3) Politicians haven't "jumped ship" at all. Bill DeBlasio was more or less forced to toe the police union line.

4) You say "no more stop and frisk" like this is a bad thing. Again, this is very obviously a good thing.

Excellent post. Are you off your meds this morning?

 

[rockaction]

Well there's a step in the right direction. Cops will start quitting, yes you will need to pay them to stay and you will have to pay them even more make up for the attrition.

Will Baltimore pay for this? And will the vote for a tax hike? And then will that cause businesses and residents to leave or not come to Baltimore, when it sounds like the city needs to increase its tax base.

Good luck this is a good example of the choices ahead.

This reads just like something from Hannity; the part about tax hikes scaring businesses away is a nice touch.

Tax hikes are a proven boon to Baltimore and other similar cities.

Thanks for playing.

 

[TobiasFunke]

I keep coming back to solutions...

1. We need federal oversight when it comes to charging cops with crimes. We can't rely on States Attorneys to do it. Too much conflict if interest.

2. Better training, particularly with regard to how, when and where to use deadly force. The current techniques have to change.

3. More cameras. Everywhere. Mandatory body cams on all cops.

4. Police must have a racial makeup that mimics the communities they serve. No more Fergusons. Use short term affirmative action programs if necessary. As much as I hate the race card, it's obvious that people still see in black and white, particularly black people.

5. Revamped drug policy. Legalize pot. Keep the hard stuff illegal but instead of sending users to jail, get them the help they need.

This is a solvable issue. It really is.

i agree with most of this, except for the first point. I don't perceive any conflict of interest. And I'm a bit surprised you would want the Feds stepping in.As for the rest, this post seems inconsistent with some of your earlier comments but more power to you for changing your mind.

I like all of these ideas. It's funny that many of us can disagree so strongly about the nature of a problem and its causes and still pretty much agree across the board when it comes to proposed solutions.

 

[RCon]

Another thing to look forward to - the Feds will get into what the Baltimore PD is paid:

http://www.abc2news.com/news/local-news/investigations/abc2-investigators-find-highest-paid-city-employees-are-everyday-police-officers

ABC2 Investigators find highest paid city employees are everyday police officersThe Baltimore Police Department routinely points to a figure of $23 million dollars as the amount it spends on overtime each year. But ABC2 Investigators found out the actual total spent on OT is much higher, with some officers taking home tens of thousands of dollars in overtime.

But some officers made even more, pulling in upwards of $60,000, $80,000 even $100,000, in overtime, putting them at the top of the list of all city employees.

The Feds did this In NO, and it was one of the first things to go, corruption in side money made by cops. The Feds will likely dig into undue overpaid OT and side businesses where they get paid for private security. This sort of thing can go straight to city hall and all kinds of businesses. This is where most cops make most of their money. It's also a big political tool.

You invite in the Feds and you will get a whole host of things you never thought about.

Isn't reducing corruption a good thing? You seem to imply that this is a negative.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

The feds might also demand monitoring of the PD, this will require a contract and it could cost the city of Baltimore in the order of $10 million over several years, as the city of NO is looking at $2 mill per year for at least 5 years, and then it gets to see if the Feds like what they are doing or think they are doing enough to be good police. If they don't, then the monitoring will continue.

In NO the consent decrees are costing about $11 million per year.

Enjoy the ride, Baltimore.

 

[rockaction]

Line of duty officers killed is up 89% in 2014, but 2013 was the lowest in 35 years

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/fbi-report-51-law-enforcement-officers-killed-2014-n357206

The link embedded in the section of the editorial I cited (from the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund) had slightly higher numbers and only a 10% increase from 2013 to 2014, but most importantly shows the same slow and steady decline since the 70s.

Over the same time frame... Haven't incarceration rates also gone up over the same time period? And haven't crime rates gone down? Would it be so surprising if police deaths would also be down?

I'm reading Tso's comments to mean the events since the Ferguson and Garnier controversies, the change in media tone and street protests and the corresponding rise in cop deaths in that time frame.

It just seems like two different issues.

Except that he provided zero evidence to back up a claim like this one and the one statistic he did cite was misleading for the reason that many people have already pointed out. Also the Ferguson and Garner decisions and subsequent outrage didn't occur until very late in that year so even if 2014 did represent a particularly dangerous year for police- which, again, it probably didn't- there's no reason to believe there's a causal link unless all those extra killings happened in December.

How about this fact then - in the largest city in the country, since December, the number of police killed has exceeded the number of people killed by police - 3 to 1.Look people - there is no doubt that the anti -police climate in this country is having a direct effect on police. You would have to be an idiot not to see this. It's human nature. Cops aren't drawing their weapons as quickly. The number of shootings of civilians is WAY down. 1 person in 5 months in a city of 8.5 million has been shot by a cop, and it was a justified shooting.

Brian Moore, the NY cop killed last week, was at the end of his shift. He saw a guy fidgeting with something in his belt. His instincts told him to check on it. Who knows, maybe 6 months ago he takes a more protective stance and approaches William Blackwell with his gun drawn. What we do know is that he didn't. And we also know that he was shot in the head before he could even react. What are cops going to do going forward? They are going to not say anything when they see a guy fidgeting like that - exactly what the public wants.

The pendulum has swung too far the other way. The police are ultimately to blame for not addressing the very real, very solvable police brutality issue, but I'm afraid we've gone so extreme the other way that we now have an even worse problem. People feel more emboldened to resist arrest, bait police, and use violence. The media is against the cops, and the politicians have jumped ship as well.

Cops are going to do exactly what the public wants - no more stop and frisk, basically less policing. That thin blue line just got a lot thinner, and the people who will bear the greatest brunt of it are the honest law abiding minorities in the inner cities.

No offense, but this is a terrible post in so many ways.

1) Your "statistic" has no context. What's the historical rate? Also, you're talking about 4 months, a ridiculously small sample size, such that we can't draw any conclusions regardless of historical context. Lastly, it's not appropriate to compare the rate of occurrence of one bad thing (police shooting civilians) versus another bad thing (criminals shooting police). Lowering the rate of either is a good thing! Lowering the rate of one but not the other may make the comparative rate look much different, but it's still a positive that there are fewer occurrences of one of the bad things.

2) You say "The number of shootings of civilians is WAY down" like this is a bad thing. This is very obviously a good thing.

3) Politicians haven't "jumped ship" at all. Bill DeBlasio was more or less forced to toe the police union line.

4) You say "no more stop and frisk" like this is a bad thing. Again, this is very obviously a good thing.

Excellent post. Are you off your meds this morning?

Yet another liberal personal attack in this thread.

I love the losers that do this. It makes me happy.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Well there's a step in the right direction. Cops will start quitting, yes you will need to pay them to stay and you will have to pay them even more make up for the attrition.

Will Baltimore pay for this? And will the vote for a tax hike? And then will that cause businesses and residents to leave or not come to Baltimore, when it sounds like the city needs to increase its tax base.

Good luck this is a good example of the choices ahead.

I don't believe most cops will quit and I don't believe we'll have to pay the majority to stay.

It happened in NO. Yeah they'll quit.

Whoever quits over this shouldn't be a cop in the first place. Society is better off with them removed from this particular profession.

Welcome to the real world.

 

[General Tso]

Line of duty officers killed is up 89% in 2014, but 2013 was the lowest in 35 years

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/fbi-report-51-law-enforcement-officers-killed-2014-n357206

The link embedded in the section of the editorial I cited (from the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund) had slightly higher numbers and only a 10% increase from 2013 to 2014, but most importantly shows the same slow and steady decline since the 70s.

Over the same time frame... Haven't incarceration rates also gone up over the same time period? And haven't crime rates gone down? Would it be so surprising if police deaths would also be down?

I'm reading Tso's comments to mean the events since the Ferguson and Garnier controversies, the change in media tone and street protests and the corresponding rise in cop deaths in that time frame.

It just seems like two different issues.

Except that he provided zero evidence to back up a claim like this one and the one statistic he did cite was misleading for the reason that many people have already pointed out. Also the Ferguson and Garner decisions and subsequent outrage didn't occur until very late in that year so even if 2014 did represent a particularly dangerous year for police- which, again, it probably didn't- there's no reason to believe there's a causal link unless all those extra killings happened in December.

How about this fact then - in the largest city in the country, since December, the number of police killed has exceeded the number of people killed by police - 3 to 1.Look people - there is no doubt that the anti -police climate in this country is having a direct effect on police. You would have to be an idiot not to see this. It's human nature. Cops aren't drawing their weapons as quickly. The number of shootings of civilians is WAY down. 1 person in 5 months in a city of 8.5 million has been shot by a cop, and it was a justified shooting.

Brian Moore, the NY cop killed last week, was at the end of his shift. He saw a guy fidgeting with something in his belt. His instincts told him to check on it. Who knows, maybe 6 months ago he takes a more protective stance and approaches William Blackwell with his gun drawn. What we do know is that he didn't. And we also know that he was shot in the head before he could even react. What are cops going to do going forward? They are going to not say anything when they see a guy fidgeting like that - exactly what the public wants.

The pendulum has swung too far the other way. The police are ultimately to blame for not addressing the very real, very solvable police brutality issue, but I'm afraid we've gone so extreme the other way that we now have an even worse problem. People feel more emboldened to resist arrest, bait police, and use violence. The media is against the cops, and the politicians have jumped ship as well.

Cops are going to do exactly what the public wants - no more stop and frisk, basically less policing. That thin blue line just got a lot thinner, and the people who will bear the greatest brunt of it are the honest law abiding minorities in the inner cities.

How is this problem- if it is a problem- our fault? If our military decided not to fight as hard after their abuses at Abu Ghraib were exposed would you blame the media that reported the abuse or the people who were outraged by it? What if our intelligence services decided that the best way to address their perceived failings in the lead-up to the Iraq war was to just provide our leaders with less information so there would be less chance of them getting something wrong in the future? What if doctors responded to a high-profile malpractice decision they didn't agree with that way?

I can't think of another profession where we'd excuse this sort of whiny, defensive mindset and a related decision to simply not do their jobs properly. Any police officer that responds this way to the recent stories and increased attention paid to police brutality shouldn't be a police officer. You wanna raise my taxes so we can raise their pay enough to attract decent, responsible people to law enforcement, I'm all for it.

Yeah but it does happen in every profession. Malpractice cases do cause a shift in doctors' behaviors. Compliance crackdowns within a company do cause employees to be much more cautious. Now if you are arguing that cops are intentionally turning a blind eye to crime, that's a different story. Here have been instances of the "blue flu" over the years, but they are widely condemned and not a good tactic for the police to get what they want.I'm sure a few people are going to see the higher crime rates and jump to that conclusion. And it's bunk. The more likely answer is that cops are just scaling back on the controversial proactive techniques like stop and frisk that have come under fire.

Ultimately the cops serve the public. If the public wants them to crack down they do. If the public wants them to back off, they do that as well.

 

[RCon]

Excellent post. Are you off your meds this morning?

I keep telling you I'm a libertarian, not a conservative. And not a Bill Maher or Bill O'Reilly libertarian, who only say it because they think it's cool. I am an actual libertarian.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Well there's a step in the right direction. Cops will start quitting, yes you will need to pay them to stay and you will have to pay them even more make up for the attrition.

Will Baltimore pay for this? And will the vote for a tax hike? And then will that cause businesses and residents to leave or not come to Baltimore, when it sounds like the city needs to increase its tax base.

Good luck this is a good example of the choices ahead.

This reads just like something from Hannity; the part about tax hikes scaring businesses away is a nice touch.

It's not, we've lived it. But I am sure things are truly grand in San Diego, you don't likely deal with things like urban blight and natural disasters and riots. Do you? We lost 3/4s of our population, so please do not personally raise this particular issue with me.

- I will just ask you: how would you personally get more people and businesses into Baltimore? A couple thoughts on my part: safety and lower taxes.

Btw on a local level I can be very liberal on this. I am not averse to higher taxes, but lower taxes can be accomplished by taxing more fairly, by checking your county assessor roles. Have you ever done that where you live? Check out how many businesses and homes are getting very low assessments. I am guessing SD has its own problems but it's much easier to talk about things thousands of miles away.

 

[rockaction]

San Diego, liberal bastion. Stalwarts of liberalism. Heavy taxation.

Oh, wait...

 

[Sweet J]

I agree with you Tobias. I think this is all an excuse. But cops wouldn't get away with it if not for all the conservatives willing to jump on board to defend them no matter what the case.

Cops are doing exactly what the public wants Tim. Stop and frisk? Hell no - unconstitutional. Profiling? Hell no - racism. Use of deadly force against people resisting arrest or attacking officers? Hell no - "Hands up, don't shoot!".I don't understand what you're pissing and moaning about. What do expect when you implement the public's wishes like this? Crime rates to go down?

I dunno. The libertarian in me says that a lot less stop and frisk -- a lot -- is a really good thing. Less profiling is a good thing. Less use of deadly force is a good thing. All good things, no?

I don't understand some conservative voices. Aren't they supposed to be more libertarian? Less government, less police intrusion? Shouldn't conservatives be in favor of more restrictive police practices?

It's strange, but here's what I see: In middle-class and upper middle-class and upper-class neighborhoods, there is MUCH less police presence than in poverty neighborhoods? But is it really causal? Much more crime going on in lower-class neighborhoods, or is it just the culture that everyone is familiar with?

I know if police started roaming the streets of my neighborhood and hassling my middle-school and high-school kids, my neighbors and I would be all up the mayor's and the city counsel's rear end. Is that why they don't harass upper middle-class kids like they do in poor neighborhoods? Nobody complains in poor neighborhoods when this happens? Or nobody listens to the complaints?

 

[Hang 10]

I agree with you Tobias. I think this is all an excuse. But cops wouldn't get away with it if not for all the conservatives willing to jump on board to defend them no matter what the case.

But Tim never trolls. Just ask him.

 

[jonessed]

I agree with you Tobias. I think this is all an excuse. But cops wouldn't get away with it if not for all the conservatives willing to jump on board to defend them no matter what the case.

Cops are doing exactly what the public wants Tim. Stop and frisk? Hell no - unconstitutional. Profiling? Hell no - racism. Use of deadly force against people resisting arrest or attacking officers? Hell no - "Hands up, don't shoot!".I don't understand what you're pissing and moaning about. What do expect when you implement the public's wishes like this? Crime rates to go down?

I dunno. The libertarian in me says that a lot less stop and frisk -- a lot -- is a really good thing. Less profiling is a good thing. Less use of deadly force is a good thing. All good things, no?

I don't understand some conservative voices. Aren't they supposed to be more libertarian? Less government, less police intrusion? Shouldn't conservatives be in favor of more restrictive police practices?

It's strange, but here's what I see: In middle-class and upper middle-class and upper-class neighborhoods, there is MUCH less police presence than in poverty neighborhoods? But is it really causal? Much more crime going on in lower-class neighborhoods, or is it just the culture that everyone is familiar with?

I know if police started roaming the streets of my neighborhood and hassling my middle-school and high-school kids, my neighbors and I would be all up the mayor's and the city counsel's rear end. Is that why they don't harass upper middle-class kids like they do in poor neighborhoods? Nobody complains in poor neighborhoods when this happens? Or nobody listens to the complaints?

I'm not sure that's even true. Do you have any stats? I think we can agree that the daily activities are likely different, but I suspect the presence may not be. I really don't know though.I'm not getting the link betwee stop and frisk and deadly force either. Perhaps you can explain that more.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Another thing to look forward to - the Feds will get into what the Baltimore PD is paid:

http://www.abc2news.com/news/local-news/investigations/abc2-investigators-find-highest-paid-city-employees-are-everyday-police-officers

ABC2 Investigators find highest paid city employees are everyday police officersThe Baltimore Police Department routinely points to a figure of $23 million dollars as the amount it spends on overtime each year. But ABC2 Investigators found out the actual total spent on OT is much higher, with some officers taking home tens of thousands of dollars in overtime.

But some officers made even more, pulling in upwards of $60,000, $80,000 even $100,000, in overtime, putting them at the top of the list of all city employees.

The Feds did this In NO, and it was one of the first things to go, corruption in side money made by cops. The Feds will likely dig into undue overpaid OT and side businesses where they get paid for private security. This sort of thing can go straight to city hall and all kinds of businesses. This is where most cops make most of their money. It's also a big political tool.

You invite in the Feds and you will get a whole host of things you never thought about.

Isn't reducing corruption a good thing? You seem to imply that this is a negative.

I'm 100% in favor of it. I was and am in favor of it locally and by the sound of what's going on there in Baltimore. I am just saying that people who are calling for it had better be ready to accept the costs, because they will be some, they could be big, and the Feds will dig up issues that no one was aware of or wanted looked at.

 

[Sweet J]

I keep coming back to solutions...

1. We need federal oversight when it comes to charging cops with crimes. We can't rely on States Attorneys to do it. Too much conflict if interest.

2. Better training, particularly with regard to how, when and where to use deadly force. The current techniques have to change.

3. More cameras. Everywhere. Mandatory body cams on all cops.

4. Police must have a racial makeup that mimics the communities they serve. No more Fergusons. Use short term affirmative action programs if necessary. As much as I hate the race card, it's obvious that people still see in black and white, particularly black people.

5. Revamped drug policy. Legalize pot. Keep the hard stuff illegal but instead of sending users to jail, get them the help they need.

This is a solvable issue. It really is. Number 5 is tough, but still doable. All we need is leadership. Unfortunately that's the one thing we don't have right now.

You're posts can be an enigma to me, Tso. Like no other poster here, I can go from strenuously disagreeing with something you write (like a reference to the "race card"), to being in complete agreement with a later post. I kind of like that you seem to be all over the map (at least to me).

 

[RCon]

I'm pretty much a believer that technology will solve most of this, as body and dash cameras become more prevalent.

 

[CBusAlex]

If the cops who don't think they can perform their duties without shooting unarmed civilians in the back or murdering them while in custody no longer want to do their jobs for fear of actually getting prosecuted for these crimes, that strikes me as a positive development. Let these losers quit and find jobs they're more qualified for, like mall security guard, or fry cook, or literally anything that doesn't involve carrying a gun.

 

[timschochet]

I agree with you Tobias. I think this is all an excuse. But cops wouldn't get away with it if not for all the conservatives willing to jump on board to defend them no matter what the case.

But Tim never trolls. Just ask him.

I assume trolling means one doesn't believe what one is posting? That doesn't describe me. I'm being very honest here. And I'm not describing all conservatives, only some.

 

[Sweet J]

I agree with you Tobias. I think this is all an excuse. But cops wouldn't get away with it if not for all the conservatives willing to jump on board to defend them no matter what the case.

Cops are doing exactly what the public wants Tim. Stop and frisk? Hell no - unconstitutional. Profiling? Hell no - racism. Use of deadly force against people resisting arrest or attacking officers? Hell no - "Hands up, don't shoot!".I don't understand what you're pissing and moaning about. What do expect when you implement the public's wishes like this? Crime rates to go down?

I dunno. The libertarian in me says that a lot less stop and frisk -- a lot -- is a really good thing. Less profiling is a good thing. Less use of deadly force is a good thing. All good things, no?

I don't understand some conservative voices. Aren't they supposed to be more libertarian? Less government, less police intrusion? Shouldn't conservatives be in favor of more restrictive police practices?

It's strange, but here's what I see: In middle-class and upper middle-class and upper-class neighborhoods, there is MUCH less police presence than in poverty neighborhoods? But is it really causal? Much more crime going on in lower-class neighborhoods, or is it just the culture that everyone is familiar with?

I know if police started roaming the streets of my neighborhood and hassling my middle-school and high-school kids, my neighbors and I would be all up the mayor's and the city counsel's rear end. Is that why they don't harass upper middle-class kids like they do in poor neighborhoods? Nobody complains in poor neighborhoods when this happens? Or nobody listens to the complaints?

I'm not sure that's even true. Do you have any stats? I think we can agree that the daily activities are likely different, but I suspect the presence may not be. I really don't know though.

Make no mistake: that post is 100% anecdotal. Just what I seem to perceive by living in both poor neighborhoods (as a kid), and upper-middle class neighborhoods as an adult. But should have made more clear that this is my personal perception, that may or may not reflect reality. I do know that my teen son and his teen friends have never been stopped by police and asked what they were up to (the neighborhood list-serve would guarantee to blow-up if that started to happen). I'm genuinely curious if that is the same reality for a black kid living in the projects.

 

[jonessed]

I keep coming back to solutions...

1. We need federal oversight when it comes to charging cops with crimes. We can't rely on States Attorneys to do it. Too much conflict if interest.

2. Better training, particularly with regard to how, when and where to use deadly force. The current techniques have to change.

3. More cameras. Everywhere. Mandatory body cams on all cops.

4. Police must have a racial makeup that mimics the communities they serve. No more Fergusons. Use short term affirmative action programs if necessary. As much as I hate the race card, it's obvious that people still see in black and white, particularly black people.

5. Revamped drug policy. Legalize pot. Keep the hard stuff illegal but instead of sending users to jail, get them the help they need.

This is a solvable issue. It really is. Number 5 is tough, but still doable. All we need is leadership. Unfortunately that's the one thing we don't have right now.

You're posts can be an enigma to me, Tso. Like no other poster here, I can go from strenuously disagreeing with something you write (like a reference to the "race card"), to being in complete agreement with a later post. I kind of like that you seem to be all over the map (at least to me).

He's not really all over the map. He's just pragmatic. If you put a group of pragmatic liberals and conservatives in a room with a problem you might get wildly different reasons for the problem, but they would likely come up with a workable solution.People can also be moody. It's not always easy to read someone on a message board. Partisan people can sometimes be reasonable and normally objective people can sometimes be partisan.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

I'm pretty much a believer that technology will solve most of this, as body and dash cameras become more prevalent.

To fully prevent all this, the City of Baltimore will need cameras in police cars, on all PD vests, in all compartments of all wagons. There will be equipment cost, vendor payments, monitoring and data storage. I wonder what the cost will be year in, year out.

How about deaths in jail cells? Quite a few of those every year too.

The total cost of body cameras in the first year alone would range from $5.5 million to $7.9 million.

http://www.statetechmagazine.com/article/2015/02/baltimore-weighs-hidden-cost-police-body-cameras

That's just body cameras.

 

[jonessed]

I agree with you Tobias. I think this is all an excuse. But cops wouldn't get away with it if not for all the conservatives willing to jump on board to defend them no matter what the case.

Cops are doing exactly what the public wants Tim. Stop and frisk? Hell no - unconstitutional. Profiling? Hell no - racism. Use of deadly force against people resisting arrest or attacking officers? Hell no - "Hands up, don't shoot!".I don't understand what you're pissing and moaning about. What do expect when you implement the public's wishes like this? Crime rates to go down?

I dunno. The libertarian in me says that a lot less stop and frisk -- a lot -- is a really good thing. Less profiling is a good thing. Less use of deadly force is a good thing. All good things, no?

I don't understand some conservative voices. Aren't they supposed to be more libertarian? Less government, less police intrusion? Shouldn't conservatives be in favor of more restrictive police practices?

It's strange, but here's what I see: In middle-class and upper middle-class and upper-class neighborhoods, there is MUCH less police presence than in poverty neighborhoods? But is it really causal? Much more crime going on in lower-class neighborhoods, or is it just the culture that everyone is familiar with?

I know if police started roaming the streets of my neighborhood and hassling my middle-school and high-school kids, my neighbors and I would be all up the mayor's and the city counsel's rear end. Is that why they don't harass upper middle-class kids like they do in poor neighborhoods? Nobody complains in poor neighborhoods when this happens? Or nobody listens to the complaints?

I'm not sure that's even true. Do you have any stats? I think we can agree that the daily activities are likely different, but I suspect the presence may not be. I really don't know though.

Make no mistake: that post is 100% anecdotal. Just what I seem to perceive by living in both poor neighborhoods (as a kid), and upper-middle class neighborhoods as an adult. But should have made more clear that this is my personal perception, that may or may not reflect reality. I do know that my teen son and his teen friends have never been stopped by police and asked what they were up to (the neighborhood list-serve would guarantee to blow-up if that started to happen). I'm genuinely curious if that is the same reality for a black kid living in the projects.

It probably isn't, but that's not necessarily because of more police presence or inherent racism.

 

[Sweet J]

If the cops who don't think they can perform their duties without shooting unarmed civilians in the back or murdering them while in custody no longer want to do their jobs for fear of actually getting prosecuted for these crimes, that strikes me as a positive development. Let these losers quit and find jobs they're more qualified for, like mall security guard, or fry cook, or literally anything that doesn't involve carrying a gun.

I can appreciate the difficulty to being a good, decent, cop now who gets "rushed" by a suspect, or makes a move towards what they genuinely think may be a gun. It really, really, sucks for them that they have to make s SPLIT SECOND decision that could affect the rest of their lives (including whether they will live another day).

It sucks that bad, negligent, immoral police that came before them and unnecessarily and willfully killed, maimed, or otherwise harmed citizens now have made the "good" cops' lives more difficult. But let's remember who is to blame for this mess. Not the victims of wrongful acts, and not the citizens who protest those wrongful acts. But the original wrongdoers.