What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Public Support Of Police - Has It Changed? (1 Viewer)

How do you think this support has changed over the last 20 years?

  • Much more support now.

    Votes: 3 5.2%

  • Some more support now.

    Votes: 3 5.2%

  • About the same as it has been.

    Votes: 23 39.7%

  • Some less support now.

    Votes: 16 27.6%

  • Much less support now.

    Votes: 13 22.4%
  • Total voters
    58
Joe Bryant

Joe Bryant

Guide
Staff member
Spinnoff from another thread.

How do you see the public's support of police?

I know it's tough to define as "police" can be such a wide range from small town officer to NYC officer. But in general, let's just assume uniformed police officer. "Public" is similar. From a wide range of demographics. 

With that said, how do you see the public's support of police? And to be clear, not YOUR support. But what you see as the public's support.

 
I think if you look at polling, public support for police is roughly at the historic average - it took a hit during the Ferguson/Baltimore years but rebounded pretty quickly. There are definitely some big racial disparities in the data, though.

 
You need to separate out how police treat minorities for this to be an accurate question, IMO.

For instance I love my local police, I thank them all the time, I'm grateful to them, I teach my children to be grateful to them and to respect them at all times.

But at the same time, I am willing to acknowledge that many police forces, particularly in high density urban areas, are known to mistreat black and hispanic youths, and there is still institutionalized racism with regard to these interactions.

These are not contradictory points.

 
timschochet said:
You need to separate out how police treat minorities for this to be an accurate question, IMO.

For instance I love my local police, I thank them all the time, I'm grateful to them, I teach my children to be grateful to them and to respect them at all times.

But at the same time, I am willing to acknowledge that many police forces, particularly in high density urban areas, are known to mistreat black and hispanic youths, and there is still institutionalized racism with regard to these interactions.

These are not contradictory points.
Click to expand...
Yeah, nobody ever likes the way the poll is setup. That's life. 

 
I think support the for the police is still the same as it has been. 

However, I do think SM/media highlights the negatives of both abuse by the police and police bashing.   Which give the perception that the public is more negative of the police and that the police are doing more abuse.  Which the facts do not show as true.   

 
Last edited by a moderator:
And yes, we all understand there are reasons why people don't like or trust police. That's a valid but different point. I'm asking here to try and gauge what people see as support for police. 

 
Joe Bryant said:
Yeah, nobody ever likes the way the poll is setup. That's life. 
Click to expand...
It wasn't meant as a big criticism. I like that you brought up the subject.

I just think it's too general, doesn't make it easy to answer.  Yes I think the public's support for police has stayed pretty strong all this time. Yes I think the public's support for police treatment of minorities has shrunk over the last 20 years. Two very different questions, IMO.

 
I’m neutral. I think they play an important role in a functioning society, but they wield a lot of power, which needs to be held in check or abuse and corruption will prevail. 

As for public support, I sense it is about the same. It may be a function of me being older, but I feel like there is a lot more rhetoric pushing us to support the police that heightened as more videos were coming out exposing police carrying out excessive violence. 

 
I think the negative publicity is affecting the support of the police, though corruption and crime in uniform is not helping their image. 

I think if everyone remembers that the police are people too, having to deal with the worst situations in society, while trying to make it home to their families, maybe we could just relax.

 
 
Everyone having a phone in their pocket has allowed more documentation of police abusing their authority. I think it is something that minority communities have known for decades, but only now are white people seeing stuff happen and starting to believe them.

 
All I know is give me more uniformed police officers and less George Zimmermans. I can't believe this guy is trying to sue the family of the kid he killed for $100 million. He has to be severely mentally ill. Sad situation.

 
The rhetoric for over the top supporting police, and troops for that matter, took a huge turn after 9/11 IMO, to the point where if you weren’t bending over backwards “showing your support”, then you weren’t a patriot. The terrorists won a victory in that way, blind patriotism isn’t fundamentally American. We started as a nation that questioned authority, the monarchy, and we lost a bit of that somehow. 

 
cap'n grunge said:
All I know is give me more uniformed police officers and less George Zimmermans. I can't believe this guy is trying to sue the family of the kid he killed for $100 million. He has to be severely mentally ill. Sad situation.
Click to expand...
He isnt only suing the family. Lots of people in there and i am not sure the amount really matters. 

When i first read this story i thought what the heck is this?!! But i looked up some old articles about the trial and i am actually at a coin flip now if he is right. 

The woman in question couldnt read her own letter during the trial. She actually said she cant read cursive. So you have a letter signed diamond eugene. You have her in his phone as diamond. And rachel jeantel testifies that diamond Eugene is actually her and she cant read the letter that she allegedly wrote? 

And she has a half sister allegedly named diamond eugene??? This is what this whole case will hinge on. If this is true and she actually does have a half sister named that, this is a slam dunk case. 

 
parasaurolophus said:
He isnt only suing the family. Lots of people in there and i am not sure the amount really matters. 

When i first read this story i thought what the heck is this?!! But i looked up some old articles about the trial and i am actually at a coin flip now if he is right. 

The woman in question couldnt read her own letter during the trial. She actually said she cant read cursive. So you have a letter signed diamond eugene. You have her in his phone as diamond. And rachel jeantel testifies that diamond Eugene is actually her and she cant read the letter that she allegedly wrote? 

And she has a half sister allegedly named diamond eugene??? This is what this whole case will hinge on. If this is true and she actually does have a half sister named that, this is a slam dunk case. 
Click to expand...
I have no idea what anyone of this is referring to. I guess I need to do some research too. Thanks.

 
jon_mx said:
It is a 'study' done by a bunch of BLM activists.  Awesome source of unbiased information.  
Click to expand...
Can you be more specific as to where the data is wrong or manipulated? You tend to do this a lot, claim something is “simply not true” without backing up your claim. This should be easy, all the data is referenced, so please explain your thoughts. 

 
Snorkelson said:
Can you be more specific as to where the data is wrong or manipulated? You tend to do this a lot, claim something is “simply not true” without backing up your claim. This should be easy, all the data is referenced, so please explain your thoughts. 
Click to expand...
I don't tend to do any such thing.  I would challenge you to find one example of where I said "simply not true" without any backup.   My statement is 100 percent factual.   If you want to put out heavily biased analysis,  that is on you.  Don't take personal and false shots at me for pointing it out. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
jon_mx said:
I don't tend to do any such thing.  I would challenge you to find one example of where I said "simply not true" without any backup.   My statement is 100 percent factual.   If you want to put out heavily biased analysis,  that is on you.  Don't take personal and false shots at me for pointing it out. 
Click to expand...
Sorry Jon perhaps I’m confusing you with another poster. Could you explain your thoughts anyway?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
@jon_mx You could be right, but I just want to know where you’re getting that. 

1. If it’s research done by BLM activists does that automatically disqualify the results as biased? 
2. Is BLM activist a blanket term here for black activist? Is don’t see any link to BLM.

3. Is there anything specific in the data he shares that you find troubling, as in misrepresented or cherry picked?

4. any sort of contradictory evidence?

 
Snorkelson said:
@jon_mx You could be right, but I just want to know where you’re getting that. 

1. If it’s research done by BLM activists does that automatically disqualify the results as biased? 
2. Is BLM activist a blanket term here for black activist? Is don’t see any link to BLM.

3. Is there anything specific in the data he shares that you find troubling, as in misrepresented or cherry picked?

4. any sort of contradictory evidence?
Click to expand...
1.  It does not disqualify it, but there are hyperbole and questionable conclusions throughout.  He does present factual data and makes good points at times.  For example, he does correct for police violence base on arrest rates, which is a good first step.  But maybe blacks are 81 percent more likely to get tased because they resist arrests at a higher rate.  Part of the disparity may in fact be because of police discrimination, but it could just be the reality of the situation.  It takes more information to prove such a conclusion.  

2.  He is a part of Campaign Zero. Which according to their wiki page was created by BLM on 2015.

3. The data is fine.  It is the conclusions and hyperbole that are questionable.  There are simply a lot more factors which need to be accounted for.

 
jon_mx said:
1.  It does not disqualify it, but there are hyperbole and questionable conclusions throughout.  He does present factual data and makes good points at times.  For example, he does correct for police violence base on arrest rates, which is a good first step.  But maybe blacks are 81 percent more likely to get tased because they resist arrests at a higher rate.  Part of the disparity may in fact be because of police discrimination, but it could just be the reality of the situation.  It takes more information to prove such a conclusion.  

2.  He is a part of Campaign Zero. Which according to their wiki page was created by BLM on 2015.

3. The data is fine.  It is the conclusions and hyperbole that are questionable.  There are simply a lot more factors which need to be accounted for.
Click to expand...
Thank you for the well thought out reply. While you “maybe” are right that there “could be” other data points at work here, the “study” has some troubling data nonetheless. 

I don’t know if you knew that about campaign zero or researched it but thanks either way. Consideration of agenda should always be applied when digesting information. 

 
Snorkelson said:
Thank you for the well thought out reply. While you “maybe” are right that there “could be” other data points at work here, the “study” has some troubling data nonetheless. 

I don’t know if you knew that about campaign zero or researched it but thanks either way. Consideration of agenda should always be applied when digesting information. 
Click to expand...
And by 'maybe', I really meant there are other data points.  There are all kinds of statistics which show much higher crime rates between races, which does not seem to be considered at all.  The data on arrests and police violence are always going to be skewed more towards those committing crimes.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
SaintsInDome2006 said:
This is a purely local issue, isn’t it? It may be even purely personal or neighborhood based within a city.
Click to expand...
Certainly local areas are different and every locality has different challenges and solutions.  Blacks/liberals/Democrats tend to be far more distrustful of police than Whites/Conservative/Republicans.  The first groups only about somewhere in the lower 40's% have confidence in the police while the second groups in the upper 60's percent do.  It is a nationwide issue.  I would not put too much weight into the data from raw numbers provided above.  But the relative numbers are useful and seeing what areas have bigger issues and what locations are being more successful.  You have to assume all reporting is equal, which is never really the case.  But it is a starting point.  Maybe San Diego is doing the worst job in California and maybe Oakland is doing somethings much better.  That is where the discussion should be without the hyperbole.  There is a serious crime problem and much of it is concentrated in heavily populated minority areas.  There is also a serious issue that police are not sensitive enough on how they are dealing with it and in some cases that approach may be unfair to certain minorities.  Police do need to discipline more police officers and not kowtow to the police unions.  But police departments throughout the country are trying and the biggest problem is not racism despite the perception.  The biggest problem is ignorance and coming up with the proper solutions without throwing divisive rhetoric around.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
cap'n grunge said:
I have no idea what anyone of this is referring to. I guess I need to do some research too. Thanks.
Click to expand...
Do a search of rachel jeantel and exclude 2019 results. Should give you plenty of articles with quoted testimony. The defense seemed to at least suspect that she didnt write that letter. I cant imagine what other motivation he would have had to have her read it.

Especially because that could have been so damning. I mean the jury seeing the girl that was allegedly on the phone with him when he died reading the letter she wrote to the mom of the boy killed??? Its an insane idea, unless you knew she didnt write it and couldnt read it. 

 
jon_mx said:
1.  It does not disqualify it, but there are hyperbole and questionable conclusions throughout.  He does present factual data and makes good points at times.  For example, he does correct for police violence base on arrest rates, which is a good first step.  But maybe blacks are 81 percent more likely to get tased because they resist arrests at a higher rate.  Part of the disparity may in fact be because of police discrimination, but it could just be the reality of the situation.  It takes more information to prove such a conclusion.  

2.  He is a part of Campaign Zero. Which according to their wiki page was created by BLM on 2015.

3. The data is fine.  It is the conclusions and hyperbole that are questionable.  There are simply a lot more factors which need to be accounted for.
Click to expand...


@Koya Campaign zero is another good example of what I was speaking about in the other thread. Not trying to argue with you or anything, just read jon's post and thought it was a fitting example. 

 
timschochet said:
You need to separate out how police treat minorities for this to be an accurate question, IMO.

For instance I love my local police, I thank them all the time, I'm grateful to them, I teach my children to be grateful to them and to respect them at all times.

But at the same time, I am willing to acknowledge that many police forces, particularly in high density urban areas, are known to mistreat black and hispanic youths, and there is still institutionalized racism with regard to these interactions.

These are not contradictory points.
Click to expand...
I don't think you necessarily do.  I think there's a general viewpoint among some, though it isn't the majority opinion, that the police don't actually care about people.  Like, at all.

Take this twitter thread:

https://twitter.com/BFriedmanDC/status/1202961963137093632?s=20

I count at least five instances of cops firing on the vehicle *with the hostage* while using occupied civilian vehicles as *human shields.* This is shocking and deplorable police work. Everyone should have their badges and guns taken away.
Click to expand...
That shootout took the lives of the hostage and a 27-year-old UPS worker who was killed in his vehicle while the police used it as a shield during a shootout.

The police were actively moving with cars trying to get out of the scene, ducking behind them and walking while engaging a suspect in a gun battle.

These things happen with some regularity and are now reported on social media and the internet in general - engaging a suspect in a gun battle in a very public area with bystanders taking fire.  

Sometimes it's the police who shoot the bystanders.

Sometimes both police and the suspect shoot bystanders.

There's a lot that is related to race in police interactions, but there's a lot that isn't.  A growing portion of the community in the country, race unimportant, believes that at least some significant portion of the police are no longer interested in "protecting and serving" anyone but themselves as a result of seeing incidents that previously would never have been heavily discussed.  Even the North Hollywood Shootout didn't receive this much exposure.

I think it's hard to argue against the number of unacceptable incidents we all see on social media these days.  And support has dropped compared to past years among people I have known, but is still high.  Hopefully most people see these as anomalies compared with the thousands and thousands of police actions per day.

 
parasaurolophus said:
@Koya Campaign zero is another good example of what I was speaking about in the other thread. Not trying to argue with you or anything, just read jon's post and thought it was a fitting example. 
Click to expand...
Not argumentative at all, I appreciate the info. 

I also believe it’s fair to say that a vast majority of community members in just about if not all neighborhoods want police presence and safety (well, the law abiding ones at least) - but the strategies, tactics, behaviors, and actions are what cause concern. I’d see your point so far as some may say that until/unless the police actually “help the community” more than they do “pose a risk” to (innocent) members of the community then perhaps its gotten to a point where some feel less or no presence is better than harassment and abuse.

to that, I’d say shame on us for blaming entire communities that live in the conditions they do in at least good part due to current and historical realities that imposed upon them as discussed beforehand in this thread (lack of education, inability to get financing, redlining, lack I’d access to jobs to get out of that situation), rather than take responsibility as a society and actually find a solution that is sustainable... to me that’s safer environments as a result of community led policing, education, access to training/employment (I think the relegations concept is utterly flawed, for example. Would rather teach a man to fish so to speak... but let’s acknowledge we’ve provided them with the crankiest fishing poles and prohibited them from fishing in any decent pond by and large for much of our history and to some degree, still today)
 

 
I live in Parkland Florida. It is not great after what happened down here in 2018. 

A lot of good people in the BSO. And Coral Springs police were admirable in their response. A clear difference in leadership between those two police forces and Governer DeSantis made the move to remove Scott Israel. Even though it is a publicly elected office. A dangerous precedence. But I don't disagree with the reason. 

My hope is support can get back to where it was pre-shooting.  It is such a thankless job in today's society.

 
I went with more respect for police, at least in my circles. And with the rise of militarization within police forces, I wonder if it doesn't end up a lighter version of fascistic or totalitarian impulses manifest.

Me, after dealing with police in an array of settings which include close family members as policemen, student observation through being a law student and the courts, and as citizen (will go unnamed), I've come to have a much, much narrower of view regarding the police that I can easily be called a primo libertarian when it comes to non-violent offenses or arson.

I think we're heading towards more acquiescence, not less, and this troubles me greatly seeing what we've seen so far from unearthed footage when they know they are being filmed. Think about that. That's crazy what they do on film, thinking it justified.

Nuts. That was a tangent. I'll stop. 

 
  I grew up I a somewhat medium type crime area.   The law abiding people respected the police, the hoodlums not so much.

 
Joe Bryant said:
And yes, we all understand there are reasons why people don't like or trust police. That's a valid but different point. I'm asking here to try and gauge what people see as support for police. 
Click to expand...
I think it’s probably about the same but with most things nowadays a vocal minority of folks can cause a lot of noise via social media and the internet - either real or fake.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

GordonGekko
Police Departments Struggle With Critical Staffing Shortages Is A Threat To National Security ( 7/19/22 22:43 PST)
2 3
Replies
100
Views
6K
Yenrub
Yenrub
GordonGekko
How NYC Bodega Clerk Jose Alba's "Self Defense" Became Political Persecution ( 7/10/22 2:12 PST)
2
Replies
97
Views
4K
parasaurolophus
parasaurolophus
GordonGekko
Oregon’s Gubernatorial Battleground: Phil Knight's Big Nike Money Vs Extremist Identity Politics (10/23/22 12:29 PST)
Replies
4
Views
970
quick-hands
quick-hands

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top