Dude, excellent thread. I love what you did here. I highly approve.
That is true but I will say that in my opinion a lot of ācop timeā wasted on the mountains of paperwork they have to do.
I trained (M.A. not as L.E.) with a few cops and while they had different opinions on what it meant to be a cop and different attitudes about their job, the one refrain I heard the most was how much they hated the time they spent on paperwork.
(Edit: One cop I knew said his job was ā1/3 policework and 2/3ās creative writingā. He said there was so much crime in some communities that most of his time would be spent driving to and from the scene of the crime and relatively almost none of it spent on actually find lawbreakers because they were so easy to spot. One guy said he got disciplined for arresting too many crackheads because they needed the room in the county jail for more serious offenders.)
Thereās got to be a way to streamline that operation. I think it could save countless dollars and leave much more time for things like training. Iām all for extra training as long as itās effective.
Start by establishing a uniform requirement for police training in the US, and shift some of the money from military-grade equipment to additional training in non-violent tactics and de-escalation?
Since the September 11 attacks, the Pentagon and the Department of Homeland Security have struck deals with local and state police departments, giving them low-cost military-grade weaponry and equipment. The proliferation of military gear has had a noticeable impact on American policing ā and the communities they operate in.
Ryan Welch and Jack Mewhirter, the authors of a 2017 study on the militarization of police found a direct correlation between the rise of militarization and more police killings.
Above quote is from American Police Training: What's Wrong and How to Fix It
Also; this seemed pretty good to me:
Whatās wrong with military-grade equipment? That term is wielded as though itās A Bad Thingā¢. Militarization of the cops, too.
Are we that far removed from thinking that we have forgotten the plight of our own troops, who are allegedly frequently under-armored and under-armed to meet their current missions? LOL, this is such a dumb argument.
Noting inherently wrong with military-grade equipment. I use loads of my stuff from the Army Reserves when I go hiking in the mountains (except anything from the uniform lol, my Goretex civilian stuff is vastly superior in that area). However, at the same time I think there needs to be an active discussion about what equipment is and isnāt appropriate for the police to use. An armored vehicle, which can both ferry cops into a live situation and injured personnel out of line of fire? Sure. Grenade throwers and tear gas/flash bangs/irritants ājust in caseā some unarmed demonstrators steps a bit too close? Nope.
Similarly, militarization of cops is not exclusively wrong, but it changes the way police view themselves, the way they view others, and how they view their job. When you have under-trained police officers who suddenly have access to super-fancy new, shiny gear which has ordinarily been used only in combat zones, youāre creating opportunities for a situation to escalate into violence and confrontation and volatility where there wasnāt any before
If you field those under-trained cops without that equipment theyād get destroyed. You may as well nor field them at all. The training and vetting process makes for bad decisions regarding fatal shootings, not the equipment.
Considering how well armed the population of the States is, Iām not surprised that military equipment trickles down.
The language youāre using is speaking to the issue being brought up in how police are meant to engage with society.
Words such as āFeildingā which alludes to a battlefield.
I donāt think policing should engage with its communities in way like a military would with a warzone.
This is perhaps the biggest problem with this discussion; itās lopsided, assuming automatically that cops are the aggressors. Why do they need armor, NVGs, armored vehicles, automatic weapons, multiple less-lethal deterrents? Itās not because they are rescuing kitties from trees.
Who is rescuing the kitties then?
1 Like
That would be the firemen. And women.
Jeebus, that canāt be her real neckā¦
The USA has a unique history and population compared to those other countries.
Simple answer, @Phrost , is that itās an apples to oranges comparison.
It like saying "Socialism works in Norway, why canāt it work like that here (USA). "
Something like thatā¦
Put two cops in a car.
Exept that gets thrown around as a massive cop out most of the time.
Anyway this is how policing is done.
1 Like
That is NOT the only or even primary use for those things, really, until the recent spate of ācivil unrestā.
On top of that, āflash bangsā are not really āmilitaryā equipment specifically. They have been used by cops for a long time for doing forced entries, hostage situations, etc.
So at least try to get your facts straight.
Oh, and āgrenade throwersā. LOL Cops are launching live frag grenades now?
Correlation does not equal causation much?
What percentage of police vs non-police killings are done with anything but a handgun?
OMG those military grade/surplus Glocksā¦
WEAPONS OF WAR
The other thing is, despite the narrative being pushed, a lot of police involved shootings are justifiable, even obviously so.
But gotta defund policeā¦
Come on, manā¦
Don Knotts was a hero. It kills me that a lot of kids today probably have no idea who he was.
Not the point I am making. What other cultures are defunding the police?
Gotta make the police better.
But you canāt because every example of better police doesnāt apply because they are from different cultures or countries.
1 Like