A Deeply Fractured US

[Infanteer]

They're probably fine with it as they likely employ armed neighbourhood guards!  :Tin-Foil-Hat:

 

[dapaterson]

Camden successfully disbanded their Police Department.

https://www.citylab.com/equity/2018/01/what-happened-to-crime-in-camden/549542/

 

[Ironman118]

Camden successfully disbanded their Police Department.

https://www.citylab.com/equity/2018/01/what-happened-to-crime-in-camden/549542/

What they describe in the article is what Canadian police services already do - community policing.

From the article -

“For us to make the neighborhood look and feel the way everyone wanted it to, it wasn’t going to be achieved by having a police officer with a helmet and a shotgun standing on a corner,” Thomson said. Now, he wants his officers “to identify more with being in the Peace Corps than being in the Special Forces.”

Very specific example...I wonder if they had guys with helmets and shotguns on random street corners before? If thats the case then yeah, makes sense to me.. sounds like needed to switch out the senior brass instead of the entire department

 

[mariomike]

We have a specialized unit that combines an officer with a mental health worker (not in service now due to COVID-19)

We don't have that luxury.

 

[Ironman118]

We don't have that luxury.

Mhm. Tell me about it..the brass is already getting dumped on for participating in the blm march during the COVID-19 crisis. Some view it as hypocritical. My life hasnt changed since this started, havent missed a work day..only difference is I get to wear a mask every now and then.

 

[Remius]

Perhaps you are a dispassionate observer. Your previous posts on this topic did not lead me to think that, you have been quite emphatic in your opinion. Describing potential outcomes in Minneapolis as "Interesting" is not likely the reaction that the majority of residents of the city will have to defunding police. I am watching the "de-funding" movement as the latest cause celebre. I would have a similar reaction should a proposal be brought forward in Ottawa. (not that close to Minneapolis).

Does that answer your question?

Which ones exactly would have lead you to think that?  The posts I mean.  I%u2019m curious.  Someone posted the experience before hand as well as doing away with unions.  I thought some of those would be interesting.

Why would the potential disbanding and reformation of the Minneapolis PD not be an interesting topic?

I will say, that I don%u2019t know why police act as social workers when other ressources could be thrown that way, or traffic control or arresting drug addicts (I see that as a medical issue)  or any other job that might be better handle by other officials.

Minneapolis has a problem.  It clearly needs fixing.  That does not mean abolishing the police outright but it may take that to reform it.


Edit:  I always find it disconcerting when people question certain words like %u201Cinteresting%u201D or %u201Cfunny%u201D when they are actually used in the right context.  English isn%u2019t my first language but I find some people who do have English as their first language that question the use of certain words don%u2019t quite get the meaning...

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/interesting

So yes it will be interesting to see how it goes one way or another.

 

[mariomike]

Mhm. Tell me about it..the brass is already getting dumped on for participating in the blm march during the COVID-19 crisis. Some view it as hypocritical. My life hasnt changed since this started, havent missed a work day..only difference is I get to wear a mask every now and then.

I just know what I see on TV and read on here from the comfort and safety of my home. 

Stay safe! 

 

[Weinie]

You know I had that thought at first and then I started reading up about what "defunding the police" really means. Admittedly it means different things to different people but at its heart it does not include doing away with policing but rather replacing POLICING and much of the prison system with a Department of Public Safety which has a larger range of disciplines available to deal with non-crime social issues that the police all too often get involved in. Police and prisons continue to exist to deal with violent crime and investigations but at a reduced level freeing funds to provide more specialized resources available to take care of issues that don't need a heavy hand.

Much of the idea comes from this book: The End of Policing by Alex Vitale

There are obviously a lot of questions about how such a model would work. For me the idea is interesting and deserving of serious discussion.

In fact, since I have a dog-whistle issue of my own, it made me think about forming a movement to "Defund the Regular Force" and rebuild the DND/CAF structure from scratch.

;D

FJAG,

Am well aware of the origins of the movement, and have read up on it.

With four kids 13 to 3, don't normally have the time to fully explain how my opinions are formed, but after they all go to bed, I do some research.

The central premise of his book is that" This book attempts to spark public discussion by revealing the tainted origins of modern policing as a tool of social control.

Go onto the latest youtube video. He explains in one part that the origin of police in the US was to maintain control over slavery. The origin of the "bobbies' was to save the capitalist system in the UK.

He is a professor of sociology and the coordinator of the Policing and Social Justice Project at Brooklyn College I don't know any sociologist's personally, I do know that he had a well filled lecture program across the country.

And what was the origin of sociology. A good discussion is at the link below:

https://www.jstor.org/stable/27821690?seq=1

So, interesting.....OK. Worthy of serious discussion? Nope.

 

[Ironman118]

I will say, that I don’t know why police act as social workers when other ressources could be thrown that way, or traffic control or arresting drug addicts (I see that as a medical issue)  or any other job that might be better handle by other officials.

What exactly do you mean by this?

 

[Brad Sallows]

House and Senate Democrats have a bill in the works, described here in NYT.  Looks very promising, nothing that would be objectionable to most conservatives and reflects what libertarians have long promoted.  I doubt the problematic municipalities and forces are going to be able to simply let this blow over.

- reduce "federal police misconduct statute [which] currently makes it a crime for an officer to “willfully” violate an individuals’s constitutional rights, meaning prosecutors must prove an officer acted with the intention of depriving the person of their rights. Democrats plan to propose lowering that standard of criminal intent to “knowingly or with reckless disregard.”"

- "alter the legal doctrine known as qualified immunity"

- "change the federal standard for the use of force by officers from “reasonableness” to only when it is “necessary to prevent death or serious bodily injury.” " [I assume that's not literally correct and that force may be used to effect arrest or prevent non-serious bodily injury]

- "In federal drug cases ... banning “no knock” warrants"

- "ban chokeholds or other carotid holds, and condition law enforcement funds on states and other agencies doing the same."

- "limit the transfer of military weaponry to state and local departments."

- "new power to Justice Department investigators conducting inquiries into patterns or practices of behavior by police departments that violate the Constitution"

- "require all uniformed federal officers to wear body cameras and use dashboard cameras ... and they would mandate that state and local agencies use federal funds to “ensure” their use."

- "conditioning federal funding on the adoption of policies and training to combat racial and other discriminatory profiling."

- "impose new requirements on the Justice Department to assemble and promulgate new policing standards for state and local agencies and collect reams of data on police actions all over the country"

- "make lynching a new federal hate crime"

 

[Brad Sallows]

For those interested in Camden, NJ, a short post at Marginal Revolution with links to more info.

 

[Remius]

What exactly do you mean by this?

It means that there are some tasks that could be handled by someone else.  Trained social workers or by law etc.  So police can focus on policing and crime.

Does a homeless guy sleeping on private property need a police response?  Or would a public health official be able to do that?

 

[FJAG]

So, interesting.....OK. Worthy of serious discussion? Nope.

So ... if that's off the table I guess that only leaves us with this option:

:cheers:

 

[Ironman118]

It means that there are some tasks that could be handled by someone else.  Trained social workers or by law etc.  So police can focus on policing and crime.

Does a homeless guy sleeping on private property need a police response?  Or would a public health official be able to do that?

Dealing with the homeless IS policing. I feel like your view of Police is pretty black and white - and does a disservice to the officers who will take that homeless individual (who they have established a rapport with over the years of interacting with them) and get them a coffee and some food. It isnt just showing up, kicking them out and back in service.

A lot of the homeless we deal with have mental health issues..introducing by-law or civillians to people who, by nature, dont trust anyone is a horrible idea..and again, will lead to injury and possible fatalities.

I'm not outright saying your ideas or opinions are wrong, however they ARE uneducated. I urge you to look up what community policing is and then realize that this is the model used across Canada.

 

[Jarnhamar]

[quote author=Remius]
Does a homeless guy sleeping on private property need a police response?  Or would a public health official be able to do that?
[/quote]

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/nypost.com/2020/05/18/homeless-man-attacks-couple-with-machete-in-fit-over-lockdowns/amp/

Homeless doesn't mean harmless. Addictions, mental health, I'd air on the side of caution myself.

 

[mariomike]

Does a homeless guy sleeping on private property need a police response?  Or would a public health official be able to do that?

They can't transport. The call originator just wants them gone.

 

[blacktriangle]

So ... if that's off the table I guess that only leaves us with this option:

:cheers:

I'd rather have Robocop than a SJW version of Judge Dredd.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Some of the people advocating "handover" seem to have set aside consideration of the reasons the police were handed the responsibility in the first place.  Marginalization doesn't make a person peaceable and noble.

 

[Weinie]

It means that there are some tasks that could be handled by someone else.  Trained social workers or by law etc.  So police can focus on policing and crime.

Does a homeless guy sleeping on private property need a police response?  Or would a public health official be able to do that?

You are conflating apples, oranges, and elephants here. Anti-black racism is a huge problem, and likely does contribute to homelessness. But it is by no means the only contributor.

OK. So public health official becomes a 24/7 on-scene responder. Much more training needed, including the ability to make an immediate Mental Health assessment, an addictions assessment, or just a dumbass drunk sleeping it off. Now, mental health pros, and addictions pros, need to be available as well, 24/7, to properly assess the individual and respond to their needs. May still require police backup. Plus, there are then the facilities needed to deal with the "guy(s)' on the park bench.

Way bigger problem than this thread was originally set up to discuss.

 

[Remius]

Dealing with the homeless IS policing. I feel like your view of Police is pretty black and white - and does a disservice to the officers who will take that homeless individual (who they have established a rapport with over the years of interacting with them) and get them a coffee and some food. It isnt just showing up, kicking them out and back in service.

A lot of the homeless we deal with have mental health issues..introducing by-law or civillians to people who, by nature, dont trust anyone is a horrible idea..and again, will lead to injury and possible fatalities.

I'm not outright saying your ideas or opinions are wrong, however they ARE uneducated. I urge you to look up what community policing is and then realize that this is the model used across Canada.

I know what community policing is and am all for it.  Is that happening in every justification though?  They did away with it here where I live years ago for reasons and started bringing it back and so far there are good results.  But it’s only been maybe a year or so, 

As for Minneapolis, has the public trust been irrevocably destroyed?  If yes, then something drastic needs to happen to fix it because what they are doing there isn’t working.

I’ll defer to your expertise though and leave it at that.