Ex-NYC Mayor Rudy Giuliani didn't much like Beyonce's politically-c...

He makes some good points. 

But I can see both sides. 

This is how bad things have become.

With the rise of the smartphone with its built-in video recording capacity, we are becoming witness to ugly police behavior. We know that on the one hand it's common, and (even police critics admit this), it's not the behavior of the typical cop. Most cops are good guys who are ready to give their lives, if necessary, to protect the public.

On the other hand, cops have become afraid to enforce the law. They avoid calls in heavily black areas. They hesitate to use lethal force when circumstances clearly call for it (some people need to be killed). Innocent cops are being assassinated by nut jobs who feel that the anti-cop climate justifies killing any cop, not just the bad apples. 

For example, in NYC a year ago, a man with a Muslim-sounding name (Ismaaiyl Brinsley) walked up to a parked police car and shot the two officers inside dead. Ironically, neither officer was white. One was Hispanic and the other Asian.

Hostility to police has reached a point where where even a 100% righteous shooting can ruin a white cop's career if the decedent is black. It can also destroy his psychological well being.

One cop has the solution: he is suing the family of the man he killed.

Is there any way out of this mess?

Views: 233

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I meant the tendency is hard wired.

IE: People generalize.

:D

Well our brains are hardwired towards xenophobic tendancies even if the distinction between whom comprises of the ingroup and outgroup is learned.

Tj, I agree with some of what you have written here. There is a human tendency to become inured to one's own wrongdoing and it is borne out historically. And human aggressors are like wolves on the kill encouraged by the sense of pack.

I think you underestimate the degree of bigotry/racism in the force.

And it is highly,  HIGHLY telling the way cops are in ghetto minority neighborhoods beating up and arresting blacks and other minorities and look the other way at affluent college campuses and throughout white suburbia where drug use is great. And it is also telling how white collar white crime is seldom prosecuted.

I think we have two overlapping, but still distinct, issues here.

One is "police brutality," "excessive force" and other sorts of misbehavior and abuse of power once the "perp" (sometimes just some schmoe who got traffic-stopped) is engaged/detained/arrested.  The cameras and other things I talked about would help with that.  That's what I figured the thread was about.

The other is whether or not the police tend to preferentially "go after" people in certain groups, out of proportion to the actual likelihood that they commit a crime. That would be what Jake is talking about, and it's a trickier question, because you need a reliable metric of statistical likelihood that an "A" will commit a crime versus a "Z" doing so, and the only ones we have (arrests, convictions) are the very things being called into question.  If it truly is the case that A is twenty percent of the population, but that twenty percent commits eighty percent of the crime, it is NOT a sign of institutional racism if eighty percent of arrests, convictions, and prison populations are A.  On the other hand, I think it's silly to expect that if A is twenty percent of the population it will turn out they commit 20 percent of the crimes, exactly, and that any other determined result should be ignored because it's really an indication of someone's racism.  The difference is likely due to a different factor at play, possibly a difference in subculture.

Unfortunately, a camera only detects what it sees.  Cop goes into an A neighborhood because that's where all the "scum" live, and has an issue, handles it professionally, all is good.  The camera WON'T see the problem he did not handle in the Z neighborhood, because he didn't go there, because "those upstanding people don't cause problems."

The other is whether or not the police tend to preferentially "go after" people in certain groups, out of proportion to the actual likelihood that they commit a crime.

Not what i was getting at, no. Rather it is the differential police brutality, arrests and prosecution of blacks and minorities relative to all other groups. And is there anybody who doubts cops already perceive blacks as villains? Is there any doubt that the judicial system is prejudicial to blacks and minorities and is a facet of the institutional racism confronting us all?

I think the situaion aerican cops find themselves in is largely one of their own, and politicians own making.

A few observations frm outside he US.
1. America as a whole has an authoritarian stick up its collective ass. For america authority must be IMPOSED and any challange to to this is the green light for the use of (often lethal ) force.
2. No where is this demand for the respect of authority more evident than in your police departments, sanctioned tacitly or less tacitly by the layers above.
3. America dos not appear to have enough of a fire break between Police Departments and prosecutors. I wonder if the political nature of prosecutors is part of the problem, open to comment. If a suspect runs it challenges police authority on a personal level in the US, why ? Running suspects here are chased only when it is safe to do so for suspect, public, police (note the order there). Running is NOT justification for summary execution by cop, that is simply murder.
4. Why are police department guidelines taken as the gold measure of cop actions ? The gold measure are the courts, being a cop should NOT make you special, immune from normal laws citizens have to observe.
5. Poor cop education: in much of Europe cops are expected to enter the police with a degree, or work for one whilst in service. Study after study here has shown that better educated cops make for less violent and vindictive cops.
6. All over Europe and Scandinavia police are able to disarm blade armed people without killing them. I once saw a petite female Dutch officer (actually she was really hot !) disarm a machete armed man of some 1.9meters alone with just her extandable baton, no one was killed or even had a broken bone. What I do notice is Dutch, German and English cops backing away from suspects while containing them, are amerians cops brans so neanderthal that walking backwards seems to be a skill beyond them ?
7. cops as tax collectors: no police department should act as a revenue collector for municipalities, its leads to unecessary citizen v police confrontation. Too many US municipalities are smply not economically viable and so resort to taxation via cop. We learnt years ago this is very corrupting, both to municipalities and cops as well as corrosive to relations, especially in the poor end of society.
8. Why are cops not drug tested,including for steroids with dismisal for those found using?
9. Make cops carry third party insurance like we they do here, it really focuses their minds to find noncombative solutions.

Some things about american police are products of America's militarised society that overly glorifies uniforms. No one is forced to be a cop, no one can join a polce force in ignorance of how challenging the job can be but if they find it too hard or that their feelings are being hurt by critisism they can always leave. Cops need to understand that THEY are citizens, not super-citizens and as such they are not "entitled" to spcial treatment. Being a cop requires that you be better than many, and that includes turning the other cheek more readily - if you are too arrogant or too stupid to grasp this then you need to go.

As to this whole "most ae good cops" rubbish........... There are very bad cops, there are bad cops, those being any who turn away when fellow officers commit atrocities and remain silent. Once you deduct all those who do nothing I wonder just how many "good cops" there are.

Well that was longer than i thought it would be.
Regards,
Judith vd R.
The cops in New Mexico are just as corrupt as they always were. Some good, some bad. It never makes national news because we are used to it and almost numb to it. The only people bitching about it are in the south. The only way out of that mess is to address the economic dispairity, the racial divide among schools (it very much still exists. Don't believe me just ask Jonathan Kozol) and to address the drug/mental illness, and the alarming rates of African American single mother households and all that comes with that (not to mention the high rates of African American men being incarcerated).

The problem isn't the cops. It is the society. If the societal problems are ignored as they have been, nothing is going to change.

Should police be protectors or warriors? When are the rare times when police should act like warriors? Do you have the feeling that your local police demonstrate the behavior of a protector or of a warrior?

An elementary quick analysis of crime statistics (taking into account percentage of population, severity of crime, etc) will show black people face police with less restrain, are more likely to be arrested, prosecuted and jailed than white people (we are comparing like crimes with like crimes). That means each arrest isn't about race ... but the lack of restraint and quick escalation of a situation can be boiled down to race.

For those who deny this (and I invite you to spend five minutes of your free time looking up these statistics and comparing them any any American city) just what kind of evidence would you need before you accept the possibility that black people (who have clearly committed crimes) receive harsher and more aggressive response and punishment. Would the statistics have to show a 100% higher incarceration rate or 500% before it becomes a significant number?

It's not different in Europe. Minorities (taking into account demography and seriousness of the crime) get arrested more, prosecuted and punished more. I don't know the statistics of Australia  but I'd bet $1000 it is the same.

For those who deny this (and I invite you to spend five minutes of your free time looking up these statistics and comparing them any any American city) just what kind of evidence would you need before you accept the possibility that black people (who have clearly committed crimes) receive harsher and more aggressive response and punishment. Would the statistics have to show a 100% higher incarceration rate or 500% before it becomes a significant number?

I take it you mean, Joe White, duly convicted of (say) a drug offense, gets penalty X, while Joe Black, convicted of the same offense, gets penalty X*5?

Oh, there's no doubt.  And I think that even if they were both the same race, there would be disparities for other reasons.  Judges have a tendency to be less hardassed on people they perceive to be upstanding members of society.  Show up to traffic court in a suit, and the judge will be willing to at the very least order an inconvenient aspect of paying the fine suspended so you can go back to your important job more quickly (he won't suspend the fine, but he'll cut through red tape).  Show up in a ratty t-shirt and jeans, and he won't.  (Ironically, the latter person is more likely to lose his job because of the time he had to take off to deal with the situation.)

I'm sure judges in other countries do the same thing, by the way...it's just that in, say Canada or Western Europe, there's less likely to be a visible racial difference thrown into the mix.  "That good-for-nothing" is going to get treated harder for peeing in the alleyway at 2AM than "the respectable guy."

RSS

© 2018   Created by Rebel.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service