Then he began to talk about what he would do with the other 300 new officers. He had a long list. At the top was a greatly beefed‑up community-policing division:
The person who doesn’t answer the radio, but builds relationships in the community and is the day‑to‑day representative of the organization dealing with, you know, not urgent crime problems, but problems in a community for which police intervention could make a difference. Okay, so things like graffiti or kids hanging out in the park at night and doing stupid stuff.
Thank you. This is exactly the crux of the problem. Cops doing things that other professionals are better suited to do. That’s exactly what the poorly named Defund the Police actually means. Reallocate some of the funding to social services.
While I’m here, I want to apologize about my earlier post about the police ride alongs. It’s been bothering me. I’m curious about why you think they were such dicks to you. Every other person I have ever met has had at the very least a very informative and interesting experience. Is your church known to be super activist or something?
I do not think it meant that, some really wanted the get rid of the Police. The ACLU did say “Divest and reinvest”.
But yes, some governments do have trained mental health experts to send out to help the police with mental health calls- like the Community Responder Programs: Which sends medics, EMTs, or crisis workers (such as the pioneering CAHOOTS model in Eugene, Oregon).
Los Angeles’ has its Unarmed Model of Crisis Response.
But one proposal that has taken hold across the country, and continues to spread, is launching alternative first response units that send unarmed civilians, instead of armed officers, to some emergencies.
In Dayton, Ohio, trained mediators are dispatched to neighbor disputes and trespassing calls. In Los Angeles, outreach workers who have lived through homelessness, incarceration or addiction respond to 911 calls concerning people living on the street. In Anchorage, Alaska, trained clinicians and paramedics are showing up to mental health crises.
I think those are an excellent idea.
What i read is that his ride-alongs were boring.
A LOT of police work is boring. My ride alongs were not boring but no gun fights, nothing really exciting- which is a normal patrol.
Get back to me with this “Need more police” nonsense when the cops are called in instead of social service when 911 is dialed, their first reaction to seeing a guy holding a knife to his own throat is emptying their weapons at the poor soul while (or sometimes before) yelling “Drop it, drop it, drop it!!”, and they get reprimanded instead of praise and sympathy.
There was yet another case here in Connecticut a few years back in which a distraught man was shot four times by a state trooper after brandishing a piece of wood he had picked up in the woods.
The State’s Attorney deemed the use of deadly force by the trooper appropriate “to defend himself and others from the use of deadly physical force” from the piece of wood.
And I am wondering how to figure out why somebody does something without knowing who and perhaps where they are. Could you perhaps unvague the question a bit?
Personal decision, city regulation, state regulation, country regulation etc.
I am not going to play the “Not going to actually give any real details, but nope, that’s not it” game, so could you please give a little more detail as to who and/or what you are talking about.
I was talking about why do police still retain batons after the development of pepper spray and tasers? What does a baton do that they can’t? What is the design function of a baton?
In addition to that, deliberately taking cover is a sort of communication that someone thinks they might get shot at.
I mean, I could see the cops diving for cover being something to clue in people that whatever they’re doing is extremely threatening, without actually shooting at them.
That’s interesting. I’d be very curious what percentage of municipal budgets police take up in Europe as well. Around here in big cities, it’s usually 25% of the overall general fund budget each year., with fire departments taking nearly another 25%. And despite that, most big city police departments are chronically understaffed.
At least around here, it’s a working conditions situation. Lots of cops choose to go through the Dallas police academy, work for Dallas for a short time, then go work in the suburbs at safer, less hectic, and generally better jobs.
According to Wiki, “Police use batons as versatile tools for defense, control, and non-lethal force, allowing officers to protect themselves, manage suspects, and maintain public order. Batons serve both defensive and offensive purposes. Officers can use them to block attacks, absorb impacts, and protect themselves from punches, kicks, or weapon strikes. Offensively, batons can be used to strike, jab, or apply control techniques such as armlocks to subdue a suspect without resorting to firearms. The design of modern batons, especially side-handle models like the PR-24, allows officers to pivot the shaft for greater reach and leverage, increasing effectiveness while minimizing injury risk when used properly. Beyond striking, batons are used to control suspects during arrests. The side-handle design enables hooking or trapping an arm, and officers can use the baton to guide or restrain individuals safely. Batons also allow for transitioning between blocking, striking, and restraining, making them a flexible tool in dynamic situations”
Try doing all that with pepper spray and tazers.
On the force continum scale the baton is listed ahead of the Taser and OC (pepper spray) and behind firearm. It is NOT used to “club” people, the target area being the back of the knee and elbows.
I have seen too many cases of police brutality in the US, but honestly, “beating up a suspect with a baton when he’s no longer a risk” is an accusation I’ve only seen once. And I’ve personally never felt threatened because a police officer had a baton. This is not an area i would have thought to question.
If only because it’s harder to get away with now, as opposed to the infamous police brutality of the 1960s. As I said there now is pepper spray and tasers; or IF the officer in questions claims it was necessary, deadly force with a gun. But a suspect dragged into the station with broken teeth, black eyes, bruises and welts and a bleeding scalp is a hell of a lot harder to explain away even by police standards.
A weapon you do not intend to use needs to look dangerous. If you just want to make a statement, “I can be a danger to you” without immediately being a deadly threat, then having something that looks the part can help.
A pistol invites immediate reaction. Pepper spray doesn’t look dangerous, you can convince yourself it won’t hurt, or he won’t hit you, etc…
A huge club promises danger without being immediately deadly.
