View Full Version : What is the endgame for the all the nonsense going on?
The only resolution I can see coming out of this is not new laws, since we already have equal rights on the books.
Reparations is out of the question.
I see the call to the ending of Police Unions. These are a Blue shield that protect bad officers. Bad conduct by an officer should be grounds for immediate termination. Police unions have set up systems to make sure bad officers are kept on the force until something really bad happens. The officer that killed Floyd was a beneficiary of that system and allowed to remain on the force well past what should be allowed.
2nd, a public system to report officers for abuse and a community review board setup to review and issue any disciplinary actions including termination. Not Internal Affairs. These boards should be elected by the community and should have short single terms. 2 years? Reviews would also include any use of force resulting in injury or death. All reviews and board meeting open to the public, nothing behind closed doors.
3rd, Training, training, training.
BPTactical
06-02-2020, 10:06
https://youtu.be/keP4MBI1taY
Training doesn't work; it's hit or miss and there's no standard. We see the same thing in the military with pet projects like EO, Sexual Harrassment, etc. Powerpoint is simply not a replacement for not hiring f**king mongloid retards with power tripping personality tendencies.
Body cams don't actually work, either. This is counter-intuitive, but the research backs it up. Similar to red light cameras (though those tend to increase accidents, rather than prevent them).
Police unions ARE a problem (just like teacher's unions, and well, most unions). I don't think this needs much explanation.
What works is the demilitarization of the police, DOJ investigations, and restrictive use of force policies.
Here's a twitter thread with backing data:
https://twitter.com/samswey/status/1180655701271732224
A civilian review board with teeth and independence is a no-brainer, beyond that I think you need to take steps to make being a cop an attractive job. Inherent in the job are shitty hours, potential danger, and exposure to conflict on a prolonged basis. To top this off, you have low pay (generally, there are some exceptions) and the main benefit, a pension, is becoming a much harder thing to find. With all that, to say nothing of the current climate of distrust of cops due to continued videotaped atrocities and fuck-ups, the people you'd want as cops aren't applying in the numbers you'd want. Instead, you're getting a lot more people who don't have skills/qualities/education that would let them earn more than they could as a cop, people who want a turn-key lifestyle (these are the guys with the thin blue line sticker on everything, oakleys constantly on, who just can't talk about anything unrelated to being a cop), and yes, the stereotypical blue punisher skull powertripper that is too common.
I think you'd have to increase pay significantly, do things like more common rotations on/off of night shifts (for sleep reasons I think you'd have to still do a few months on/off at a time) so people can both maintain their friendships/relationships with people outside of the public safety shift work groups and so that they could get a more holistic view of the community they're working in, and maybe even little things like discouraging military/tactical sunglasses, haircuts, watches, whatever to help avoid people creating the "us" in the us vs them mentality in the first place.
Beyond that, as I briefly mentioned, I think you'd absolutely need a powerful civilian review board on the federal level. I've heard an idea tossed around that in addition to use of force investigations, all police officers would have to obtain their credentials through this organization, and would be subject to revocation of the credentials by this federal body to avoid state and local authorities ignoring problem officers or sweeping complains under the rug.
Zundfolge
06-02-2020, 11:24
The goal is to cause chaos in an election year when the incumbent President is a Republican.
This is about undermining Republican politicians and replacing them with Democrats, that's really all it is.
.455_Hunter
06-02-2020, 11:45
The goal is to cause chaos in an election year when the incumbent President is a Republican.
This is about undermining Republican politicians and replacing them with Democrats, that's really all it is.
+1000
Can you imagine the media narrative if hostile crowds were similarly laying siege to an Obama White House?
hurley842002
06-02-2020, 11:45
A civilian review board with teeth and independence is a no-brainer, beyond that I think you need to take steps to make being a cop an attractive job. Inherent in the job are shitty hours, potential danger, and exposure to conflict on a prolonged basis. To top this off, you have low pay (generally, there are some exceptions) and the main benefit, a pension, is becoming a much harder thing to find. With all that, to say nothing of the current climate of distrust of cops due to continued videotaped atrocities and fuck-ups, the people you'd want as cops aren't applying in the numbers you'd want. Instead, you're getting a lot more people who don't have skills/qualities/education that would let them earn more than they could as a cop, people who want a turn-key lifestyle (these are the guys with the thin blue line sticker on everything, oakleys constantly on, who just can't talk about anything unrelated to being a cop), and yes, the stereotypical blue punisher skull powertripper that is too common.
I think you'd have to increase pay significantly, do things like more common rotations on/off of night shifts (for sleep reasons I think you'd have to still do a few months on/off at a time) so people can both maintain their friendships/relationships with people outside of the public safety shift work groups and so that they could get a more holistic view of the community they're working in, and maybe even little things like discouraging military/tactical sunglasses, haircuts, watches, whatever to help avoid people creating the "us" in the us vs them mentality in the first place.
Beyond that, as I briefly mentioned, I think you'd absolutely need a powerful civilian review board on the federal level. I've heard an idea tossed around that in addition to use of force investigations, all police officers would have to obtain their credentials through this organization, and would be subject to revocation of the credentials by this federal body to avoid state and local authorities ignoring problem officers or sweeping complains under the rug.
I agree with most of your post, except the part about hiring people who don't have "education", circa 2013/2014 that is ALL most of the Denver metro PD/SD would hire, you either had to have education (didn't even have to be relevant), or you had to be a lateral. This attracted all sorts of unqualified individuals with no clue what they were doing, all they saw was a good paycheck, they didn't have real world skills, and IMO is what has led to all the skittish, trigger happy individuals we see to this day. Again, this is just my opinion and my experience in the past.
As to the Oakley/thin blue line thing, you will be hard pressed to find anyone in the LE community that doesn't wear Oakleys, and many of them have thin blue line stickers/apparel, they are proud of what they do, it's no different than [insert military branch here], stickers, shirts, license plates, etc.
Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk
Aloha_Shooter
06-02-2020, 11:46
Whose endgame? Endgame for the Left is to energize their base for the November elections, just as they did after Officer Wilson defended himself against Michael Brown. I'm sure they were hoping something would pop up this summer so they weren't as transparent with the timing of "protest" movements as they were with the Occupy Wall Street muck. In this case, they lucked out by having an incident they don't need to lie about the way they did with Brown.
Endgame for the nation? I have no idea except that it won't be good in the long run.
It feels like Jiu jitsu, or some equivalent, training should be a requirement for all officers. When you have the knowledge to safely restrain someone, there is less shit like just straight up choking to subdue.
I agree with most of your post, except the part about hiring people who don't have "education", circa 2013/2014 that is ALL most of the Denver metro PD/SD would hire, you either had to have education (didn't even have to be relevant), or you had to be a lateral. This attracted all sorts of unqualified individuals with no clue what they were doing, all they saw was a good paycheck, they didn't have real world skills, and IMO is what has led to all the skittish, trigger happy individuals we see to this day. Again, this is just my opinion and my experience in the past.
As to the Oakley/thin blue line thing, you will be hard pressed to find anyone in the LE community that doesn't wear Oakleys, and many of them have thin blue line stickers/apparel, they are proud of what they do, it's no different than [insert military branch here], stickers, shirts, license plates, etc.
Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk
When I was looking into it (2014-15) with a couple of departments out here it was generally four year degree or military, plus of course laterals. At the time it skewed more towards military service though there were a bunch of people with degrees that I interacted with.
I'm actually more in favor of getting people that view it as a paycheck rather than a way of life, but it has to be a good paycheck. The Denver metro's average police salary is somewhere around $60k, which isn't too bad, though you're definitely going to be feeling the squeeze if you're single income with our current cost of living.
That's not the case everywhere, I know an Atlanta cop making $44k/yr, and we knew a family friend making 16/hr as a cop elsewhere in the southeast, and heard similar stories outside of the large cities. Those are just comically low, and you get what you pay for. To top it off, even the higher end mid-career salaries of Denver metro salaries aren't what you need to attract and retain top talent. Not everywhere is like this of course, and some state and a lot of federal agencies realize this and are paying accordingly. I've gotten to interact with a number of IRS Special Agents, for example, and they are well paid, sharp, and exceedingly professional, as you'd expect out of someone making a similar salary in the corporate world. Granted, those aren't patrol positions, but we should still expect that if we want the same qualities the rest of the job market wants like intelligence, attention to detail, integrity, patience, and people skills, we have to pay for them.
Trigger Time 23
06-02-2020, 13:00
It feels like Jiu jitsu, or some equivalent, training should be a requirement for all officers. When you have the knowledge to safely restrain someone, there is less shit like just straight up choking to subdue.
I train Jiu Jitsu. There are a police at the academy I go to. They all agree more training would help, but Jiu Jitsu is significant time and $ commitment. It can also be very humbling (which some guys won't like). It would be great if more police did, but it needs to be required by the department and funded or I don't think it will happen. The little training they do get does not compare in quality/quantity to what we get. Hopefully this gets figured out.
It feels like Jiu jitsu, or some equivalent, training should be a requirement for all officers. When you have the knowledge to safely restrain someone, there is less shit like just straight up choking to subdue.
Depends on which dept.
Some do Koga, Akido/hapkido, judo, even ppct for restrain.
I know a guy who accidently broke a subject's wrist with basic simple ppct.
Depends on which dept.
Some do Koga, Akido/hapkido, judo, even ppct for restrain.
I know a guy who accidently broke a subject's wrist with basic simple ppct.
Yep, but that dude isn't dead.
Probably also should be looking at revising use of force/arrest requirements in addition to safer physical methods. I don't think society would crumble if NYPD gave Garner a ticket and moved on for selling loosies, once you go hands on shit will always have the potential to go truly bad, should at least make sure the reason for it is something worth the risk.
Aloha_Shooter
06-02-2020, 13:31
NYPD had given Garner tickets in the past. At some point, you have to take more action against repeat offenders than handing out tickets that they have shown they will ignore. The biggest problem (IMO) with that situation was NYC's draconian tax policies that made Garner's reselling of "loosies" a criminal offense.
At some point, enforcement officers will run into recalcitrant people and this invariably provides an opportunity for bad optics. Look at what happened to United with the whole Dr. Dao situation a couple years ago. If you really look at the video, the officers who came on the aircraft moved deliberately to lift him out of the seat when he refused to get out. Discussion about whether the airline should have deboarded him involuntarily is a whole other lengthy topic but it appeared to me like all of his injuries from that point forward were essentially self-inflicted as he went wild in resisting their lift. Nonetheless, United got a black eye and ended up paying him millions in compensation, CPD took a lot of criticism until they deflected to the Airport Police, etc.
Bottom line for any enforcement personnel is that they will always have to think about what they are doing being broadcast on MSNBC or ABC or some nutter channel on YouTube. It's similar to Patton's complaint at the end of WW2, being effective is no longer good enough.
It feels like Jiu jitsu, or some equivalent, training should be a requirement for all officers. When you have the knowledge to safely restrain someone, there is less shit like just straight up choking to subdue.
The thing is, he was already subdued. Get the hell off of him. Hogtie him and carry him to a car if you have to.
hurley842002
06-02-2020, 13:46
When I was looking into it (2014-15) with a couple of departments out here it was generally four year degree or military, plus of course laterals. At the time it skewed more towards military service though there were a bunch of people with degrees that I interacted with.
I'm actually more in favor of getting people that view it as a paycheck rather than a way of life, but it has to be a good paycheck. The Denver metro's average police salary is somewhere around $60k, which isn't too bad, though you're definitely going to be feeling the squeeze if you're single income with our current cost of living.
That's not the case everywhere, I know an Atlanta cop making $44k/yr, and we knew a family friend making 16/hr as a cop elsewhere in the southeast, and heard similar stories outside of the large cities. Those are just comically low, and you get what you pay for. To top it off, even the higher end mid-career salaries of Denver metro salaries aren't what you need to attract and retain top talent. Not everywhere is like this of course, and some state and a lot of federal agencies realize this and are paying accordingly. I've gotten to interact with a number of IRS Special Agents, for example, and they are well paid, sharp, and exceedingly professional, as you'd expect out of someone making a similar salary in the corporate world. Granted, those aren't patrol positions, but we should still expect that if we want the same qualities the rest of the job market wants like intelligence, attention to detail, integrity, patience, and people skills, we have to pay for them.I forgot to include military as well, you are correct, that was also my experience. I certainly agree with your outlook on pay and the need to attract the right candidates. I think much of it starts with your resume, what have you done in the past that proves you are capable handling yourself when SHTF. Military is certainly a good indicator of worthiness. When I began pursuing LE back in 05 another great way to "get your foot in the door" was correctional experience, if you can keep your cool in that environment, it is a good indicator of performance elsewhere. Education really doesn't tell me a whole lot about you as it pertains to practical experience, and some of the best folks I've worked with, have either been Military, or have years of correctional experience. Not to downplay folks with Education, but I haven't seen a ton of excellent officers with education as their sole ticket to an LE career.
Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk
I feel like work experience outside of government, and especially LE should be required. Officers need to have experienced life as an adult outside of the scope of the police. Way too easy to program people into us vs them mentality.
Dealing with the dregs of society on a dailly basis is certainly not an attractive and uplifting work experience. Especially in this day of dealing with 'frequent flyers' every day screwing things up for everybody else.
There are those that are attracted to police work and truly want to serve and help other people. They're doing it for the right reasons.
Then there are those that want power over other people, and they're in it for the wrong reasons.
I'm just grateful that the law enforcement career path didn't work out for me and I got into IT instead.
hurley842002
06-02-2020, 14:16
I feel like work experience outside of government, and especially LE should be required. Officers need to have experienced life as an adult outside of the scope of the police. Way too easy to program people into us vs them mentality.I can't disagree with this, and ideally applicants would have a well rounded resume with a plethora of attributes (management/supervisor experience being a bonus). I started working in a prison at the age of 21, but I had also been working consistently since the age of 13 (paper route), with customer service experience, as well as hard labor jobs leading up to 21.
Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk
Great-Kazoo
06-02-2020, 14:24
It feels like Jiu jitsu, or some equivalent, training should be a requirement for all officers. When you have the knowledge to safely restrain someone, there is less shit like just straight up choking to subdue.
If it's 1 on 1 and that 1 isn't doped up.
the 128 in harlem around say 1983ish. Guy's handcuffed, arrested for the usual suspects stuff besides being under the influence and possession of unknown substance (possibly angel dust) and syringe.
He's semi lucid when arrested, when they get to the station house he's going off the rails, seeing this, imagining that. Go to fingerprint him, big mistake imo.
He breaks the hold of 1 cop swings and connects, down goes cop #1. #2 grabs the now highly agitated suspect, bam! they're down on the ground. Suspect breaks free and manages to stand. In come 2-3 more cops, night stick to knees takes him down, yet he has no clue he' sustained a major injury to the knee area.
Wobbles to his feet swinging at any and every thing. 2nd night stick drops him again.
Bam he's back up with no regard for injuries. Took 1/2 doz + cops to literally tackle him, like a defensive line.
So no matter how trained and versed you are in any non lethal form. It sometimes takes a village to stop a single threat. The higher they are ( be it drugs or alcohol) the more unpredictable the situation becomes. AND yes sometimes, no matter how much armchair QB'ing one does. Unless you're there, you'll never know why one did what they did, at that time.
Especially from a biased media. Perfect example is the st swisher, hands up, don't shoot, shit that is still believed today.
Bailey Guns
06-02-2020, 14:25
Every time someone tells me they want to get into law enforcement I tell them to be a firefighter instead.
Bailey Guns
06-02-2020, 14:29
If you've never been in a knock-down drag-out fight with someone that's under the influence of something it's hard to understand how all the fancy training you get in the academy and on in-service days goes out the window almost immediately. It's also easy to look at the after-the-fact description of an incident that takes multiple officers to subdue one person and wonder why it took so many.
I'm talking a little out of school here, but when your training goes out the window at first contact, you don't have enough training.
That people do drugs is not any kind of argument. So what? People do drugs so don't have training?
When an asshole in another job (say an engineer) goes rogue and tries to choke out someone from accounting...
Do we say all engineers need more training? All engineers need anger management classes?
When you consider how many people are employed as law enforcement officers, I'm surprise the statistical incidence of manslaughter isn't higher to be honest. That doesn't make it right AT ALL, but law enforcement/military/etc. are all still comprised of people, and not surprisingly, just like all other segments of people, when you have enough people, some percentage are violent, or have anger issues, others are unnecessarily "twitchy", others have ego issues, etc., and "training" doesn't make that segment of the population vanish, nor does their pretend-psychological analysis even begin to remotely filter those people out, being as much security theater as a lie-detector test. I think we all know legitimate stories of select US Service Members also doing abhorrent things, that doesn't mean we can "train" it away from the US Armed Forces.
Presently, I have not seen any pragmatic suggestion for a resolution that will actually help all the underlying issues. I'm not sure there is one.
Since humans are involved, there's bad apples in every bunch. Doesn't matter if it's clergy. There are some that will abuse their position.
Painting with such a broad brush that those bad apples define the entire bunch is something the media loves to do. The same can be applied to some criminal with a gun and then all lawful gun owners are defined like the criminal. We know how that feels.
Bah, what do I know. I'm afflicted with white privilege.
ETA: Spelling correction and improved clarity.
I'm talking a little out of school here, but when your training goes out the window at first contact, you don't have enough training.
I know someone who participated in a study at Quantio, where they spent over 20 hours in training trying to teach a new fighting style while under heavy analysis both before, at all stages, and after. All subjects were generally already skilled in some level of hand-to-hand. They were tested by back-to-back legitimate fights until the point of exhaustion.
The net analysis from the report is that 20 hours training in a hand to hand technique didn't do a damn bit of good. People don't have enough time to make cognizant decisions during a fight (e.g. recall training), they react instinctively and quickly if they have a chance of getting an upper hand. Now for a select few, they've trained in something SO MUCH that it becomes instinctively. The guy that did Canadian HL for a decade was constantly trying to bash people in the head. The Asian martial arts guy that did weekly sessions for 15 years largely did martial arts (not what he was supposed to). People that think you can send your wife to a weekend class or send an officer to a week of ju-jitsu sessions.... it's not going to do anything other than inspire confidence. They'll still largely fight the way they're instinctively inclined to, and it requires substantial dedication to have a practical effect.
Great-Kazoo
06-02-2020, 15:07
I'm talking a little out of school here, but when your training goes out the window at first contact, you don't have enough training.
That people do drugs is not any kind of argument. So what? People do drugs so don't have training?
sorry but i'm calling B.S on this one. You're missing the point. I don't care how much training you have. One person under the influence who's brain is not registering will never know they're injured.
Hell there's numerous stories on line of people who have been shot multiple times. Either walking, or driving, them self to the hospital.
You ever go toe-toe with someone after all other avenues have been exhausted? They rarely go down with 1-2 punches and that's sober.
I don't think you understand what Jiu jitsu is Kazoo.
Fox, who is taking about a weekend class? 20 hours is nothing. That's what, a weeks worth of training?
You can get everything you want in the above posts, and quite possibly will. The result will be you get a college educated 35+ year old who didn?t stick with their first career choice to politely take your statement and photograph your injuries. The only arrests that will be made are going to be the suspects who for one reason or another were incapacitated before the officer arrived, or voluntarily submitted to arrest. I guess you could just stop arresting people and switch to a ticket based justice system. Thing is, I?ve heard stories about people who won?t sign tickets or even identify themselves. I?m sure someone will figure out how to deal with those cases.
A few side effects I can see arising pretty quickly: You?re going to have to double the size of most departments to deal with the level of training you want and still be able to staff the streets. You will also have to significantly increase the training budget as you will be continually replacing officers who quickly either decide they can?t stand rotating shifts every few months in addition to continually interrupting their sleep schedule for training, court, and other administrative procedures/hearings or just decide they?re ready for something else (as they couldn?t start out at 21). With this much physical hands on training, you will continually have a large number of officers out on workman?s comp claims, as practicing fighting and defensive tactics in a realistic manner for the demanded competency will invariably cause injuries. You?re also going to repeat all of the above for every officer that forgets they?re not supposed to defend themselves or has to deal with one of the aforementioned incapacitated suspects who suddenly wakes up from their alcohol and or drug induced stupor and wants to fight.
Man, I can?t even imagine how a bunch of 35+ year olds with college degrees and managerial experience would do taking orders as rookies on shift work....
Bailey Guns
06-02-2020, 15:32
I'm talking a little out of school here, but when your training goes out the window at first contact, you don't have enough training.
That people do drugs is not any kind of argument. So what? People do drugs so don't have training?
Honestly...you really don't know what you're talking about here. So how much hand-to-hand do you think cops get? I don't recall specifically but it was probably about 40 hours total throughout the academy and then 8 hrs here and there each year.
Not to mention much of police control tactics are as much about compliance as they are control. Certain holds, arm bars, etc...are pain compliance techniques. When someone doesn't feel pain, like when they're on drugs, that shit doesn't work. It also doesn't work when the suspect is much bigger than you, or when he's trying to get your gun, or whatever. And you have to worry about his buddies, his girlfriend, other drunks that wanna help right the injustice being done to fellow drunk at the hands of police, etc...
It's not as simple as saying, "needs more training".
Bailey Guns
06-02-2020, 15:35
You can get everything you want in the above posts, and quite possibly will. The result will be you get a college educated 35+ year old who didn?t stick with their first career choice to politely take your statement and photograph your injuries. The only arrests that will be made are going to be the suspects who for one reason or another were incapacitated before the officer arrived, or voluntarily submitted to arrest. I guess you could just stop arresting people and switch to a ticket based justice system. Thing is, I?ve heard stories about people who won?t sign tickets or even identify themselves. I?m sure someone will figure out how to deal with those cases.
A few side effects I can see arising pretty quickly: You?re going to have to double the size of most departments to deal with the level of training you want and still be able to staff the streets. You will also have to significantly increase the training budget as you will be continually replacing officers who quickly either decide they can?t stand rotating shifts every few months in addition to continually interrupting their sleep schedule for training, court, and other administrative procedures/hearings or just decide they?re ready for something else (as they couldn?t start out at 21). With this much physical hands on training, you will continually have a large number of officers out on workman?s comp claims, as practicing fighting and defensive tactics in a realistic manner for the demanded competency will invariably cause injuries. You?re also going to repeat all of the above for every officer that forgets they?re not supposed to defend themselves or has to deal with one of the aforementioned incapacitated suspects who suddenly wakes up from their alcohol and or drug induced stupor and wants to fight.
Man, I can?t even imagine how a bunch of 35+ year olds with college degrees and managerial experience would do taking orders as rookies on shift work....
Yep...that's a great post. Quite honestly, the public has been getting the police departments they've been asking for, over the last 20 or 30 years. And it's not working out too well.
Explain to me ANY situation where more training is harmful. I guess I don't understand why there is even a discussion. People do drugs. And?
It doesn't matter if a person doesn't feel pain, if they are immobilized. Present a single scenario where an officer having more of an ability to control another person would be a detriment.
What I'm heading so far is, people do drugs and don't feel pain, so police shouldn't carry tasers.
Bailey Guns
06-02-2020, 15:48
More training isn't harmful. That's not the point. The point is, there isn't enough time, money and cops to provide the amount of training you're talking about in most departments. And, sure...if a person is immobilized it doesn't matter if they feel pain. The problem is getting them immobilized in a manner that doesn't cause injury to them or the officer or the public.
I get it. You've never been in a situation like we're trying to describe to you. You don't understand what goes into it. Trust me...you don't. If it were as simple as you seem to think it is, don't you think it would've been done by now?
3beansalad
06-02-2020, 16:00
Man, I can?t even imagine how a bunch of 35+ year olds with college degrees and managerial experience would do taking orders as rookies on shift work....
35 hell, I wouldn't do it at 25. After serving as a FORSCOM MP on Carson (Worldwide Deployable- and boy did we!) I had 4 years practical experience but couldn't get a job as a LEO or CO in the early 90's. I started in the construction industry and made good progress in my trade. A couple of years later, when I could have joined CSPD, I was making a comfortable living and couldn't accept starting as boot on mids.
Here is an interesting exercise: https://www.tmz.com/2020/06/01/baltimore-cop-knocks-woman-out-cold-smack-face/
Keep in mind this is in the context of the protests/riots last Friday night. The first (white if that matters) cop tries to gently hold the female?s (black if that matters) arm presumably to place her under arrest, or possibly escort her away. He gets clocked in the head. The second officer (black if that matters) grabs her arms from behind. The female rips her arms away, and punches the first officer in the head a second time...hard. The officer is unable to avoid the impact of either punch. The second officer approaches from behind the female, striking her once near the head/neck, apparently knocking her unconscious.
To those who want to sit on the citizen review board, police brutality?
Bailey Guns
06-02-2020, 16:32
I saw that and I have no problem with it. It's funny...you can hear someone in the background say, "That was her fault, though." Then, when people start crowding around, everyone changes their tune and the po-leece are bad.
More training isn't harmful. That's not the point. The point is, there isn't enough time, money and cops to provide the amount of training you're talking about in most departments. And, sure...if a person is immobilized it doesn't matter if they feel pain. The problem is getting them immobilized in a manner that doesn't cause injury to them or the officer or the public.
I get it. You've never been in a situation like we're trying to describe to you. You don't understand what goes into it. Trust me...you don't. If it were as simple as you seem to think it is, don't you think it would've been done by now?
The misunderstanding seems to be on your end. It feels like you are thinking that because I made a suggestion, that I think it's THE solution to fix everything. I never made any such claim. As Gman already pointed out, Jiu jitsu training wouldn't have even solved the issue that started this whole debate. The guy in question was already subdued, yet the police officer elected to keep his knee on that guys throat until he was dead. That isn't a training issue, it's a character one, that likely couldn't be trained out of that individual anyway.
Back to the argument about training though, the only issue I see with my statement is that I said it should be required. VDW is correct, that would be difficult. It wouldn't HAVE to be a burden on the department though. People could seek their own training outside of the department. I'd actually encourage that. Any officer that takes their job, and their own personal safety seriously at all, would seek out additional training beyond the laughable amount provided by the department in the first place. Like in any other profession, most people wouldn't unless they are required. That goes for me to. I don't train in Jiu jitsu. I should, but I don't, and I don't even have a good reason not to.
To sum things up, the argument that officers shouldn't get additional combat training because fighting is hard and people do drugs is so stupid that I won't even bother to address it again. Should I stop wearing my seatbelt because it won't help me in a head on with a semi-truck at highway speeds?
Explain to me ANY situation where more training is harmful. I guess I don't understand why there is even a discussion. People do drugs. And?
It doesn't matter if a person doesn't feel pain, if they are immobilized. Present a single scenario where an officer having more of an ability to control another person would be a detriment.
What I'm heading so far is, people do drugs and don't feel pain, so police shouldn't carry tasers.
Have you ever worked any job with annual training schedules? Government, EMS, Police, even OSHA shit. Ask any of those people if "80 hours more training a year is going to help them".
There's already such a load of annual bullshit on all of those positions that people are largely doing the bare minimum to get past them. Blame HR and health and safety as well as gov't regulations, but if you think anyone has time to put 80 or 100 hours of training into something else a year is NBD, you're going to have to hire someone else to do the job they are no longer able to do. Not only that, but deal with a reduction of 10% of their force to cover the increased cost of training, because SUUUUUURe, right now voters are going to approve giving police mo'money.
TRAINING is not the issue. You can train someone for 8 straight years, get them a PHD, and a percentage of them will still be malicious assholes with an ego that occasionally get someone killed. You can't fix the core personality issues at the root of the problem with "training". There's little doubt that the involved officer knew he shouldn't be putting a lot of weight on someones neck for 8+ minutes. He was most likely largely just being a dick because bystanders asked him to stop... HES THE OFFICER IN CHARGE, SCREW THOSE GUYS. He already knew it could result in asphyxiation. Training doesn't fix that attitude problem.
Bailey Guns
06-02-2020, 16:56
The misunderstanding seems to be on your end. It feels like you are thinking that because I made a suggestion, that I think it's THE solution to fix everything. I never made any such claim. As Gman already pointed out, Jiu jitsu training wouldn't have even solved the issue that started this whole debate. The guy in question was already subdued, yet the police officer elected to keep his knee on that guys throat until he was dead. That isn't a training issue, it's a character one, that likely couldn't be trained out of that individual anyway.
Back to the argument about training though, the only issue I see with my statement is that I said it should be required. VDW is correct, that would be difficult. It wouldn't HAVE to be a burden on the department though. People could seek their own training outside of the department. I'd actually encourage that. Any officer that takes their job, and their own personal safety seriously at all, would seek out additional training beyond the laughable amount provided by the department in the first place. Like in any other profession, most people wouldn't unless they are required. That goes for me to. I don't train in Jiu jitsu. I should, but I don't, and I don't even have a good reason not to.
To sum things up, the argument that officers shouldn't get additional combat training because fighting is hard and people do drugs is so stupid that I won't even bother to address it again. Should I stop wearing my seatbelt because it won't help me in a head on with a semi-truck at highway speeds?
I understand perfectly well what you're trying to say. It appears to me you don't understand what I'm trying to say. And your sentence in bold sums nothing up...correctly, anyway. Have a nice night. I need to go find a softer wall to beat my head against.
We're all talking past each other anyway. I don't think anyone is even on the original subject at this point anyway.
DavieD55
06-02-2020, 17:08
IMO all the rioting and anarchy is not about George Floyd. It appears to be about the previous America hater administration and current America haters loosing power of the presidency and organizing riots under the guise of "justice for George Floyd". To take advantage of the situation in order to manufacture crisis to get all the nincompoops all riled up leading up to the next election and to blame America and the POTUS for all the bullshit and crisis they manufacture.
1% of those behind the riots are commie crooks who know exactly what they're doing leading the other 99% around for the fucking moron dupes and paid professional agitators that they are. Until the shitweasels who are behind the scenes of all this manufactured anarchy and crisis are indicted and prosecuted for their crimes they will likely continue on organizing riots and strife when they don't get their way. As time goes on they only get more emboldened and more powerful.
Their ultimate endgame is to stripe the American people of power in order to consolidate the power for themselves to control us and force their twisted communist agenda on America. They don't believe in a constitutional republic folks. They want to force a mob rule democracy on America and then through that channel, communsim.
Great-Kazoo
06-02-2020, 17:29
I don't think you understand what Jiu jitsu is Kazoo.
Fox, who is taking about a weekend class? 20 hours is nothing. That's what, a weeks worth of training?
actually i do. 2 people in my old CO prayer group, were instructors and competed internationally . So yes i do know what it is.
Great-Kazoo
06-02-2020, 17:35
IMO all the rioting and anarchy is not about George Floyd. It appears to be about the previous America hater administration and current America haters loosing power of the presidency and organizing riots under the guise of "justice for George Floyd". To take advantage of the situation in order to manufacture crisis to get all the nincompoops all riled up leading up to the next election and to blame America and the POTUS for all the bullshit and crisis they manufacture.
1% of those behind the riots are commie crooks who know exactly what they're doing leading the other 99% around for the fucking moron dupes and paid professional agitators that they are. Until the shitweasels who are behind the scenes of all this manufactured anarchy and crisis are indicted and prosecuted for their crimes they will likely continue on organizing riots and strife when they don't get their way. As time goes on they only get more emboldened and more powerful.
Their ultimate endgame is to stripe the American people of power in order to consolidate the power for themselves to control us and force their twisted communist agenda on America. They don't believe in a constitutional republic folks. They want to force a mob rule democracy on America and then through that channel, communsim.
agree. Look at the face mask, hoodies, full color posters. That shit is not grass roots funded, when they show up around the country in a 24 hr period.
IMO all the rioting and anarchy is not about George Floyd. It appears to be about the previous America hater administration and current America haters loosing power of the presidency and organizing riots under the guise of "justice for George Floyd". To take advantage of the situation in order to manufacture crisis to get all the nincompoops all riled up leading up to the next election and to blame America and the POTUS for all the bullshit and crisis they manufacture.
1% of those behind the riots are commie crooks who know exactly what they're doing leading the other 99% around for the fucking moron dupes and paid professional agitators that they are. Until the shitweasels who are behind the scenes of all this manufactured anarchy and crisis are indicted and prosecuted for their crimes they will likely continue on organizing riots and strife when they don't get their way. As time goes on they only get more emboldened and more powerful.
Their ultimate endgame is to stripe the American people of power in order to consolidate the power for themselves to control us and force their twisted communist agenda on America. They don't believe in a constitutional republic folks. They want to force a mob rule democracy on America and then through that channel, communsim.
I think it's a lot easier to blame paid agitators and some huge conspiracy perpetrated by Obama and Hillary, two people so powerful and sinister they were blocked by republicans on all their political goals (including the presidency for Clinton) than to believe the country has rapidly changing demographics and viewpoints. You can combine the slew of horrible videos of police violence versus the unarmed with the realization that the democrats are going to keep nominating centrists that their own party does not like and won't help the poor/young, the slow (then rapid since 2015 or so) abandonment of any real republican principles beyond "gotta own the libs!", with a nice dusting of lockdowns and massive unemployment and you've absolutely got a recipe for this.
It's gotta be a more fun world to just be able to dismiss shit we don't like as some evil dem conspiracy, but the reality is that a lot of people are scared, fed up, and now have a lot of free time on their hands. You only get away with ignoring the complaints of people for so long before things like this happen, which we see again and again but never quite address it.
Back to the argument about training though, the only issue I see with my statement is that I said it should be required. VDW is correct, that would be difficult. It wouldn't HAVE to be a burden on the department though. People could seek their own training outside of the department. I'd actually encourage that. Any officer that takes their job, and their own personal safety seriously at all, would seek out additional training beyond the laughable amount provided by the department in the first place. Like in any other profession, most people wouldn't unless they are required. That goes for me to. I don't train in Jiu jitsu. I should, but I don't, and I don't even have a good reason not to.
To sum things up, the argument that officers shouldn't get additional combat training because fighting is hard and people do drugs is so stupid that I won't even bother to address it again. Should I stop wearing my seatbelt because it won't help me in a head on with a semi-truck at highway speeds?
I?m trying to wrap my head around what you?re saying. You want officers to master self/defense/offense on their own time/dime, but you don?t want gung ho types or bad asses that would be interested in those extra curricular activities? I take it you?re not a lawyer? A quick web search should yield a plethora of cases where cops were fired, had their asses sued off, and/or were criminally charged for using tactics not approved by, or taught by their department. That includes times where the improvised technique likely would have caused less injury and/or danger than the approved techniques. You?re proposing making an extremely difficult job impossible. There would be no way for an officer to do anything without being fired, arrested, or sued. Then they would get fired/sued for failure to act.
The results will be catastrophic, and I?m not talking about for the police officers. If the expectation is that the police can?t protect themselves or be expected to win every fight, the same will apply to civilians.
The thing is, he was already subdued. Get the hell off of him. Hogtie him and carry him to a car if you have to.
Hogties or hobbles have been widely banned in departments across the nation for being inhumane and ?causing? in-custody deaths. The officers did try multiple times with at least 3 officers to carry him and place him in a patrol car, but Floyd wasn?t having it. Also, as discussed earlier, drugs, especially stimulants, can make suspects extremely difficult to physically control, even when handcuffed. Floyd?s autopsy showed ?fentanyl intoxication? and recent methampetamine use. That probably goes to show why 3 officers were unable to get him in the car. That doesn?t excuse Chauvin, but it may explain why there were 3 officers on him or holding him in some of the photos.
One question I have is, where the hell was their supervisor (corporal, Sgt, etc. not senior officer)?
Hogties or hobbles have been widely banned in departments across the nation for being inhumane and ?causing? in-custody deaths. The officers did try multiple times with at least 3 officers to carry him and place him in a patrol car, but Floyd wasn?t having it. Also, as discussed earlier, drugs, especially stimulants, can make suspects extremely difficult to physically control, even when handcuffed. Floyd?s autopsy showed ?fentanyl intoxication? and recent methampetamine use. That probably goes to show why 3 officers were unable to get him in the car. That doesn?t excuse Chauvin, but it may explain why there were 3 officers on him or holding him in some of the photos.
One question I have is, where the hell was their supervisor (corporal, Sgt, etc. not senior officer)?
That.
( I just deleted a large paragraph)
Bailey Guns
06-02-2020, 19:39
Hogties were banned in the agency I worked for in the mid 90s. Positional asphyxiation was the thing everyone was worried about back then. We were warned to never leave anyone lying face down any longer than absolutely necessary. We still had the hobbles but we wrapped their ankles, sat them in the seat and shut the extra length in the door so they couldn't kick. Not nearly as effective but a lot safer.
Hogties were banned in the agency I worked for in the mid 90s. Positional asphyxiation was the thing everyone was worried about back then. We were warned to never leave anyone lying face down any longer than absolutely necessary. We still had the hobbles but we wrapped their ankles, sat them in the seat and shut the extra length in the door so they couldn't kick. Not nearly as effective but a lot safer.
Well...that then.
Whatever it takes besides killing somebody.
The problem is certain cops doing terrible stuff and not being punished for it. Choking detained citizens to death. Shooting citizens trying to follow conflicting orders and not doing it quickly enough. And they continue to unnecessarily escalate in these protests now and further prove that they need independent oversight.
Yeah, the rioters and looters need to be dealt with appropriately, but shooting peaceful protesters in the face point blank with smoke canisters (https://i.imgur.com/medV8y6.gifv) and in the head with rubber bullets (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-BGyTi-KdKc) is not the way to handle what is going on. It's going to lead to escalation, and people are going to start bringing weapons themselves. Then shit is going to get out of hand and a lot of people are going to be hospitalized or dead.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.