[Maru]

Notice: Please do not post off-topic matters relating to the elections, riots or BLM-related controversy. This is not an election thread or politics or about protests. Let's just keep it on police and civil matters as it relates to human rights. You can bring up points made by protest groups or politicians that you feel are relevant here, but only to support your answer to this thread's question... if you don't obey these rules, I may vote for your least favorite presidential candidate Thank you and it is appreciated.

I want to start off by referencing the developments related to Terrence Crutcher's killing in Charlotte, NC.

Tulsa police shooting investigated by Justice Department
http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/20/us/okl...lice-shooting/
**It will help if you watch the videos, especially the helicopter one...**

CNN)From different angles, the videos show the same scene.
An unarmed black man walks on a Tulsa, Oklahoma, road with his hands in the air. Police officers follow closely behind him as he approaches his vehicle. He stands beside the car, then falls to the ground after one officer pulls the trigger.

Now 40-year-old Terence Crutcher is dead. Crutcher's sister is demanding that prosecutors charge the officer who shot him. And the police videos of the incident are fueling criticism about the case.

Federal, state and local authorities are investigating the Friday night shooting.

Crutcher's family says he was waiting for help on the road after his SUV broke down.

The officer's attorney says she was afraid Crutcher was reaching for a weapon when she opened fire. Attorney Benjamin Crump, part of the legal team representing Crutcher's family, countered at a Tuesday news conference that Crutcher's window was rolled up, making it unlikely he was reaching into the car.

Further developments in this case...

Terence Crutcher Shooting: Tulsa County District Attorney Charges Officer Shelby With Manslaughter
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/...shelby-n652856

The affidavit:

-------------------------------------------------------------

For me, the affidavit writes more succintly what I was trying to explain to my husband when we had this discussion the other night (we had watched the videos). He works in detentions in the mental health unit so he is constantly having to curb the line between unreasonable and reasonable use of force.

Naturally, **** happens so when comes home with an injury or he calls me to let me know "he is alright", we have this discussion more often than we probably want to... We get bursts of weekly letters from Workmans Comp and their insurance company for things as minor as urine being thrown on him, other contact with bodily fluids, finger being cut or more serious ones, etc... he always prefers to talk them down but there are always times when he doesn't have that choice. Of course we would love to reduce the amount of confrontation... I'd worry less and so would every other person out there in the world with a family member who is in or works detentions or on the street.

When I watched the video of the Terrence Crutcher shooting, I told him I didn't think that she had good reason to shoot him from my initial watch. Clearly something was amiss, he was doped up and doing unpredictable things, it didn't spell threat, but then it could've easily had been a mental disorder...

He told me that, honestly, every situation is variable and unless he was there himself, he couldn't say what he would've done or if what she did was correct. They pretty much have to react using their best judgement they have at the time but that every situation is different and you can only plan so much. It's impossible to provide set guidelines for every situation because rules can't always be applied the same every single time. Hence, why creating a specific training regime to combat the innate fear that officers experience is difficult... because they must also rely on the same fear to keep them alive.

My thought, she should've used non-lethal force first (i.e. OC spray). There was distance and she had time to do as much. May have not been the perfect solution either, but he would've been alive. She could've retreated to her car until more back up arrived... but then, what if he drives off and starts a police chase? There's risks associated with that. What if he T-bones someone? What if?...

He said that is normally the way it does work (he read off the official steps which I don't remember relating to use of force). He agreed that from what we could see, and if the window was not drawn down as some had suggested at the time, that it would seem to be the case she over-reacted (especially since the second officer had done so simultaneously)... though, he said in training and in videos, the concern with the guy getting into the window is that a lot of people will have weapons stored on the dash accessible that way and will pull out and fire. People have been killed this way in the past and it's something they are made aware of during training. So there is that.

Personally for me it is still not clear-cut. I'm not 100% on everything I feel. My opinion could change. Though as I suggested alternatives, my husband would provide examples of why that would not work. It was very hard to find a solution that would work better in every case...

What I think may have compounded the situation in the case of this shooting (and perhaps others) is the prominent 'you' or 'me' mentality in law enforcement... i.e. it's either you or me (who gets hurt/goes home alive). That's to say... if the officer is trained to protect him and his companions, then likewise they are always looking for observable threats and constantly examining for details and reacting accordingly.

The best officers I think are able to act as a social worker in some cases and even provide some form of psychological assistance (to ease the nerves of some people confronting a uniform). Even that can't be applied in every situation.

What people don't really realize either is these officers usually see the worst of the worst. Many of them become jaded, especially if they start off in detentions. My husband has stories too, but ironically enough, they're not stories most people would easily beleive. It's very hard not to become emotionally invested in their work and it's also hard not to bring it home. Law enforcement has a high rate of divorce, suicide and depression for that very same reason.

I think though that one problem in the field is that it should not be 'me' vs 'you'... the goal should be to get everyone home. The concern on my husband's end is where that thinking can get you killed. My thought is if law enforcement together had adopted this thinking more predominantly... perhaps there would be less altercations, more peaceful resolutions and in the end less need for use-of-force...

You versus Me

As it is now, it is 'you' versus 'me'. The other concept to add onto this is the justice system becomes the unfortunate safety net for issues that our government is too incompetent or unwilling to tackle or resolve. We got this way because we neglected lower income communities. We got this way because we took away the infrastructure for a person without means dealing with psychological disorders... so they often turn to crime to survive.

Naturally, these people are not treated well by society for various reasons, because you versus me mentality is prominent not only throughout law enforcement... but throughout our communities and even the current political psyche.

A little off-topic, but not quite: I get annoyed by how quickly some people are willing to abandon their original communities because they're more "challenging" (i.e. "different" (more ethnic), more crime, anti-comfort zones...) to deal with than the brand new suburbs up the road... only issue with that locally in Houston is that the more you build out, the less flood plain, so neighborhoods inside start flooding more often than they ever used to. We know with New Orleans, flooding is a major problem (they might as well re-zone that area for global warming) and is a huge source of pain for the poor living there... (as well as here). If your home is re-zoned in a flood plain, then you have to have very expensive flood ins... and if you have that flood ins, even if your home is paid off, you can't sell and move because the new homeowner will require it to mortgage the property. If they can even afford to move.

Our city is doing fine I think (for now), but places like Baltimore and further up north, they don't have the space to grow out, so the money eventually leaves. That includes jobs, big business, other sources of govt support, educational opportunities, etc... the people left holding the bill and stuck in poor living conditions are the least wealthy.

Houston's demographic is heavily mixed and I guess because we've adjusted to having a majority-minority demographic and we can continue to spread out for many years to come, all these different communities don't fall into the conditions of some other areas where space/development opportunities are limited and so though they are poorer neighborhoods, they still have great access to jobs, education, cheap cost of living, so we don't have that much of a strain because there is still upward mobility for many...

TLDR: My point overall... I don't think that fixing this solution is simply more training for law enforcement (if it were that easy, then they'd done it already if it were a matter of neglect), use magic and somehow remove all the incompetent officers in law enforcement who may overreact (many of these people are dedicated and are only human beings)... but it needs to be an across the board change throughout all fabrics of society... all of society needs to adapt to the changes in cultural demographics (their subdivisions and schools becoming more mixed), deal better with culture clash and older communities may need extra support (not just a source of cheap labor for the top 10% pet projects) so they don't just fall off the map because they're not "hot properties" like they used to... if we give those areas more support, make them feel more included and give them better access to jobs and opportunities, then perhaps society as a whole will be less knee jerky and law enforcement agencies as well can relax their policing because they're not the first and last defense against falling living conditions and all other forms of social discourse that the government and the rest of society would prefer to ignore...

Just think... some of us in better communities will meet business owners, well-dressed doctors, polite and engaging shopkeepers, people of what is considered good standing... whereas in a lesser areas... the first uniformed role model a child may see is a police officer... and maybe not in the best of circumstances. Some don't have easy access to the same role models/model living conditions as you, much less to health care nor can they afford to go to nice shops. Consider that when you wonder why some of these people, who already feel systematically victimized, may not react as you would do to an authority figure...


Anyway, enough of my thoughts... what are your thoughts about what we could do better as a country?

[Tom4784]

Short term, the police needs to show condemnation for the killer cops. It makes them look bad when these killers are protected by the system which is unfair since most officers are likely very good at their jobs, it's a small number of bastards that ruins it for all of them.
As it stands Police officers cannot complain about distrust and open hatred from the public if they aren't willing to take a stand against these killers.

Long term, better training and a tougher screening process are needed. These killers should have never been given a gun and a badge in the first place if they are going to lose their heads and murder people as a first response.

[bots]

The police force in any country attracts a certain percentage of people who are nothing more than criminals themselves. Put a gun in those peoples hands and make it next to impossible to prosecute them and they can literally run riot.

The system has to hold them accountable for their actions, at all times, and that includes when police turn a blind eye to crimes to. It works both ways as turning a blind eye may lead to further unnecessary death further down the line too.

Most people, when they know they will be made accountable, will modify their behaviour.

[arista]

All USA Cops must have Body Cams
then all killing are on camera
showing the others with guns
refusing to drop them.

[jaxie]

I think it's a really difficult issue and beyond saying get rid of the guns, and they are so ingrained in the US way of thinking I don't know if that is an achievable goal, I don't know what to tell you. I'm sure more training always helps though I doubt they are lacking in training realistically. I do have some sympathy for the police in the US who are in a difficult situation. I doubt any of the shootings are more than split second decision, maybe even panic in some situations. "The other guy or me, I choose me, bang." All lives matter but I doubt in many of these cases in the press that the officer sets out to shoot a black person, or any person. That isn't to say there isn't blame on the police sometimes too but I don't see it as being clear cut.

When every person you confront in you law keeper job could have a gun how can you deal with that confrontation without getting shot yourself?

I suppose something that could be done is to ban all fake weapons that look realistic or make them have some sort of glow in the dark neon colour that makes its obvious it's not a real gun so those kinds of mistakes don't happen.

[Crimson Dynamo]

You cannot fix poorly educated people looking at videos and thinking that it is judge jury and executioner

The problem is not the police, its the masses and their new access to social media

[Ammi]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

You cannot fix poorly educated people looking at videos and thinking that it is judge jury and executioner

The problem is not the police, its the masses and their new access to social media

..that doesn't matter though because it's not the public who are the ones who decide in a court of law and the courts do decide some wrongful killing that have been committed by police officers...so it's right also that each killing is questioned because otherwise, essentially what you would be saying is that we must accept some wrongful deaths because not all are wrongful...so some lives don't matter then because they just have to be 'absorbed' into a system and not questioned or prosecuted if found guilty....

[Northern Monkey]

I don't think it can or will change much for the better while guns are so prevalent.Any officer at any call could end up not going home.It only takes a second and it could be game over.The police are only human and it is instinctive to want to survive.It's a much bigger issue than just blaming 'poorly trained cops' when they are only human and know they could be shot any day.It's always in the back of their mind surely.That can take its toll on a person.
In years to come if the gun problem were ever to be solved(highly unlikely) then all this will be seen as just a symptom of the culture.Imo.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Originally Posted by Ammi

..that doesn't matter though because it's not the public who are the ones who decide in a court of law and the courts do decide some wrongful killing that have been committed by police officers...so it's right also that each killing is questioned because otherwise, essentially what you would be saying is that we must accept some wrongful deaths because not all are wrongful...so some lives don't matter then because they just have to be 'absorbed' into a system and not questioned or prosecuted if found guilty....

No, all deaths are fully investigated independent as they are in the UK. The public do not need to get involved

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

No, all deaths are fully investigated independent as they are in the UK. The public do not need to get involved

The Police department are there to protect and serve the public, of course they have a right to get involved if they believe that there is an issue. The USA isn't a dictatorship last time I checked

[Crimson Dynamo]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

The Police department are there to protect and serve the public, of course they have a right to get involved if they believe that there is an issue. The USA isn't a dictatorship last time I checked

Correct and they have plenty of legal way to do this

Killing police, looting, ranting and raving on streets and on social media
That is not the way


As the OP said, if the idiots who represent BLM would actually get involved in their local politics and community they could do a lot

[kirklancaster]

A) The most draconian gun laws ever, will NOT keep weapons out of the hands of those who want to possess them.

Criminals and terrorists in ANY country do NOT obey laws and can access weapons whenever they wish to, and no amount of 'Gun Laws' can EVER prevent 'rogue' cops from possessing weapons in any country where it is the lawful practice to have armed police.

B) No amount of 'Improved Training' will prevent the types of 'Murder By Cops' in question, because in such cases, it is not a lack of training which causes the cop to kill, it is a wilful, deliberate DESIRE to kill - a desire enabled by the very fact that the perpetrator is a cop - coupled with the oh so reassuring knowledge, that being a cop also LARGELY affords protection against legal recrimination for carrying out the murder.

Basically; Laws, which were formed to keep the unlawful lawful, only really affect the law abiding anyway, because the unlawful really don't give a feck.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Also maybe just obey police when they ask you to do things

dont break the law

dont wave replica guns around

and have a little respect

[arista]

"Criminals and terrorists in ANY country do NOT obey laws and can access weapons whenever they wish to, and no amount of 'Gun Laws' can EVER prevent 'rogue' cops from possessing weapons in any country where it is the lawful practice to have armed police."



Yes Kirk
its worse

Give Every Police person a body cam
so they can prove more.

[arista]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

Also maybe just obey police when they ask you to do things

dont break the law

dont wave replica guns around

and have a little respect

Stupid parents

[GiRTh]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.9d9661c73946

https://www.justice.gov/opa/file/883366/download

How do we fix a police department like the Baltimore Police department

[GiRTh]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

Correct and they have plenty of legal way to do this

Killing police, looting, ranting and raving on streets and on social media
That is not the way


As the OP said, if the idiots who represent BLM would actually get involved in their local politics and community they could do a lot

They do and they have.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_a...r_primary.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/...b065e2e3d7cd65

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/...k-lives-matter

[GiRTh]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

Short term, the police needs to show condemnation for the killer cops. It makes them look bad when these killers are protected by the system which is unfair since most officers are likely very good at their jobs, it's a small number of bastards that ruins it for all of them.
As it stands Police officers cannot complain about distrust and open hatred from the public if they aren't willing to take a stand against these killers.

Long term, better training and a tougher screening process are needed. These killers should have never been given a gun and a badge in the first place if they are going to lose their heads and murder people as a first response.

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

A) The most draconian gun laws ever, will NOT keep weapons out of the hands of those who want to possess them.

Criminals and terrorists in ANY country do NOT obey laws and can access weapons whenever they wish to, and no amount of 'Gun Laws' can EVER prevent 'rogue' cops from possessing weapons in any country where it is the lawful practice to have armed police.

B) No amount of 'Improved Training' will prevent the types of 'Murder By Cops' in question, because in such cases, it is not a lack of training which causes the cop to kill, it is a wilful, deliberate DESIRE to kill - a desire enabled by the very fact that the perpetrator is a cop - coupled with the oh so reassuring knowledge, that being a cop also LARGELY affords protection against legal recrimination for carrying out the murder.

Basically; Laws, which were formed to keep the unlawful lawful, only really affect the law abiding anyway, because the unlawful really don't give a feck.

Agree with these two posters.

[Ammi]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

Short term, the police needs to show condemnation for the killer cops. It makes them look bad when these killers are protected by the system which is unfair since most officers are likely very good at their jobs, it's a small number of bastards that ruins it for all of them.
As it stands Police officers cannot complain about distrust and open hatred from the public if they aren't willing to take a stand against these killers.

Long term, better training and a tougher screening process are needed. These killers should have never been given a gun and a badge in the first place if they are going to lose their heads and murder people as a first response.

..yeah, I think the thing is with this as well is the counter-productiveness of it in terms of the 'you or me' thing as well and those calls that have to be made because with Terence Crutcher for instance..?...he had his hands in the air/wasn't a threat and yet more officers came and surrounded him with weapons pointed at him so surely, that's just going to cause someone to make movements..(in their fear..)..that could then be seen as suspicious and threatening...so I think what has to be looked at (in some cases..)...is whether police officers themselves actually contribute to and even cause that suspicious behaviour, which to be would seem almost inevitable...I mean, the general public in these situations are acting 'split second' as well but it's not necessarily threatening though.../but that split second has them dead and killed so they're never allowed to explain their actions or their fears for their lives even when they're innocent....

[Ammi]

..and then when these incidents happen of what seems, police over-reaction and action which cause loss of life of an innocent, of course communities are going to react in their grief..wouldn't we all if it was our husband/son/brother etc...and that then will rightly bring support from BLM plus the whole nation off public...

[Maru]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

The Police department are there to protect and serve the public, of course they have a right to get involved if they believe that there is an issue. The USA isn't a dictatorship last time I checked

Yes. Policing is and should always be a community effort. After all it's ultimately the voters and the communities themselves that are to be held the most accountable for their govt. What we have now is a system that passes the buck, points fingers and at best, waits for somebody else to solve the problem... at worse creates an even bigger bureaucracy (creating issues such as overpolicing) which in the end only makes the situation worse.

Originally Posted by Northern Monkey

I don't think it can or will change much for the better while guns are so prevalent.Any officer at any call could end up not going home.It only takes a second and it could be game over.The police are only human and it is instinctive to want to survive.It's a much bigger issue than just blaming 'poorly trained cops' when they are only human and know they could be shot any day.It's always in the back of their mind surely.That can take its toll on a person.
In years to come if the gun problem were ever to be solved(highly unlikely) then all this will be seen as just a symptom of the culture.Imo.

I know many people here don't like guns, but having a public that can function as a militia is a big part of American culture. It also aids in keeping the government honest, and like the UK citizens, we are more likely to rebel than in most any other countries then to accept government oppression. We also have the right to defend ourselves. I think we need to make background checks more universal (and make private sale illegal), but basically once the cat is out of the bag so to speak, you can't just put it back in and then enact laws to remove gun ownership from the constitution. It's impossible to find and destroy every weapon... either way, guns can still come in over the borders from Mexico, just like we have a problem with drugs. If gun control is done right, it can work in the US... but there will always be gun violence.

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

You cannot fix poorly educated people looking at videos and thinking that it is judge jury and executioner

The problem is not the police, its the masses and their new access to social media

No, the public should do their due diligence as a society and hold our authorities accountable for their action(s). That is part of community policing. Law agencies widely prefer when the public gets involved. Not to mention, this is how democracy works and freedom of speech... yes, there is ignorance, but there will always be ignorance and you can't fix stupid. That lesson is social media's biggest gift to humanity.

Originally Posted by jaxie

I think it's a really difficult issue and beyond saying get rid of the guns, and they are so ingrained in the US way of thinking I don't know if that is an achievable goal, I don't know what to tell you. I'm sure more training always helps though I doubt they are lacking in training realistically. I do have some sympathy for the police in the US who are in a difficult situation. I doubt any of the shootings are more than split second decision, maybe even panic in some situations. "The other guy or me, I choose me, bang." All lives matter but I doubt in many of these cases in the press that the officer sets out to shoot a black person, or any person. That isn't to say there isn't blame on the police sometimes too but I don't see it as being clear cut.

When every person you confront in you law keeper job could have a gun how can you deal with that confrontation without getting shot yourself?

I suppose something that could be done is to ban all fake weapons that look realistic or make them have some sort of glow in the dark neon colour that makes its obvious it's not a real gun so those kinds of mistakes don't happen.

Wonderful post, jaxie. I think you get right to the point.

The situation is dire because we let it get this way. The blame falls squarely on every single one of us in the US. We've ignored the urban communities and those of us who got out only focused on ourselves. These communities that are plagued with violence and poverty have been doing it mostly on their own which is why they've now come up with their own systems of survival and rules of conduct that aren't compatible with the local police. Of course they're not going to want to assimilate into society. Society's rules really don't apply when you live in a community where order is not apparent and violence/crime is a fact of life.

Before social media and cameras, the government could just ramp up police anytime crime or certain elements left their "assigned" neighborhood. We ended up with over-policing in these areas because more often than not, this is the default response from the government and the public towards the issues. The average law enforcement officer already was in-between a rock and a hard place and expected to solve most of society's problems and adding more pressure to that won't fix their ability to help those issues.

While I think we should optimize our police force and reverse corruption wherever possible, to put only put more pressure on every single police to do their jobs "better", i.e. lower use-of-force in the times of rising crime, is unrealistic. We need to take pressure off law enforcement by selecting the community's that need attention and take a civil approach at a local govt level instead of just resorting to more policing.

If we continue as we are now, encouraging disenfranchised demographics to self-victimize and dig themselves deeper into their entrenched beliefs and passing the buck to the police then it will only continue the cycle of police brutality/community violence.

[Crimson Dynamo]

look at any similar sized organisation/business and do they have a number of twits, twats and crims in their numbers?

Of course they do (just look at the church ) but the police also have guns and also have to deal with the scum of society so why anyone is surprised is beyond me, its a fact of life and the law need our support not being made falsely to be some murderous regime by certain "groups"

[Maru]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

look at any similar sized organisation/business and do they have a number of twits, twats and crims in their numbers?

Of course they do (just look at the church ) but the police also have guns and also have to deal with the scum of society so why anyone is surprised is beyond me, its a fact of life and the law need our support not being made falsely to be some murderous regime by certain "groups"

I agree there are groups painting with very broad strokes behind the media. However, there will always be interest groups who will do rage-mongering to spread their influence. It's just a fact of life and part of living in a democratic society. A problem we have in the US is that nobody wants to be accountable. We have rage-mongering from one group (extreme left), rage-mongering (extreme right) from the other... both work carefully as to avoid responsibility for their own actions and to pass the blame onto each other because part of their main goal is to disable the American political system so that they can possibly influence and install their own narratives. It's the people in the middle who suffer, but then they only have themselves to blame as they don't pay attention until it's nearly November and for some reason opt out of primaries...

[Ammi]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

look at any similar sized organisation/business and do they have a number of twits, twats and crims in their numbers?

Of course they do (just look at the church ) but the police also have guns and also have to deal with the scum of society so why anyone is surprised is beyond me, its a fact of life and the law need our support not being made falsely to be some murderous regime by certain "groups"

..I think that's the vicious circle though, LT...as Niamh said, the police or there to protect and serve the people...which means working with the people to reduce crime/to prevent and that can't happen while it's seen more as a 'them and us' thing...that they're more the enemy of some sections of society, which seems very much the case atm....it's very much why police actions have to be fully investigated and fully explained to the public with questionable incidents and questionable killings because if they're not...then we're not really 'serving the police force', either...we're just leaving them vulnerable within their jobs ....I would say that not all police officers were suited to the job they do because if that wasn't so...?...then that would be quite unique in a profession...but it would be too simplistic to just put it down to the individual as well because so much I think is down to resources/limitations and not sufficient training given and not the right training to prevent and to preserve life..(while upholding the law..)..it's not an either/or situation..all of us in our jobs would feel 'out of out depth' if we faced situations that we didn't feel fully and properly trained in..and out of someone's depth in the police force, when faced with the decisions they are faced with and when 'making a call' with an armed weapon...could mean death for an innocent in front of a police officer, or indeed, death for the police officer themselves...if things aren't brought to attention, then how are we serving the police departments either...