eRv wrote:For news and views on BLM. Start ranting right-wingers!
Black Lives Matter (BLM), the activist group that campaigns agasint police brutality and racial injutice, have just come out with their plan to help fix the issues that plague police forces up and down the country.
Their plan – “Campaign Zero” – focuses on 10 points where they would like the law to change. They believe that these changes will help stop racial profiling and lessen the dangers everyday citizens face when dealing with the police.
To get an idea of what they are asking for we thought we’d provide a breakdown of their plan:
1. End “broken windows” policing, which aggressively polices minor crimes in an attempt to stop larger ones.
“Broken windows” policing is the idea that vigorously enforcing small crimes (like vandalism) will prevent larger crimes from happening. This law has allowed police to increase “stop and frisks”, which BLM claims enables racial stereotyping. They argue that Black men and women are unfairly targeted by police using this law as an excuse, and that this policy ultimately led to the death of Eric Garner (remember the guy that was choked to death after he was caught selling loose cigarettes). This is their first point in their plan, and probably the most controversial.
And it works. Quite well in fact. If you don't want to get Eric Garnered don't be a menace to the neighborhood and obey the law. It ain't rocket science. We don't see "broken windows" enforcement causing problems in upscale suburban neighborhoods or Beverly Hills. Why is that, do you suppose? Perhaps because the residents of those areas give a fuck about the community and their neighbors and the law so they keep their property maintained and don't act like unsupervised children or savages in their own "hood."
2. Use community oversight for misconduct rather than having the police department decide what consequences officers should face.
Rather than the police deciding how an officer is punished after they’ve committed a crime (like when an officer who caused a death is ‘punished’ by being put on paid leave for six months), they want an independent group to review all cases and dole out the punishments. Since, you know, the police department might be a tad on biased.
Yeah, that's going to happen... Is there even the smallest doubt in anyone's mind what would happen to police officers if "community oversight" in Ferguson or LA were how discipline were meeted out? We'd have cops lynched and strung up from light poles.
On the other hand, what SHOULD happen is that police misconduct should NOT be
investigated by the department. Rather, there should be an independent investigation by, for example, the state police or even a city/county-wide board of lawyers and law enforcement officials from other agencies who are NOT members of the police department. They do the investigation and publish the results in a public hearing, with ALL the evidence revealed to the public and NONE of it held back, and then the City Council or County Commissioners, along with the head of the agency, apply punishment as dictated by a detailed discipline policy that has been created by the department and approved by the City Council, and from which there is NO APPEAL. If you whup a teenage thug and the matrix says you get fired, you're fired on the spot,
and then you face both criminal and civil charges for the abuse of authority.
In this way the community has input through the election of the council, mayor and chief of police, who are responsible for setting the standards of behavior for the department, the investigation is taken away from the department to avoid the appearance of impropriety or favoritism, and the punishments are decided ahead of time and every officer knows exactly what will happen to him if he violates policy, no matter what his excuse is.
3. Make standards for reporting police use of deadly force.
A lot of reports of police using deadly force aren’t released to the public. This skews the statistics when it comes down to who died by police hands and it leaves the public in the dark about how the police operate. BLM want to standardize the reporting methods and make the whole process more transparent.
Police use of ANY physical force, no matter how slight, should generate a full report, just as if a crime had occurred, with an investigation and collection of evidence, and if PC is found that the officer violated policy both a disciplinary investigation and criminal investigation should take place and the officer should be charged as appropriate. Those reports should all be public record. Police have NO EXPECTATION OF PRIVACY AT ALL in their actions taken. None. Everything a cop does while on duty, right down to picking his nose, is and should be a matter of open public record available to anyone and everyone, whether or not it's a "personnel matter." It should be made clear in the law that when you hire on as a police officer
you forfeit your right to privacy while on duty, and anything you do, or did, and everything to do with your employment as a public servant, is open to the public at all times. This should be true for
any and every person employed by or serving in public officer or employment as a condition of working in government.
4. Independently investigate and prosecute police misconduct.
Much like point two, BLM doesn’t want the police investigating crimes committed by the police since it’s proven to be a recipe for trouble. Instead, they want an independently run government body to investigate whether or not an officer has violated the law. The short version: if a cop shoots someone, someone other than the cops should look into the case to see if that shooting was lawful.
Yup, I'm down with that.
5. Have the racial makeup of police departments reflect the communities they serve.
This one is simple enough to ask for, harder to carry out in practice. BLM want the police force to be racially representative of the areas they protect. If a community is 50% Black, 30% Hispanic, and 20% White, they want to see a police force that reflects those demographics. Hypothetically, for every two White officers they’d hire, they’d also hire five Black officers and three Hispanic officers.
The real problem is that this leads to the lowering of standards so that less-well-educated minority members can qualify just so that racial quotas can be met. Bad idea.
6. Require officers to wear body cameras.
This policy has already been implemented in several different police forces across the country – and with great success in some cases. However, the debate starts when it comes down to when and why an officer can turn the camera off. For example, you wouldn’t want people watching you when you went for a piss, would you?
If it's a condition of employment, then if you don't like it, don't be a cop. It's just that simple. However, the issue of "body cameras" is a whole lot more complex than it sounds, and the costs of managing the video can be enormous. However, technology is addressing some of the issues, such as systems that turn the camera on when certain events occur like turning on patrol car lights, loud sounds, drawing of a weapon, running or wrestling. Sensors like the ones in an iPhone can pretty easily programmed to distinguish between ordinary non-critical situations and emergencies or violence using sound, motion, heart rate and other sensors.
7. Provide more training for police officers.
More training is never a bad thing. Many supporters of BLM believe that a lot of the issues between police officers and citizens have been instigated by rookie cops that are a little too eager to prove themselves in the field, and they feel a little extra training could help that out.
Hey BLM, you get what you pay for. If you want better cops, stop being dependent class leeches on society who pay zero taxes and start contributing to the costs of hiring and training your police.
8. End for-profit policing practices.
This is a biggie. As of now, the police can legally take any money or property that they “believe” is in some way linked to a crime, and they can use that money and property as they see fit, even if you’re never convicted of that crime. It’s called Civil Forfeiture and the police in many areas have used this “right” to fund their own agencies and precincts. This is a major issue, and many people from different walks of life see it as legalized robbery. For more information check out John Oliver’s take on it, as he explains it far more eloquently than I ever could.
This I absolutely agree with. Civil asset forfeiture was intended to deprive major criminals of the fruits of their crimes using a lower standard of evidence than "beyond any reasonable doubt," but like many other authorities granted to the police, they have grossly abused it and often for their own benefit.
There should be no seizure of assets without a felony criminal charge, and no forfeiture of any asset without a felony conviction.
9. End the police use of military equipment.
BLM argues that the police should be working with the community to provide peaceful resolutions to society’s issues and that the use of military equipment shows an intent to abuse their power over citizens. It drives home the Us vs Them mentality. Big guns and body armour = scared citizens. Open dialogue and transparency = happy citizens.
This is a cart/horse issue. Police are "militarized" because they face threats today that are more severe and serious than in the past. But, I agree that the habit of militarizing of the police has gotten out of hand, way out of hand, to the detriment of the relationship between the police and the public. There is a time and place for military-grade hardware, as Dallas proves, but it need not be ubiquitous or obvious. High-powered weaponry should stay in the patrol car until it's needed. On the other hand, vests and firearms are simply necessary tools for the modern cop, even in places like the UK.
But, and this is important, the presence of tools of force (OC, baton, gun, handcuffs) should be offset by both professional dress and demeanor on the part of the officer. If you look at many state police agencies across the country and examine their dress, decorum and demeanor policies you'll likely find that there are far, far fewer incidents and complaints about well-dressed, polite and controlled state troopers where there may be many about sloppy, slovenly, ill-dressed, loutish and arrogant cops on the beat in some big city like NYC or Chicago.
I found that during my career the very best way to avoid physical conflict with someone I was contacting or even arresting was to be unfailingly polite and professional and to speak carefully, respectfully, honestly and without anger and PERSUADE the individual to submit voluntarily to arrest. An officer's communications skills and ability to remain calm, polite and respectful even when the person he is in contact with is angry, agitated and verbally abusive is what distinguishes good cops from bad ones.
One of the reasons I believe there are so many bad cops out there is that you simply cannot interact with the public effectively as a police officer
if you act like the worst of the people you interact with. I can't begin to count the number of times I've seen some badge-heavy, arrogant and overbearing rookie (or veteran) cop start the contact off in a way that guaranteed that the situation would quickly escalate out of control...and did.
My take is that police need to constantly be reminded of the fact that they are
public servants there to serve the public, they are NOT the masters or overlords of the public to whom the public owes a duty of instant deference and knee-bending like they are some serf tugging a forelock as the King passes by. Too many cops have exactly this sort of "us vs. them, and we're better than they are" attitude that shows in their body language, their tone of voice and their speech patterns and instantly tells the citizen that he's inferior scum who'd damned well better do what he's told.
It is THAT attitude that BLM rightfully complains about, and it's quite common because of the adversarial nature of the relationship that used to be one of citizen and public servant there to help them but is all too often now police overlord cowing and subjugating the plebs just because he can. It's no wonder black people get angry at being treated that way. I would too.
The solution to that problem is very simple: careful supervision and monitoring (via video and audio if necessary) of an officer's interactions with the public
and the immediate termination of any officer who is rude or abusive to anyone, for any reason, even during a violent arrest. A failure to refer to a citizen as "Sir" or "M'am" under ANY circumstances should be cause for termination of employment
Those two words of respect kept me out of innumerable violent conflicts simply because I granted the citizen respect and acknowledged my position as a public servant, not someone's superior or master. It's all about an officer's ego, and policing is no place for egoistic assholes, and they need to be drummed out of the corp as quickly as they are found out.
10. Implement police union contracts that hold officers accountable for misconduct.
So, police unions have a history of protecting police (shocking, I know). Police officers accused of misconduct are no exception, but other members are oftendiscouraged by their unions to speak out against those accused. This can delay convictions and stop valuable information or evidence from coming to light which prevents real justice. While the police need unions to protect their rights, BLM argue that the unions should play their part in weeding out the bad apples. If not, the abuse of power will continue because the bad officers know they can get away with it.
[/quote]
I'll go them one better:
It should be unlawful for any public employees, including police officers, to unionize at all. Public employment is, and should be public
service, and it should be undertaken on the firm understanding that such employment
is not a right and being a public employee vests no right of continued employment no matter how long the individual's tenure, and that all public employees serve at the will of the public, as administered through regulations created by
elected public officials. The conditions of employment must be such that the employee understands that he or she may be terminated from public employment for any reason
or no reason at all according to the will of the public, as expressed through their election of officials to enact and administer the public's will, or their employment may be terminated by public referendum and plebescite of the people.
Public employment is a privilege, not a right.
"Seth is Grandmaster Zen Troll who trains his victims to troll themselves every time they think of him" Robert_S
"All that is required for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Edmund Burke
"Those who support denying anyone the right to keep and bear arms for personal defense are fully complicit in every crime that might have been prevented had the victim been effectively armed." Seth
© 2013/2014/2015/2016 Seth, all rights reserved. No reuse, republication, duplication, or derivative work is authorized.
