Derek Chauvin Murder Trial


Jazz4ever

Well-Known Member
I just wish we held our political leaders to the same standards we're trying to hold professional athletes.

Why put police in a position to escalate the situation and kill someone?

I get if someone is being threatened with a knife. To me, that case is probably justified.

But do we really need police escalating a situation with a lightless bike, minor traffic violation, or someone selling cigarettes? That can't be handled by someone else?

Why put them in a position to potentially execute someone in a split second? And when they kill someone, why isn't there an automatic independent review board to ensure the police weren't acting inappropriately? Letting the police investigate the police is like letting the fox guard the henhouse. This essentially gives the police a license to kill.

No other profession in our country operates like this.

Who would be on this "review board"? Who could fairly grade them without having done this incredibly difficult job?
 


TheGoldStandard

Well-Known Member
I just wish we held our political leaders to the same standards we're trying to hold professional athletes.

Why put police in a position to escalate the situation and kill someone?

I get if someone is being threatened with a knife. To me, that case is probably justified.

But do we really need police escalating a situation with a lightless bike, minor traffic violation, or someone selling cigarettes? That can't be handled by someone else?

Why put them in a position to potentially execute someone in a split second? And when they kill someone, why isn't there an automatic independent review board to ensure the police weren't acting inappropriately? Letting the police investigate the police is like letting the fox guard the henhouse. This essentially gives the police a license to kill.

No other profession in our country operates like this.
We need to train police not to escalate. Having non-police handle "lesser" crimes is not a good idea, as they often turn into dangerous situations. We don't want a new profession of non-police putting themselves at risk. As it is, I appreciate having as many police as we can, but we need new police with different training. Where I live, they don't even investigate burglaries because they are overwhelmed. And if there is a violent crime, odds are cops won't get there in time to save you.

It is about training to deescalate. If you see someone with a gun (and no one in harms way) take a tactical approach to see if the person with a gun will put it down.

Vegas put in a policy that if someone runs the person chasing should not be the one to make the arrest but to coordinate with backup. Use of force went down almost 25%.

I'd like to see more female lead roles, citizen oversight (happens many places) and more education (college degree in a related field with specific courses on deescalation, constitutional law, etc.) I'd also like to see more pay in the profession so we get a better talent pool. Additionally, part of each cops duty should be going to community events to get to know the people they serve and protect. Do all this and I will be happy to have more cops around.
 
Last edited:

AlaskanAssassin

Well-Known Member
I just wish we held our political leaders to the same standards we're trying to hold professional athletes.

But do we really need police escalating a situation with a lightless bike, minor traffic violation, or someone selling cigarettes? That can't be handled by someone else?

We should be holding everyone to the same standards, including general public opinion.

Police are asked to do a broad range of services that just are not compatible. Makes me think of a Reason TV bit. Check out the clip at about 45 seconds in.

 

AlaskanAssassin

Well-Known Member
As it is, I appreciate having as many police as we can, but we need new police with different training. Where I live, they don't even investigate burglaries because they are overwhelmed.
That's funny, because where I live police sure seem to have a lot of time to write citations and issue fines for minor traffic violations. I guess increasing citation revenues is more important than investigating burglaries.
 

The Thriller

Well-Known Member
We need to train police not to escalate. Having non-police handle "lesser" crimes is not a good idea, as they often turn into dangerous situations. We don't want a new profession of non-police putting themselves at risk. As it is, I appreciate having as many police as we can, but we need new police with different training. Where I live, they don't even investigate burglaries because they are overwhelmed. And if there is a violent crime, odds are cops won't get there in time to save you.

It is about training to deescalate. If you see someone with a gun (and no one in harms way) take a tactical approach to see if the person with a gun will put it down.

Vegas put in a policy that if someone runs the person chasing shoot not be the one to make the arrest but to coordinate with backup. Use of force went down almost 25%.

I'd like to see more female lead roles, citizen oversight (happens many places) and more education (college degree in a related field with specific courses on deescalation, constitutional law, etc.) I'd also like to see more pay in the profession so we get a better talent pool. Additionally, part of each cops duty should be going to community events to get to know the people they serve and protect. Do all this and I will be happy to have more cops around.
Yeah. Let’s keep letting these guys handle things:


Come on.

The issue is the training has been poor and we don’t need police to escalate all of these non-violent issues. Just the silly automobile issues alone incentives police to focus on the most vulnerable, exploit the poorest, and exacerbate poor relations between races. Seriously, think about it. When the police want to find drugs, are they going to patrol Holladay or West Valley City? And we wonder why the poorest among us are getting fed up with being exploited?

We shouldn't have to rely on the police for everything. They often escalate the situation just with their presence.

Read this before commenting further:

EDIT I couldn't find this earlier but now I have. Why don't we enact reforms like this?
Since June 1, 2020, a mental health clinician and a paramedic have traveled around the city in a white van handling low-level incidents, like trespassing and mental health episodes, that would have otherwise fallen to patrol officers with badges and guns. In its first six months, the Support Team Assisted Response program, or STAR, has responded to 748 incidents. None required police or led to arrests or jail time.
Remember just a few months ago when Salt Lake Police killed an autistic and unarmed 13 year old boy? Why the hell were they the ones responding to this? Couldn't some social workers have handled it?

So we can reform the police with some of these common sense reforms or I guess maintain the status quo since that's working out so well... Cuz the police have hard jobs and no one understands them and we can't ever change anything in this country...
Just curious, isn't anyone getting tired of the defeatist attitude in America? Since when did we become such defeatist losers? We're a bunch of Trump whiners and *******. Whether it be with climate change, gun violence, health care, police brutality... I just don't get it. If the Mormon pioneers had had the same defeatist attitude as current Utahns/Americans, they would've starved to death in one year. "It's just dry here. It's too hot. It's too cold. Building a town in the middle of the Wasatch is too hard and no one understands us."
Cmon guys, we're Americans dammit. We've got a problem with police brutality. There are better ways to serve and protect our communities. Let's fix things!
 
Last edited:

The Thriller

Well-Known Member
Who would be on this "review board"? Who could fairly grade them without having done this incredibly difficult job?
There are plenty of incredibly difficult jobs out there. I'm tired of hearing excuses to maintain an unaccountable privileged profession because. This is a stupid and defeatist excuse to not do anything. It’s merely a way for conservatives who don’t want to think or do anything to end the conversation.

Why maintain the status quo when we can do better? Many other industrialized countries have independent parties evaluate police officers. Why are our police the exception?

 
Last edited:

The Thriller

Well-Known Member
It's funny when like a writer has the name Letterman, a fisherman has the name Fisher, a horticulturalist has the name Gardner, etc. This guy has a very appropriate name as well.
Please show him respect. His job is hard and no one can understand his job and why do you hate the police you unpatriotic commie?!
 

The Thriller

Well-Known Member
Did that autistic kid who was shot in Utah by police, die?
He was shot 11 times but survived. Who knows if he’ll suffer long-term organ, facial, or muscle damage? But why are we calling armed police for an unarmed 13 year old autistic kid? Can’t we reform to make a better system?

Or is American society just too lazy, noncreative, defeatist, and obstinate to reform the police?
 

Top