USA Politics

[SurprisedByBeauty]

I admire Churchill for the usual reasons and think a statue of him should be allowed to lawfully and gracefully topple itself.

Preferably by an excess of drink, not some drunk anarchist hooligans.

That, incidentally, is also one of the problems I have with the current fad of idolatry. Look at the brainless white idiots delighting in their destruction and dancing on the thing with flip-flops and Kufiya, holding on to their joint in their free hand. There's no consideration there, no nuance, no will for reflection or self-criticism; the cause is, at best, the thin whitewash for their lootish tendencies.

Some statues might have to go, others ought probably remain. But it does us well to consider the changing mores of the times that the type of people we once put on pedestals, we now wish to pretend never existed.

I don't see how such a statue should not also be able to become a statue reminding us of our past follies and future attempts of getting it right; a warning... a shaming perhaps even... or -- dreaming here -- a symbol to the nuance in life... where the bad and the good, the evil and the dear often go hand in hand. And, failing that, build a bigger statue of the heroes-de-jour right next to it, twice as big, to put it into context.

[geralmar]

I do wonder if an enlightening and factual discussion of criminology can occur on GMG.

I wonder if police/community interactions would improve it policing returned to the "beat" system.  A policeman used to be assigned to a specific area of his city-- several square blocks, downtown, a neighborhood, etc.-- which he would walk.   Residents would get to know him and he would get to know the residents.  If he responded to a "situation" there was the increased likelihood he would know the people involved and act accordingly.  I am fascinated watching the strolling cop in Hollywood movies of the 1940s and '50s.  Now, unless there is trouble I only see the police in patrol cars and I know them little more than they know me.  Long ago I read that the beat system was "inadequate" for some reason not specified. 

[SurprisedByBeauty]

I wonder if police/community interactions would improve it policing returned to the "beat" system.  A policeman used to be assigned to a specific area of his city-- several square blocks, downtown, a neighborhood, etc.-- which he would walk.   Residents would get to know him and he would get to know the residents.  If he responded to a "situation" there was the increased likelihood he would know the people involved and act accordingly.  I am fascinated watching the strolling cop in Hollywood movies of the 1940s and '50s.  Now, unless there is trouble I only see the police in patrol cars and I know them little more than they know me.  Long ago I read that the beat system was "inadequate" for some reason not specified.

I've been thinking the same thing. We NEED to get a personal relationship back between police and policed. From both sides. Not easily possible in vast neighborhoods, I suppose, or in very dangerous ones. But it's necessary. And the police needs to be trained not to perceive every interaction with civilians as a potential threat, even though all too many such encounters obviously are. The police needs to, in essence, let down its guard, accept higher losses in certain situations, and start de-escalating rather than militarizing. And it needs better educated, better-paid people. Don't defund the police. Fund it better and make it more accountable.

[Todd]

And the police needs to be trained not to perceive every interaction with civilians as a potential threat, even though all too many such encounters obviously are.

Who says they aren't? 

[SurprisedByBeauty]

Who says they aren't?

The all-too-many incidents we see, witness, and even experience say that too many are not adequately trained.

[Todd]

The all-too-many incidents we see, witness, and even experience say that too many are not adequately trained.

Not really.  Training varies across jurisdictions, and how different officers respond to specific situations also varies.  The politicized press relies on sensationalism to sell papers and entice clicks.  To be sure, there are too many incidents of use of excess force, but without knowing what types of training police officers actually receive, and what alternatives are available, a blanket proclamation about how police are trained appears inaccurate, or at least incomplete.

[Karl Henning]

The all-too-many incidents we see, witness, and even experience say that too many are not adequately trained.

Ask a Trumpkin to open his eyes: good luck with that!

[Gurn Blanston]

The all-too-many incidents we see, witness, and even experience say that too many are not adequately trained.

If one doesn't accept the obvious "out" of inadequate training, there are not many options remaining if you wish to exclude racism or just plain meanness. Certainly there are percentages of all of those things, but speaking as a retired professional trainer, I have to say, even IF inadequate training is the root cause, there is still a 'hearts and minds' issue. Simply teaching right from wrong has no value without buy-in...

[Gurn Blanston]

Someone deserving of being on a pedestal? Perhaps...

[SurprisedByBeauty]

Not really.  Training varies across jurisdictions, and how different officers respond to specific situations also varies.  The politicized press relies on sensationalism to sell papers and entice clicks.  To be sure, there are too many incidents of use of excess force, but without knowing what types of training police officers actually receive, and what alternatives are available, a blanket proclamation about how police are trained appears inaccurate, or at least incomplete.

Blanket statements are, indeed, of limited use. And yes, obviously readers prefer to click on things that outrage them... and the press responds.

But that said, there are clearly too many officers who respond in ways that are not helpful (to understate it, considerably). And even without knowing what alternatives are available, it is also clear that an alternative is necessary. And it's not just training, of course. It is, as Gurn points out, a matter of the material... the people.

Ultimately, we need police to take greater risks, be more prepared, and -- to put it very bluntly -- more intelligent and empathetic. And that means they need to earn a lot more money to attract the right crop of people... and the screening needs to be better.

No such brief point can do justice to the realities. But we're not asked to draft legislation or the like. We're merely thinking about what might bring on the change that is so direly needed. And what we need is an end to the police-vs.-populous perception. The demilitarization of the police while ensuring their safety in extreme situations. (Of which they encounter many... but not always... or even in the majority of times.) And an end to the vicious circle where police suspect anyone to be a criminal and wrong-doer before sorting the facts as best they can. Heck, I don't know how to introduce humanity back into a business that sees and deals with some grim stuff. But we ought to try. Even if discussing this in a classical music forum might not seem like a particularly effective way of getting there.

Ask a Trumpkin to open his eyes: good luck with that!

Karl, there's no point casting out people who think differently than we/you, on appearance or allegiance. We are all -- most of us, at any ate -- striving towards a better society. It's much more interesting to figure out where the differences lie and to try to overcome them and find the common denominators than to cast judgment and dismiss a whole section -- imagined or real -- of the population at hand. That's what's gotten us in that mess in the first place.

[Todd]

But that said, there are clearly too many officers who respond in ways that are not helpful (to understate it, considerably).

It is not at all clear that this is the case.  (This is premised on an interpretation of the use of underlining as a way to emphasize something perceived to be widespread or close to widespread.)  The main problem with this topic, and the reason I posed the question I did last week, is that these discussions end up being factless.  I do understand that there is no "national database" of police activity, to use an idea I've seen repeated in the press multiple times, but claims of how many officers do what are not backed up with facts.  I know DOJ publishes data, as do state level agencies, but those reports do not inform these discussions, nor do they typically inform sensationalist reporting.

Now, let's take the salary argument.  What do police officers earn on average?  A quick Google search will reveal one number that means next to nothing.  It does not account for wide differences even within states.  Nor does it account for pensions, which absolutely must be considered in total compensation.  It also does not account for overtime.  It is not unheard of for police to earn more than time and a half on overtime.  As with claims about teacher salaries, it is far more complex than simply stating they should earn more.  (What profession should earn less?) 

The argument that screening needs to be better, that officers need to be more intelligent - meaning what, precisely? - and empathetic - same question - again fails to take into account widely varying standards.  For instance, Multnomah County deputies must have a four year degree.  Other jurisdictions across the country require similar educational standards.  And yet these jurisdictions also have examples of improper behavior. 

And what we need is an end to the police-vs.-populous perception.

Not everyone perceives things this way. 

[drogulus]

The confederate ones should be in museums- Grant and Washington absolutely do not deserve to be toppled, they should be on full public display.

Just give it another year or two, I bet they will be going for MLK. There's already people that don't like him for the fact that he advocated peaceful protests. Seems that is the next logical step.

I think now is the time when many liberals will have to make a decision on how far they want to join the communists- either go along with them or have a schism and say enough is enough.

     The communists have a decision to make about whether they will join me. I don't make decisions for them and likewise.

[SurprisedByBeauty]

Not everyone perceives things this way.

It's already broken if too many do.

[Todd]

It's already broken if too many do.

How many do, and who determines how many is too many?

[arpeggio]

     That's not a good interpretation of his refusal to budge, which doesn't come from socialism any more than my refusal to budge on some positions is due to whatever ideology I might adopt...

Thanks, your response is better that anything I could come up with 

[drogulus]

Thanks, your response is better that anything I could come up with 

     I do qualify my observation when I say it applies to ideologies with learning in them. Not all people who think they are socialist are learners, though one expects that dedicated non-learners will call themselves something more ferocious to indicate that.

[Karl Henning]

Karl, there's no point casting out people who think differently than we/you, on appearance or allegiance.

You're right, and I do not.

[geralmar]

Back, briefly, to policing.  I live in a town with a population of 4,000.  I could easily walk across it in half an hour.  Yet the police zip around in police cruisers, too fast to get a sense of what is really happening in my neighborhood (admittedly very little).  I have no idea which cop is the car that rolls by at 1:30 a.m. each morning when I feed the neighborhood stray cat.  I doubt the cop even sees me wave.  Last week I read about an idiot in a "gated community" of Los Angeles who called the police because she saw a black man in the wrong place.  The police officer who responded immediately recognized the man as a homeowner just working in his own yard; said hello, and the incident was over without any racial ugliness or police "mistake".   (The woman was savaged on social media).  The stop could have escalated tragically if the cop did not know the (black) man.  I have no knowledge why the neighborhood cop and foot patrols ended.  The cynical part of me suspects a climate controlled car with a convenient cup holder and no need to actually get out and walk had as much to do with it as "effective policing".  I know "walking a beat" is not a panacea-- as a kid I learned to read by working through the Sunday Detroit Free Press and was puzzled by the recurring story about the "negroe male" killed by an errant police "warning shot"--  but I do believe at least some of the police/community disconnect would recede if police presence didn't feel like an alien occupying army.

None of this is to minimize the issues of "police culture" and police unions.  I retired from local government and learned much about our police from the human resources manager.

[Karl Henning]

Oklahoma reports more than 300 new cases on day of Trump rally. Also seen (I paraphrase minimally): Trump holds indoor rally disregsarding CDC guidelines on masks and social distancing—Trump loves you loving him more than he loves you living.

[arpeggio]

I disagree a 100%, he is the perfect example of an ideologue repeating ad naseum the same critiques despite being corrected  or confronted multiple times. When unpleasant facts or realities get in the way he refuses to answer them, ends the conversation and then waits for another chance to repeat himself all over again.

There are many reasons for my feelings concerning this issues.  One of them is that I had a close relative who many years ago had an abortion for medical reasons.  It was a very difficult decision for her.  In spite of her circumstances I know that some would be unsympathetic.  In this instance it is very unfair to accuse me of being an ideologue.   

Abortion is a difficult issue and there are no easy answers.  I want to respect the feelings of those who disagree but it is difficult.