TX - Sandra Bland, 28, found dead in jail cell, Waller County, 13 July 2015 #3

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
By your logic, someone would be just as correct if they said that they 'could' be causing 20-30 more shootings by their regular abuses of power.

Regarding traffic stops -- they are not effective for preventing other crimes, especially in light of the biases of LE:


"A study in Arizona shows that during 2006-2007, the state highway patrol was significantly more likely to stop African Americans and Hispanics than Whites on all the highways studied, while Native Americans and persons of Middle Eastern descent were more likely to be stopped on nearly all the highways studied. The highway patrol was 3.5 times more likely to search a stopped Native American than a White, and 2.5 times more likely to search a stopped African American or Hispanic.

The Arizona study also shows that racial profiling is counterproductive and a misallocation of scarce law enforcement resources. Although Native Americans, Hispanics, Middle Easterners, and Asians were far more likely to be stopped and searched than Whites on Arizona's highways, Whites who were searched were more likely to be transporting drugs, guns, or other contraband. While African Americans were twice as likely as Whites to be stopped and searched, the rates of contraband seizures for the two groups were comparable."

http://www.civilrights.org/publicat...acial.html?referrer=https://www.google.co.uk/
And, a review of the stops previously made by BE don't indicate a pattern of racial profiling, tho granted, it's a small dataset to try to draw trends on.

http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-sandra-bland-trooper-encinia-20150810-story.html

Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk
 
By your logic, someone would be just as correct if they said that they 'could' be causing 20-30 more shootings by their regular abuses of power.

Regarding traffic stops -- they are not effective for preventing other crimes, especially in light of the biases of LE:


"A study in Arizona shows that during 2006-2007, the state highway patrol was significantly more likely to stop African Americans and Hispanics than Whites on all the highways studied, while Native Americans and persons of Middle Eastern descent were more likely to be stopped on nearly all the highways studied. The highway patrol was 3.5 times more likely to search a stopped Native American than a White, and 2.5 times more likely to search a stopped African American or Hispanic.

The Arizona study also shows that racial profiling is counterproductive and a misallocation of scarce law enforcement resources. Although Native Americans, Hispanics, Middle Easterners, and Asians were far more likely to be stopped and searched than Whites on Arizona's highways, Whites who were searched were more likely to be transporting drugs, guns, or other contraband. While African Americans were twice as likely as Whites to be stopped and searched, the rates of contraband seizures for the two groups were comparable."

http://www.civilrights.org/publicat...acial.html?referrer=https://www.google.co.uk/

Here are some examples to counter the above article:


Traffic stops regularly result in criminal arrests, drug interdiction, and criminal investigations. Some traffic stops are world renowned. For example, the Oklahoma City bombing suspect, Timothy McVeigh, was apprehended by an Oklahoma State Trooper while making a "routine" traffic stop. Serial murderer Ted Bundy, who killed over 22 women, and the Atlanta child killer, Wayne Williams, who killed 28, were also apprehended because of traffic stops. "Son of Sam," David Berkowitz, who killed 6 and wounded 7, was captured because of a parking ticket.

While not necessarily making national news, police officers and sheriff's deputies make hundreds of traffic stops every day that result in criminal apprehensions, directly affecting the security and safety of communities across the country
. There are many examples of the agencies and officers who make this a regular part of their job. The following illustrate some examples.

Doña Ana County Sheriff's Department, New Mexico

Sheriff's Deputy Kenneth Wooten initiated a traffic stop for speeding (86 mph in 65 mph zone). The violator, later identified as a convicted felon, became increasingly nervous as the deputy talked to him. Deputy Wooten called criminal investigators and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms to assist. A search of the vehicle revealed several weapons with the serial numbers removed. The weapons were confiscated, and it was determined they were stolen during a burglary. Deputy Wooten's actions to issue a speeding ticket removed dangerous weapons from the hands of a convicted felon, thus possibly preventing further violent crimes from being committed.

California Highway Patrol

Officer Les Knapp stopped a truck for an expired Arizona registration. The female driver and male passenger were unable to produce current registration information for the vehicle. A vehicle identification number check revealed the truck had been taken in Arizona during a homicide three days prior to the stop. Descriptions of a couple wanted in connection with the murder matched the descriptions of the vehicle occupants Officer Knapp had stopped. Officer Knapp placed both subjects under arrest for auto theft, receiving stolen property, and homicide. After questioning, the couple eventually admitted involvement in the homicide. Arizona authorities extradited them to face charges. Officer Knapp has made other "looking beyond the ticket" stops and says catching criminals is simply "part of his job."

Back to Top

Colorado State Patrol

Trooper Timothy Marnell stopped a vehicle for a speeding violation. The driver, who did not have any identification, was later identified as a wanted and extremely dangerous fugitive. The subject was looking for papers in the vehicle when Trooper Marnell noticed he was reaching under his jacket. Trooper Marnell felt he was in danger, drew his weapon and directed the occupant from the vehicle. Without backup, Marnell took the subject into custody. The subject was carrying a semi-automatic handgun in a shoulder holster under his jacket and two illegal knives. He had a sawed-off shotgun under a sleeping bag on the front seat of the vehicle. The subject was an escaped felon from a Utah correctional facility with convictions for murder, armed robbery, and attempted murder of a police officer. Trooper Marnell had no idea how this speeding violation would turn out when he decided to stop the vehicle. His initiative and attention to cues "beyond the ticket" resulted in a significant arrest and contributed to his own personal safety.

http://www.nhtsa.gov/people/injury/enforce/Beyond/percept.htm
 
Anecdotes.

Nothing more I can say. Statistics > Anecdotes, any day of the week.
 
Anecdotes.

Nothing more I can say. Statistics > Anecdotes, any day of the week.

Anecdotes, which included huge arrests that came from traffic stops. You asked for a SOURCE and I gave you one. One that explains the following:

While not necessarily making national news, police officers and sheriff's deputies make hundreds of traffic stops every day that result in criminal apprehensions, directly affecting the security and safety of communities across the country.


That was the point I was making and you asked for a source. I gave you one. It is not about statistics, it is about results. If a cop stops people all day long for minor traffic infractions, that is fine. Because people need a nudge to pay for the new stickers or to get their tail lights fixed sometimes. But if just one of those stops gets some illegal weapons off the streets or gets a criminal locked up on an open warrant, then thats even better. JMO
 
Anecdotes.

Nothing more I can say. Statistics > Anecdotes, any day of the week.

Those anecdotes prove the following statement of yours INCORRECT:



"Regarding traffic stops -- they are not effective for preventing other crimes, especially in light of the biases of LE"


Those anecdotes gave SOLID EXAMPLES of crimes that were prevented because of various traffic stops.
 
It is not about statistics, it is about results.

rsbm

The only way to evaluate results is through statistics.

Sure, a guy arrested McVeigh on a traffic stop. Perhaps if there were more LEOs looking at right wing extremists rather than giving out traffic tickets, McVeigh would have been stopped before he killed all of those innocent people.

Just because pulling people over results in some arrests does not mean that it is the best way to police or even that it is better than any other way. Studies show that those stops are cash grabs and largely inefficient -- that is, they are not an effective way to deploy police resources. But a lot of sheriffs and elected LE officials like them because they fill the coffers and give numbers of arrests that demonstrate work product. They do not, on their own, show any sort of intelligent use of a public resource.
 
rsbm

The only way to evaluate results is through statistics.

Sure, a guy arrested McVeigh on a traffic stop. Perhaps if there were more LEOs looking at right wing extremists rather than giving out traffic tickets, McVeigh would have been stopped before he killed all of those innocent people.

Just because pulling people over results in some arrests does not mean that it is the best way to police or even that it is better than any other way. Studies show that those stops are cash grabs and largely inefficient -- that is, they are not an effective way to deploy police resources. But a lot of sheriffs and elected LE officials like them because they fill the coffers and give numbers of arrests that demonstrate work product. They do not, on their own, show any sort of intelligent use of a public resource.

Statistics can be made to say anything one wants them to say.

Are you seriously saying that cops should no longer do traffic stops? Whose studies ? BlacklivesMatter studies?

What a joke. I am sure there are lots of groups that don't want cops pulling people over anymore. I shudder to think of the results, however.
 
OT responding to OT. :) Sandra Bland's arrest and suicide has sparked heated debate. I'm sure we all agree that a police force is necessary. But I see a lot of criticism of how LE does things (some certainly justified). So I have to ask...What are your solutions? How would you "run the zoo" (borrowing from a favorite Dr. Seuss book "If I Ran the Zoo.") If you believe that police are targeting some people unfairly, what is the solution? If you believe they are trigger-happy, what do you propose? If you believe we are living in a police state, what do you want to do about it? Etc...

It's too late for Sandra. But I'm curious what the critics here would change...and above all, how they would go about it. These are sincere questions.
 
OT responding to OT. :) Sandra Bland's arrest and suicide has sparked heated debate. I'm sure we all agree that a police force is necessary. But I see a lot of criticism of how LE does things (some certainly justified). So I have to ask...What are your solutions? How would you "run the zoo" (borrowing from a favorite Dr. Seuss book "If I Ran the Zoo.") If you believe that police are targeting some people unfairly, what is the solution? If you believe they are trigger-happy, what do you propose? If you believe we are living in a police state, what do you want to do about it? Etc...

It's too late for Sandra. But I'm curious what the critics here would change...and above all, how they would go about it. These are sincere questions.

1. Mandatory body and dash cams on officers at all times.
2. Where and when possible - hire and promote within the community.
3. Better training on mental illness for those in the field and support staff (e.g. dispatchers, intake staff, guards, etc.)
4. Re-examine legislation passed in the '70s and '80s that led to hyper-institutionalization - this has had a knock-on effect of people being ticketed for relatively minor, often non-violent offenses seemingly to generate revenue. I think politicians need to look for other sources of cash.
5. Better training on non-lethal methods of force.
6. Swift and transparent reprimand of officers found to have flagrantly disregarded departmental rules or abused their authority.
7. Change how traffic stops are conducted - in 'problematic' areas two officers could be assigned.
8. A national hiring blacklist. Some officers, when fired for offenses that have led to the injury and/or death of innocent civilians, have simply moved departments.
9. Mandatory, on-going counseling for officers to cope with the stressors of putting their lives at risk for a paycheck.
10. Better mental health screening prior to recruitment.
11. As has been done with the prison telecom industry, limit the profiteering from crime for everyone - to include local government generating revenue in way of fines and court costs all the way up to multi-million dollar corporations who lobby for harsher, lengthier punishments for non-violent crimes. Make sure crime really doesn't pay, for anyone.


This is my pre-coffee list, off the top of my head. Subject to change once caffeine hits my blood stream. :biggrin:
 
OT responding to OT. :) Sandra Bland's arrest and suicide has sparked heated debate. I'm sure we all agree that a police force is necessary. But I see a lot of criticism of how LE does things (some certainly justified). So I have to ask...What are your solutions? How would you "run the zoo" (borrowing from a favorite Dr. Seuss book "If I Ran the Zoo.") If you believe that police are targeting some people unfairly, what is the solution? If you believe they are trigger-happy, what do you propose? If you believe we are living in a police state, what do you want to do about it? Etc...

It's too late for Sandra. But I'm curious what the critics here would change...and above all, how they would go about it. These are sincere questions.

I would go about it by implementing a citizen's training course which would essentially teach civilians how to respond and react when pulled over in a traffic stop. Sensitivity and understanding are essential for all persons - life is a two-way street.

:cow:
 
Because they could have been 30 or 40 shootings if not for the arrests made during traffic stops.

So then you admit that you have no evidence to back up your claim that police harassing motorists for minor infractions is getting guns, drugs, wanted criminals off of the streets?
 
rsbm

The only way to evaluate results is through statistics.

Sure, a guy arrested McVeigh on a traffic stop. Perhaps if there were more LEOs looking at right wing extremists rather than giving out traffic tickets, McVeigh would have been stopped before he killed all of those innocent people.

Just because pulling people over results in some arrests does not mean that it is the best way to police or even that it is better than any other way. Studies show that those stops are cash grabs and largely inefficient -- that is, they are not an effective way to deploy police resources. But a lot of sheriffs and elected LE officials like them because they fill the coffers and give numbers of arrests that demonstrate work product. They do not, on their own, show any sort of intelligent use of a public resource.

According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, traffic stops led to arrest in just 1% of examined cases in 2011. This report is full of apparently 'useless' statistics - to include that the majority of drivers felt a traffic stop was legitimate when the officer explained the reason for the stop. Apparently, communication goes a long way with detainees. Perhaps Sandra Bland would have exited her vehicle with no further incident had BE simply stated the reasons behind his 'lawful' order.

http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/pbtss11.pdf
 
1. Mandatory body and dash cams on officers at all times.
2. Where and when possible - hire and promote within the community.
3. Better training on mental illness for those in the field and support staff (e.g. dispatchers, intake staff, guards, etc.)
4. Re-examine legislation passed in the '70s and '80s that led to hyper-institutionalization - this has had a knock-on effect of people being ticketed for relatively minor, often non-violent offenses seemingly to generate revenue. I think politicians need to look for other sources of cash.
5. Better training on non-lethal methods of force.
6. Swift and transparent reprimand of officers found to have flagrantly disregarded departmental rules or abused their authority.
7. Change how traffic stops are conducted - in 'problematic' areas two officers could be assigned.
8. A national hiring blacklist. Some officers, when fired for offenses that have led to the injury and/or death of innocent civilians, have simply moved departments.
9. Mandatory, on-going counseling for officers to cope with the stressors of putting their lives at risk for a paycheck.
10. Better mental health screening prior to recruitment.
11. As has been done with the prison telecom industry, limit the profiteering from crime for everyone - to include local government generating revenue in way of fines and court costs all the way up to multi-million dollar corporations who lobby for harsher, lengthier punishments for non-violent crimes. Make sure crime really doesn't pay, for anyone.


This is my pre-coffee list, off the top of my head. Subject to change once caffeine hits my blood stream. :biggrin:

This is a great list!

I would add to 6: Incidents should be investigated by a third-party.

And:

Get rid of politicians who condone or endorse police brutality.
When cops lose their jobs they should also lose their pensions, retirement, and any other benefits that would continue after they lose their jobs.

Working to end poverty and racism is big picture and longterm, but it would also reduce crime and incidences of violence involving police officers. (Likely impossible to fix but we could try a lot harder.)
 
This is a great list!

I would add to 6: Incidents should be investigated by a third-party.

And:

Get rid of politicians who condone or endorse police brutality.
When cops lose their jobs they should also lose their pensions, retirement, and any other benefits that would continue after they lose their jobs.

Working to end poverty and racism is big picture and longterm, but it would also reduce crime and incidences of violence involving police officers. (Likely impossible to fix but we could try a lot harder.)

Ok..
I would be ok with LE's benefits being taken away if they are found guilty.
Now how about the criminals?
They should lose all benefits as well, no more food stamps, no more welfare, no more free insurance and other benefit available to up standing citizens.
 
Ok..
I would be ok with LE's benefits being taken away if they are found guilty.
Now how about the criminals?
They should lose all benefits as well, no more food stamps, no more welfare, no more free insurance and other benefit available to up standing citizens.

In most cases I think taking away their benefits, if they have them, would only increase poverty and limit their options. What if they are disabled? Mentally ill? Veterans? Senior citizens? And I think we're mostly referring to citizens who are abused, brutalized, or murdered by cops when they don't need to be. They aren't necessarily criminals, but if they are, their punishment should fit the crime. Criminals are still citizens.
 
Ok..
I would be ok with LE's benefits being taken away if they are found guilty.
Now how about the criminals?
They should lose all benefits as well, no more food stamps, no more welfare, no more free insurance and other benefit available to up standing citizens.

If the goal is rehabilitation then this is a terrible idea and would only help keep the cycle of crime moving. This would also negatively affect innocent people such as children and spouses.
 
So then you admit that you have no evidence to back up your claim that police harassing motorists for minor infractions is getting guns, drugs, wanted criminals off of the streets?

I posted an article that had solid examples of how it does so. And I know some examples, personally. I know of a traffic stop for lack of registration that ended with finding a sawed off shotgun and a stolen Glock. I know of another stop that ended up with finding out the passenger had a warrant for murder in another state. So YES, traffic stops do get guns/drugs off the street.
 
Ok we shouldn't take anything away from the criminals.
What should happen to them then?
Because taking away the benefits of the LE officer also would hurt their family etc etc
Does that not matter?
 
According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, traffic stops led to arrest in just 1% of examined cases in 2011. This report is full of apparently 'useless' statistics - to include that the majority of drivers felt a traffic stop was legitimate when the officer explained the reason for the stop. Apparently, communication goes a long way with detainees. Perhaps Sandra Bland would have exited her vehicle with no further incident had BE simply stated the reasons behind his 'lawful' order.

http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/pbtss11.pdf

The purpose of traffic stops is not 'arrest.' The purpose is to correct certain infractions, educate drivers, and PREVENT them from driving drunk, or carrying contraband, KNOWING they will possibly be pulled over. And if 1% of the time they do have grounds for arrest, that is fine.
 
Ok we shouldn't take anything away from the criminals.
What should happen to them then?
Because taking away the benefits of the LE officer also would hurt their family etc etc
Does that not matter?

Apparently not.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
249
Guests online
348
Total visitors
597

Forum statistics

Threads
609,107
Messages
18,249,615
Members
234,536
Latest member
UrukHai
Back
Top