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

[bwt42]

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.)

A lot of police officers belong to unions & I'm guessing they have rights that can't be taken away if fired. jmo

 

[Nana]

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.

There wouldn't be a need to rehabilitate if they didn't brake the law in the first place.
Maybe the criminal should think first, if they cared at all for the ones it would effect.

 

[bluesneakers]

A lot of police officers belong to unions & I'm guessing they have rights that can't be taken away if fired. jmo

Which is exactly my point.

 

[katydid23]

Which is exactly my point.

So officers shouldn't have rights?

 

[katydid23]

So we are going to ask officers to be on camera, every second at all times, be subject to 3rd party reviews of their conduct, which could end up in their being fired and losing their pensions, and being arrested and charged if they use too much force in defensive situations.

How many cops are going to want to apply and work under conditions that will be possibly biased against them?

 

[Montjoy]

How many cops are going to want to apply and work under conditions that will be possibly biased against them?

rsbm

Fewer bad and abusive cops, I would guess. I don't see how being held to a set of rules and being accountable is in any way unfair. They work for the public, not themselves, and those who obey the rules would have nothing to fear.

 

[Lilibet]

If this list is what you came up with pre-coffee I'm impressed! This is excellent and well thought out. One thing I appreciate about your list is that only two items (6 and 8) are punitive. The rest are ways to support and help LE to do a difficult and thankless job. Thank you and other posters for responding to my query.

What I hoped to accomplish by asking my questions was to illustrate the complexity of the serious problems we see with LE. Your list makes that clear IMO. Implementing (or even getting departments to be motivated to implement) and then afford these excellent suggestions is the part that is even more complex. I'm not saying it can't be done. But I think it makes for a nuanced, productive and less adversarial discussion of Sandra Bland to acknowledge the complexity of preventing situations from escalating unnecessarily. In her case, items 1, 2, 3, 4, 9 and 10 (and perhaps 7) could have made a difference IMO.

Again, thanks! :tyou:

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:

 

[human]

So we are going to ask officers to be on camera, every second at all times, be subject to 3rd party reviews of their conduct, which could end up in their being fired and losing their pensions, and being arrested and charged if they use too much force in defensive situations.

How many cops are going to want to apply and work under conditions that will be possibly biased against them?

Many teachers are under camera watch and are evaluated continuously. People in retail are under camera watch. People in restaurants and banks are under camera watch.

The camera tells the tale.

As far as the pension, they earned it while working. If fired, they cannot contribute to the pension.

 

[Nana]

So it's LE that needs to do all the changing?
I think not, if it weren't for the ****s, criminals, drug dealers, druggies and on and on, there wouldn't be a problem!
Cops matter too!
Maybe they should do mailers and let everyone know don't break the flippin law!

 

[human]

So it's LE that needs to do all the changing?
I think not, if it weren't for the ****s, criminals, drug dealers, druggies and on and on, there wouldn't be a problem!
Cops matter too!
Maybe they should do mailers and let everyone know don't break the flippin law!

Police should be trained. Just like any job. Maybe we should be mailed instructions not to smoke ,drink, eat so we are overweight, exercise everyday. That kind of thing so doctors don't have to have so many patients and we don't have to pay so much in health care. Easy solution!

 

[bluesneakers]

So it's LE that needs to do all the changing?
I think not, if it weren't for the ****s, criminals, drug dealers, druggies and on and on, there wouldn't be a problem!
Cops matter too!
Maybe they should do mailers and let everyone know don't break the flippin law!

I believe if we made an attempt to reduce poverty, treat mental illness and addiction, end systemic racism, and ensure equal rights for everyone it would make a huge difference in the amount of crime and criminals LE deals with every day. IMO if we want to change criminal culture we need to change the overall culture.

We can't order criminals to change, but we pay LE to do a specific job. I think it's completely reasonable we expect them to treat citizens fairly, with respect, and without hostility and unnecessary violence or brutality.

The original question was about Sandra though, and what LE's critics would change.

 

[Night-owl]

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.

BBM

precisely why you are not able to punish police you don't like by doing all kind of punitive things to them.

You want to attract good people to a job by threatening to take away a pension they contributed to for years? Really?

Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk

 

[Night-owl]

rsbm

Fewer bad and abusive cops, I would guess. I don't see how being held to a set of rules and being accountable is in any way unfair. They work for the public, not themselves, and those who obey the rules would have nothing to fear.

Not at all. Fewer applicants all around. So now instead of a pool of recruits, you may be forced to consider less than optimal cadidates.

Since some folks are so hot to up the ante for cops, let's do it across the board. Get convicted of any crime and lose your SSI benifits. Hey, I don't want my tax dollars supporting criminals.

And that's sarcasm, BTW, for those who are unable to detect sarcasm on their own.

Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk

 

[human]

BBM

precisely why you are not able to punish police you don't like by doing all kind of punitive things to them.

You want to attract good people to a job by threatening to take away a pension they contributed to for years? Really?

Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk

I agree that you cannot take a pension away although there are rules in place about being vested, I imagine.

It isn't a matter of "police you don't like", but a matter of police who cannot do their job.

The taxpayers need to pony up the cash. Maybe every five years the police need to take a year or six months off and get their same pay but do a different job. Maybe work in a food shelf. I don't know but the continuous stress is no good.

Police have high rates of divorce and alcoholism. I don't think anyone can do such a job continuously for years

 

[cocomod]

I have a very good friend who happens to be a police officer. Last week, he pulled over a vehicle and rescued a kidnapped child in the process. As he was holding this child, and they were putting the suspect in to the police car, a couple of cars went by and yelled "F**** You". As a citizen, I can tell you that it hurts me to see the kind of disrespect that has grown in our communities. I do think that there are rogue cops. But, I also believe with a great deal of certainty that the change of attitude in our community has made their jobs a lot harder. Their job is thankless. The good that they do is rarely highlighted, but the bad is shown to the world and made to seem that the bad outweighs the good. I can tell you that I would NOT want to live without the law. I think that the attitudes of LE have changed as well. They are becoming more defensive and possibly less tolerant. There needs to be a change all the way around. Just like a marriage - it can't be just one party that changes their attitude to make it work. Both usually need to change in order for true harmony to occur. JMHO

 

[human]

I have a very good friend who happens to be a police officer. Last week, he pulled over a vehicle and rescued a kidnapped child in the process. As he was holding this child, and they were putting the suspect in to the police car, a couple of cars went by and yelled "F**** You". As a citizen, I can tell you that it hurts me to see the kind of disrespect that has grown in our communities. I do think that there are rogue cops. But, I also believe with a great deal of certainty that the change of attitude in our community has made their jobs a lot harder. Their job is thankless. The good that they do is rarely highlighted, but the bad is shown to the world and made to seem that the bad outweighs the good. I can tell you that I would NOT want to live without the law. I think that the attitudes of LE have changed as well. They are becoming more defensive and possibly less tolerant. There needs to be a change all the way around. Just like a marriage - it can't be just one party that changes their attitude to make it work. Both usually need to change in order for true harmony to occur. JMHO

I agree. As a retired white woman who was raised knowing the police are my friend, I am now terrified of what they do.

I don't know if it is TV and movies which makes them think they need to be hard a***** Rambos or what it is, but I have witnessed their cruel manner myself many times now in my community.

I know there are many that have racist views. FB should be looked at for what some of these guys post. Wowsa.

What happened to the officer as your friend instead of the officer who you are afarid of and have to be sure you do everything correctly so you don't get arrrested or blown away?

 

[bluesneakers]

BBM

precisely why you are not able to punish police you don't like by doing all kind of punitive things to them.

You want to attract good people to a job by threatening to take away a pension they contributed to for years? Really?

Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk

When did this turn into punishing police I don't like?? This is about dealing with cops who are violent, aggressive, and homicidal. If you are a police officer found guilty of murdering a citizen, yes, you should lose your benefits. JMO.

IMO "Good people" don't want to become cops to brutalize, harass and murder citizens.

 

[bluesneakers]

I agree that you cannot take a pension away although there are rules in place about being vested, I imagine.

It isn't a matter of "police you don't like", but a matter of police who cannot do their job.

The taxpayers need to pony up the cash. Maybe every five years the police need to take a year or six months off and get their same pay but do a different job. Maybe work in a food shelf. I don't know but the continuous stress is no good.

Police have high rates of divorce and alcoholism. I don't think anyone can do such a job continuously for years

I like the idea of a job rotation every so often, and I believe they do need more support wrt to mental health and job stress, and reducing any stigma they might have to deal with internally.

I also have no problem with paying officers higher salaries and giving them greater benefits on-the-job. I think good people are worth investing in.

 

[bluesneakers]

Not at all. Fewer applicants all around. So now instead of a pool of recruits, you may be forced to consider less than optimal cadidates.

Since some folks are so hot to up the ante for cops, let's do it across the board. Get convicted of any crime and lose your SSI benifits. Hey, I don't want my tax dollars supporting criminals.

And that's sarcasm, BTW, for those who are unable to detect sarcasm on their own.

Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk

What if you offered better pay, more benefits, education assistance, and more vacation time? I think it's possible to make the job a more attractive and lucrative choice, even with more restrictions and regulations. That might bring in more optimal candidates.

 

[BritsKate]

So it's LE that needs to do all the changing?
I think not, if it weren't for the ****s, criminals, drug dealers, druggies and on and on, there wouldn't be a problem!
Cops matter too!
Maybe they should do mailers and let everyone know don't break the flippin law!

What's wrong with cops protecting themselves even more? It's not just about physical protection but also protection from allegations of wrong-doing, which would probably go a long way in restoring some trust within the communities they serve and protect, which may - hopefully - also reduce violence, distrust, and disrespect shown officers in some of those areas.

In terms of economics, it may also be useful tool to avoid local and state governments having to pay out multi-million dollar lawsuits as well. That money can be so much better spent on officers welfare, on enhancing community policing, on technology, on increasing officers pay to ensure the right candidates are being attracted, on defensive equipment, on training, etc.

To bring this back to Sandy...we don't yet know what will happen, of course. But what if BE just following departmental procedure or wearing a bodycam could have avoided the necessity of paying out for a lawsuit? Or what if the jail had followed their own procedures properly? These are just small changes - but they have a far greater potential.

JMO and FWIW