The Ferguson, Missouri thread

[kuronosan]

I'm sorry Neph but you've lost your fucking mind.

[BaneTheBrawler]

no, it just turned blue. i've been saying this for a while now.

[Acevalefor]

Mayad

Let's be clear here; You are far too upset about this when you cannot even recognize a series of jokes playing off of the media bias which you take so seriously.

On a serious note, we understand what you are saying, but it is nothing new. Every time there is a national/international media story about police brutality, vigilantes killing unarmed black kids, disturbed teenagers killing classmates, or any other horrible thing that happens, there are ALWAYS people who muddy the pond and/or try to hijack the attention. The jury selection is just as difficult in all of those subsequent criminal proceedings as well.

[Salodin]

What happened to the attorney General after his visit there? He showed up, then suddenly the news cycle saw a juicy story and moved on from Ferguson. I know I started off as "wait till we know all the facts", but however many weeks later we still know nothing else official? Dafuk...

[Nephlite]

I'm sorry Neph but you've lost your fucking mind.

It's awesome, isn't it?

Let's be clear here; You are far too upset about this when you cannot even recognize a series of jokes playing off of the media bias which you take so seriously.

On a serious note, we understand what you are saying, but it is nothing new. Every time there is a national/international media story about police brutality, vigilantes killing unarmed black kids, disturbed teenagers killing classmates, or any other horrible thing that happens, there are ALWAYS people who muddy the pond and/or try to hijack the attention. The jury selection is just as difficult in all of those subsequent criminal proceedings as well.

I recognize it, and take a different stance. It's funny, because it's one thing to recognize there's a problem and agree there's a problem, yet you look at the situation objectively and think from a professional standpoint that it doesn't apply to yourself and you get a label because of association. It's a whole different thing altogether when people label the police as racist and focus on disparities, and yet they still don't look at the stuff that people don't want to touch because of the fear of being labeled.

For instance, my former academy instructor is a veteran of Vietnam and served in the department for over 40 years. When his time came for the draft, there was a lot of racial disparities in the Army (he's black). He served and came back to the department to become an instructor at the academy. His primary function was ethics in policing, and later Internal Affairs. He explained at one point, disparities in police forces in terms of race is directly proportional to race in America. It's less apparent in agencies like ours, where the majority of applicants in the region are black, but there's still a disparity in Admin where the majority of them are white. Why is that? We explored it when we started in to racial profiling and ethics in policing, and it all comes down to disparity in poverty where opportunities (education) are less available. It's still more of a disparity in white America, but it's more readily apparent to regional differences.

It's a simple concept. Call it what you will, but this is what we are taught and what we need to keep an eye out for when policing. The worst thing you can do is get caught up in a racial complaint as a Police Officer, and we harp it constantly. It never seems like it's enough, because it's constantly brought up. What is the solution? How do we fix it? How do we change the perception and get everyone back on board and fix the relationships between the police, the citizens, and the races?

Even stuff like this, for example, isn't enough. What do you do?

http://nypost.com/2014/09/22/saluting-new-yorks-finest/

[kuronosan]

No, it isn't. It makes me seriously wish you weren't a cop.

[Nephlite]

No, it isn't. It makes me seriously wish you weren't a cop.

I don't stop white dudes, so you shouldn't have anything to worry about.

If you think you can do better, give it a shot. Take my job. I'll gladly turn it over to you if you think you can do it better.

What exactly makes me crazy? Explain it to me. I'm genuinely curious as to why you believe I've lost my mind.

[Tomiko]

What exactly makes me crazy? Explain it to me. I'm genuinely curious as to why you believe I've lost my mind.

I don't stop white dudes, so you shouldn't have anything to worry about.

Sarcasm or not, this isn't exactly the type of thing I would want to see an officer say.

[Nephlite]

Sarcasm or not, this isn't exactly the type of thing I would want to see an officer say.

An officer is still a person. I'm entitled to my opinion and have the ability to make fun of perceptions because, you know, they're about me. Off duty, of course. If in a professional setting I made comments like that, sure, I'm wrong. I don't. I don't let my perceptions or negative feelings encroach upon my job. I do it regardless of personal beliefs. I didn't agree with being part of the protection detail of the Westboro Baptist Church because I think they're a bunch of flaming retards, but I still did it because I had to. It's my job.

If anything, that's probably why I'm crazy. Having to support that type of duality can have strange effects on the brain.

[Acevalefor]

I recognize it, and take a different stance. It's funny, because it's one thing to recognize there's a problem and agree there's a problem, yet you look at the situation objectively and think from a professional standpoint that it doesn't apply to yourself and you get a label because of association. It's a whole different thing altogether when people label the police as racist and focus on disparities, and yet they still don't look at the stuff that people don't want to touch because of the fear of being labeled.

For instance, my former academy instructor is a veteran of Vietnam and served in the department for over 40 years. When his time came for the draft, there was a lot of racial disparities in the Army (he's black). He served and came back to the department to become an instructor at the academy. His primary function was ethics in policing, and later Internal Affairs. He explained at one point, disparities in police forces in terms of race is directly proportional to race in America. It's less apparent in agencies like ours, where the majority of applicants in the region are black, but there's still a disparity in Admin where the majority of them are white. Why is that? We explored it when we started in to racial profiling and ethics in policing, and it all comes down to disparity in poverty where opportunities (education) are less available. It's still more of a disparity in white America, but it's more readily apparent to regional differences.

It's a simple concept. Call it what you will, but this is what we are taught and what we need to keep an eye out for when policing. The worst thing you can do is get caught up in a racial complaint as a Police Officer, and we harp it constantly. It never seems like it's enough, because it's constantly brought up. What is the solution? How do we fix it? How do we change the perception and get everyone back on board and fix the relationships between the police, the citizens, and the races?

Even stuff like this, for example, isn't enough. What do you do?

http://nypost.com/2014/09/22/saluting-new-yorks-finest/

A good place to start is removal of all the "gotcha" mechanisms that police use against people who would otherwise never have a problem with law enforcement. Things like; no more street crossing entrapment operations, no pulling people over for turning into the wrong lane, no speed traps where traveling 80 in a 65 zone is hurting NOBODY. Things that aren't in the interest of public safety but use public safety as an excuse to generate revenue. That will go a long way in restoring positive public opinion in the police.

Also, departments could, and a few are, return the 1033 equipment they purchased that is unnecessary and suggests heavy-handed tactics can and will be used.

Remember, this is all about public perception and opinion. I don't know how much of that can or will actually happen. In my case, I was arrested for pulling a woman off a child whom she was beating when I was 15. More recently, I was cited for failure to yield to a pedestrian in a sting operation. They set up in a 55mph zone, waited until I was too close to stop, stepped into the opposing traffic lane, which puts them within the "lane-and-a-half" required for drivers to yield to pedestrians, and I got pulled over. I tried to fight it in court but found out when I walked into the "courthouse" (it was really an old Grange Hall that had been abandoned so they used it as a makeshift courthouse.) that everyone there from the officers, to the clerk, to the Judge all relied on those bullshit citations for their paycheck. They were so desperate that they also timed people stopping at stop signs. Anyone who did not stop and remain stopped for two full seconds got a ticket. This included a guy who was cited for rolling backward as he was releasing the clutch. Not a single citation was dismissed. Not even for the lady who had recorded proof that the 2 officers involved were trapping people into citations. That shit is the kind of stuff I am talking about when I talk about stuff that is not in the interest of public safety.

Sorry, I kind of rambled a bit there....

[Nephlite]

A good place to start is removal of all the "gotcha" mechanisms that police use against people who would otherwise never have a problem with law enforcement. Things like; no more street crossing entrapment operations, no pulling people over for turning into the wrong lane, no speed traps where traveling 80 in a 65 zone is hurting NOBODY. Things that aren't in the interest of public safety but use public safety as an excuse to generate revenue. That will go a long way in restoring positive public opinion in the police.

Also, departments could, and a few are, return the 1033 equipment they purchased that is unnecessary and suggests heavy-handed tactics can and will be used.

Remember, this is all about public perception and opinion. I don't know how much of that can or will actually happen. In my case, I was arrested for pulling a woman off a child whom she was beating when I was 15. More recently, I was cited for failure to yield to a pedestrian in a sting operation. They set up in a 55mph zone, waited until I was too close to stop, stepped into the opposing traffic lane, which puts them within the "lane-and-a-half" required for drivers to yield to pedestrians, and I got pulled over. I tried to fight it in court but found out when I walked into the "courthouse" (it was really an old Grange Hall that had been abandoned so they used it as a makeshift courthouse.) that everyone there from the officers, to the clerk, to the Judge all relied on those bullshit citations for their paycheck. They were so desperate that they also timed people stopping at stop signs. Anyone who did not stop and remain stopped for two full seconds got a ticket. This included a guy who was cited for rolling backward as he was releasing the clutch. Not a single citation was dismissed. Not even for the lady who had recorded proof that the 2 officers involved were trapping people into citations. That shit is the kind of stuff I am talking about when I talk about stuff that is not in the interest of public safety.

Sorry, I kind of rambled a bit there....

I agree. Still not the police's problem. Take it up with the lawmakers and those who issue (illegal) quota systems. Traps and sting operations that you cited aren't a spur of the moment decision made by a single patrol officer. In my experience, a citizen complaint about X-Intersection being very dangerous to pedestrians filters through the Mayors office, who filters it to the head admins, who sends it to Traffic Division or a sector commander, who tells the officers to fix it, and a big-wig with a bar decides to do X-Operation because it's an approved method of enforcement by the department.

Most (if not all) traffic regulations were made because of a certain issue that made it a concern. Speed limits were set because people drive too fast and it causes huge traffic accidents. Pedestrian laws were made because vehicles were striking pedestrians, sometimes in crosswalks. A huge semi-truck stopped at an open crosswalk with no stoplight or stop sign can easily block the view of an oncoming vehicle that may not know a pedestrian is crossing and that pedestrian steps right out in to the lane of traffic as a car is blowing the crosswalk at 50+ mph. Failure to yield right there. Turning in to an opposing lane caused people to sideswipe or head-on a U-Turning vehicle from the opposing lanes. You see where I'm going with this?

Do it enough times in a certain area, and it becomes a traffic law. Do it enough times across the country, it becomes a NHTSA standard common law.

I get you to a point. I don't like to enforce some of those laws (which is why I could never be in traffic divisions), but they're necessary because of something I, nor you, nor the collective of BG could possibly begin to fathom. It's a "bigger" issue than us, and likely won't change. As I've said before in previous threads: if it saves just one life, then it's worth it.

[Melena]

A good place to start is removal of all the "gotcha" mechanisms that police use against people who would otherwise never have a problem with law enforcement. Things like; no more street crossing entrapment operations, no pulling people over for turning into the wrong lane, no speed traps where traveling 80 in a 65 zone is hurting NOBODY. Things that aren't in the interest of public safety but use public safety as an excuse to generate revenue. That will go a long way in restoring positive public opinion in the police.

Also, departments could, and a few are, return the 1033 equipment they purchased that is unnecessary and suggests heavy-handed tactics can and will be used.

Remember, this is all about public perception and opinion. I don't know how much of that can or will actually happen. In my case, I was arrested for pulling a woman off a child whom she was beating when I was 15. More recently, I was cited for failure to yield to a pedestrian in a sting operation. They set up in a 55mph zone, waited until I was too close to stop, stepped into the opposing traffic lane, which puts them within the "lane-and-a-half" required for drivers to yield to pedestrians, and I got pulled over. I tried to fight it in court but found out when I walked into the "courthouse" (it was really an old Grange Hall that had been abandoned so they used it as a makeshift courthouse.) that everyone there from the officers, to the clerk, to the Judge all relied on those bullshit citations for their paycheck. They were so desperate that they also timed people stopping at stop signs. Anyone who did not stop and remain stopped for two full seconds got a ticket. This included a guy who was cited for rolling backward as he was releasing the clutch. Not a single citation was dismissed. Not even for the lady who had recorded proof that the 2 officers involved were trapping people into citations. That shit is the kind of stuff I am talking about when I talk about stuff that is not in the interest of public safety.

Sorry, I kind of rambled a bit there....

Maybe your area is full of perfect drivers, but the town I live in, we had a minimum of 7 people legally crossing a crosswalk or waiting on the curb for it to be safe to cross getting clipped, and at least once a week I either nearly get plowed in the rear when turning into my apartment complex because some dumbshit thinks 45+ is an acceptable speed in a thirty zone, or my favorite, dumbshit in suv who decides he was in the wrong turn lane and tries to merge through me to go from the far left lane to the far right cause he wants to make a right hand turn at the next block.

[Acevalefor]

You guys misunderstand what I am saying. The left turn into a wrong lane is not unsafe in Oregon because u-turns are illegal unless otherwise posted. A single left turn lane has an option of sometimes 3 lanes to turn into which are all three empty. The sting operation involving pedestrians happened where there were no crosswalks and no reason for someone to be crossing the road there. It was an empty grass field with a fence.

45 in a 30 is a reasonable cause for concern and it DOES serve the the public's safety to cite drivers there. 80 in a 65 (because that is the bullshit max speed on I-84 when it is a 3-lane freeway with 60 miles between towns) is not unsafe. Idaho agrees and has set speed limits at or near 80mph. Enter Oregon and you are suddenly unsafe at that speed....right, great logic.

What I am getting at Neph, is there is not much you can do at the enforcement level to change public perception, and you agree with me. But what happens if all, or at least a majority of officers just refused to enforce something like weed possession laws?

as an aside and quite comically, Portland has a law which disallows people from bringing wet umbrellas into buildings that are open to the public. I have never heard of a case where that law was enforced or someone was issued a citation for it.

[Melena]

You guys misunderstand what I am saying. The left turn into a wrong lane is not unsafe in Oregon because u-turns are illegal unless otherwise posted. A single left turn lane has an option of sometimes 3 lanes to turn into which are all three empty. The sting operation involving pedestrians happened where there were no crosswalks and no reason for someone to be crossing the road there. It was an empty grass field with a fence.

45 in a 30 is a reasonable cause for concern and it DOES serve the the public's safety to cite drivers there. 80 in a 65 (because that is the bullshit max speed on I-84 when it is a 3-lane freeway with 60 miles between towns) is not unsafe. Idaho agrees and has set speed limits at or near 80mph. Enter Oregon and you are suddenly unsafe at that speed....right, great logic.

What I am getting at Neph, is there is not much you can do at the enforcement level to change public perception, and you agree with me. But what happens if all, or at least a majority of officers just refused to enforce something like weed possession laws?

as an aside and quite comically, Portland has a law which disallows people from bringing wet umbrellas into buildings that are open to the public. I have never heard of a case where that law was enforced or someone was issued a citation for it.

Different states, different rules. Every time the wife and I drive to Disneyland, I drive the longest speed trap in california, I-5 for 300 miles with a posted speed limit of 70mph, despite it being relatively flat and straight. I drive 78 but that's due to me not wanting a 400+ dollar ticket that I wouldn't be able to contest without taking a day off from work. If a 65mph zone gets you in such a tizzy, you would have hated life 15 years ago when the federal government mandated speed limits of no higher than 55mph.

[Acevalefor]

Different states, different rules. Every time the wife and I drive to Disneyland, I drive the longest speed trap in california, I-5 for 300 miles with a posted speed limit of 70mph, despite it being relatively flat and straight. I drive 78 but that's due to me not wanting a 400+ dollar ticket that I wouldn't be able to contest without taking a day off from work. If a 65mph zone gets you in such a tizzy, you would have hated life 15 years ago when the federal government mandated speed limits of no higher than 55mph.

I was driving 15 years ago. I remember those times. I also remember the large number of vehicles on the road which were barely capable of driving 55 in there was a hill of any kind. 92 Geo Metro anyone?

It is a matter of perception and public opinion we are talking about. Police will always get the negativity as long as the majority of their public interactions are on the opposing side of the law from those they interact with. Unfortunately, it is necessary and will not change in America because there are MANY people who would take advantage of a stand-down of enforcement of any kind.

[BaneTheBrawler]

Police will always get the negativity as long as the majority of their public interactions are on the opposing side of the law from those they interact with..

just to be clear, there's a huge difference between "i hate the cops, i got a DUI last year" and the kind of shit that leads to Ferguson-type unrest.

[Acevalefor]

just to be clear, there's a huge difference between "i hate the cops, i got a DUI last year" and the kind of shit that leads to Ferguson-type unrest.

Indeed, there is.

[Nephlite]

What I am getting at Neph, is there is not much you can do at the enforcement level to change public perception, and you agree with me. But what happens if all, or at least a majority of officers just refused to enforce something like weed possession laws?

We'd get fired or arrested. There's a statutory misdemeanor in D.C. called "Failure to Arrest" that can get you prison time or fired if you're found in violation of it. It's mostly due to officers failing to arrest people on Domestic Violence cases, but it's used for political markers and keeping officers in the vice-grip of the administration when it's convenient. Like most people who work, we're just trying to get paid and survive just like anyone else. If I refuse to support it, there will be at least one other officer who will support the enforcement for brownie points and promotional opportunities because he's a "Yes Man". That's how the world works, and it's not just restricted to Law Enforcement.

The Mayor's supporters and the Chief of Police pushed for the decriminalization of marijuana in our jurisdiction. Like Seattle, we have a policy if you're caught in public consuming or you possess more than an ounce, you get arrested. We also cannot use the smell as Reasonable Suspicion to develop Probable Cause for an arrest. You have to use sight of the "joint" or marijuana, then field test it to determine if it has THC to have PC to arrest. If you smoke and blow out the side and I don't see the joint or pipe, I can't touch you. Simple possession is also a citation too, by the way.

You know what they (our commanders) said to us? "Stop enforcing marijuana ordinances until further notice." You know what we did? "Thank you Jesus..." and we stopped giving any fucks about marijuana. THAT is how you change shit. Take it out of the officers hands altogether, and get policy makers with strong backings to make it at least decriminalized. Might as well be legal at this point.

[kuronosan]

Boy it's a good thing these psychos are just doing their job:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com%2F2014...n_5879694.html

You know, I know not all cops are like that. It's disturbing that this is more epidemic than most will admit.

[Nephlite]

Dead link?