I'm asking specifically what would be a higher quality cop? People would like higher quality everything I'm sure, but what does that mean specifically? What is a better quality police candidate look like, and what makes them that?
Well if this holds up, those cops will be in hell during prison time. Ill never understand how people can hate so much. I guess I just was not raised that way.
Initially It means cutting millions out of govt waste libbie programs to attract and train higher quality leos.
I would say armed cops should all have twenty years military experience. I am okay with them qualifying for two great pensions before they hit 60
What makes them higher quality? Where do you find them and what are the qualifications you are looking for?
So an even more militarized police force? Yikes. I think a lot of police forces already draw heavily from the military, but probably not people who've done 20 years. There cant be many of those.
Damn - Well, if that particular policeman wanted revenge he should have handled that "mano-e-mano" - by "ganging up" that whole set of cops lost jobs, careers, retirements and of course could be fending for their lives in prison.
I think it depends on your philosophy of use of LE. I think you can divide the force into subsections that specialize in different activities. When you need a hammer, deploy the hammer. When you need a feather deploy a feather.
Same characteristics as I’d look for in any kind of leader. Higher educated, solid decision maker under stress, someone with a bit of integrity.
Well my philosophy is against the idea of policing period, but I'm asking people who think policing can be fixed with a sort of business mentality of better training or candidates. Can you maybe expound on that further? Are you saying hire bad ass operators from the Green Berets and Harvard academics who studied conflict resolution?
I’m saying MANY situations don’t need “policing.” Hire accordingly. Hostage situation, yes, send in the door kickers. Traffic stops, expand the duties of the meter maid. Mental health situation - send in a counselor - with an escort of safety is in question.
I guess that's why I'm wondering why the cops need to hire those people, instead of diverting resources to where those people in situations that dont need policing are operating already.
The current paradigm is that cops are just the hammer, whether its a domestic violence call, a homeless guy on private property, shoplifting or a spree shooter. If you want to hire people that can do things that dont require policing, thats a paradigm change too.
Happy Friday O&B - Yes and no I think. In high crime areas, absolutely. But the reality is policing is reflective of society. Wealthier communities typically have much better policing, less effluent areas, not so much. I am conflicted about police. I have seen plenty of police abuse in my life, my half brother being an undercover detective in S Alabama back in the 70's. The shit they did back then would have seen the entire department sent to the federal penn these days. On the flip side we all have seen the social decay and rot associated with poor or non-existant policing. Communities go straight to hell in a hurry without cops. It would be interesting to plant microphones in police stations and get the "REAL" story behind all these cameras, cams, and recorders cops have to wear these days. These devices do really make it hard to just "bust heads" like cops did in the old days. But flipping the script again - Have you seen these "Podcasts" of citizens deliberately being desrespectful and uncooperative with police? (I don't answer questions - am I being arrested). You could not pay me enough money for that job. Dealing with the American public as a police officer is a job I would not do. Just not geared up psychologically to deal with conflict every second of the day.
I agree. What I am saying is if you want them to hire people other than hammers, you have to have a philosophy of use change in Law Enforcement. Philosophy of Use change will necessitate different hiring practices.
Wouldnt it make more sense in shrinking the police force to deal with the hammer stuff (which would mean a higher quality cop, no need to recycle the bad ones) and expand the role of non-police to do the work of things that cops deal with as hammers but shouldnt?
I have no problem with shrinking the force and expanding non-policing. Edit: This statement reflects a MASSIVE shift in my personal political thoughts over the years. The only bigger shift has been my opinion on the validity of the death penalty - I'm no longer in favor of the government making the call to end someone's life.
