Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Cop Talk' started by LordAnderson, Jun 5, 2020.
It’s a shame they have to have a policy.
I’ve stopped a couple of guys from doing something stupid over my 22 years.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yes another feel good policy by lazy politicians.
That's what your partner is supposed to do when you go off the reservation. FFS. So much virtue signaling.
Next thing you know, folks will be getting days off and fired when some desk queen feels they should have done something different.
Might as well go to reactive policing and letting the city burn to avoid police contacts.
Well I mean there are 3 cops now facing felony charges for stand by or even assisting in Floyd's murder. There have also been a rash of incidences of brutality against protesters that required departments to take action against individual officers while their fellow cops stood by or again, even assisted.
This probably also comes out of an incident in Dallas where a white cop did something (hit a protester maybe) and a female black officer immediately went over to him and shut him down so it's top of mind in this area.
I agree, real cops don't need a policy instructing them to intervene. It is in their nature to intervene, it's why they became cops in the first place.
But when you have policies to weed out the ones that would be good cops in favor of "diversity" and other nonsense you endup with folks that have no business being cops to begin with.
Expect more incidents as the lefts policies driven by the delusion that anybody can do the job bear it's inevitable fruit. And when it does rather than realize the idiocy of their policies they will just blame the cops.
I totally agree.
There are protests all over the country because 3 officers didn't stand up and step in. I mean just yesterday the Buffalo police pushed that 75 year old man down and walked past him. When the reports of the incident were pulled, they claimed he tripped. That sure is a lot of "good apples" covering for a bad one.
I can envision instances where this type of policy is going to blow up in the faces of police executives that implement it.
Say Officer/Deputy/Trooper/Agent "Q" affects an arrest on a combative suspect and the suspect's wrist get broken [not debilitating, but painful and it happens enough]. The agency goes after employee "Q" for excessive use of force. By policy, shouldn't every one in the chain of command be named as "Involved Persons" since their have a direct and enumerated duty to supervise, manage, and command employee "Q"s action/inaction? One can just about guarantee that the arrested person's defense attorney would love to get this in order to use as a pry bar on the agency and the government responsible.
I'd love to be the accused employee's representative in this kind of case.
ALL 57 members of Buffalo PD's ERT unit resigned from the unit in protest over the department's actions.
I see you posted this hoping for a certain kind of response and that your mind is made up.
Good luck out there without cops. I hope alternative justice works in your favor when they come knocking on your door.
2 out of the three involved had LESS THAN ONE WEEK on the job. Do you think they had ANY IDEA about what was going on. When I was an FTO, my trainees with that little time on were told to keep their eyes and ears open and their mouths closed. And don't touch anything.
I saw that one. The guy video taping couldn't have framed it better. I wonder how many times they practices on a mattress? Watch out out there guys, these people all want to get rich quick on you.
I'm betting back and neck injuries. Whatever happened to slipping on a banana peel in a store?
Dude, I live in the sticks. The response time running code 3 to my house is 30-45 minutes on a good day. The only use I have for the police is making reports for the insurance company.
That being said, the Chief of the closest city to me did a virtual townhall today and said that police brutality is a problem in this country and we should all stand against it together. He was out at a protest today and made serious inroads with the community. Not by gassing them but by having conversations with them.
Oh I agree that those guys were probably way out of their depth but that means there is still one officer who pushed people away from his partner slowly killing a man. If you look at this thread it seems like the sworn and retired cops seem to think that the police police themselves pretty well but the evidence seems to show a different story.
Again, look at the Buffalo case. 2 cops intentionally injure a 75 year old man for no reason and not only does every other cop around them lie and say he tripped, they then resign from the response team because an investigation was opened.
FWIW, this isn't a new subject.
Consider that perhaps sometimes a new policy may have to be created when hiring, training, supervision and management practices may not be addressing issues.
The courts also have a way of providing "hints" to LE when it comes to clarifying responsibilities, conduct and performance.
As some people are discovering, it really isn't a case of just anyone being able to fit the job, let alone do the job.
Past hiring, retention and promotion practices of the last 10-20 years may well become flocks of chickens looking for places to roost as they come home.
Just yesterday I was discussing this subject with another retired cop who has a PhD in Psychology. We agreed and lamented how we've seen this train coming down that tunnel for some time. It sounds like he's become motivated to find the time to fit in writing a paper for a national LE training venue.
So what happens if the officer intervening is wrong or gets someone hurt or killed. I can see a future video, police fight at 11:00. officer disagree on use of force and sprays arresting office, another officer tases intervening officer. Arresting officer half blind fearing for his life shoots supervisor arriving on scene, suspect escapes.
You see what you want to see. I seem to recall a lawful order being given (repeatedly) to disburse. (Or similar terms). How many times? How long to organize a line? (How many more warnings)? They advanced, he advanced and attempted to disrupt their advance. He did not step aside, move away...
He played the push well. (Ok imo overplayed it) EMS treated, transported.
In yrs past people knew better. He would get attested. But they are letting rioters go free. “Stop breaking the law or we will ask you to stop again”
I’m all for protests. Get a permit, don’t endanger the public and chant yourself silly.
When ordered to clear a public area. Ask where you can gather. I dealt with some Stupid protests Yrs back. “You can’t block the entrances. If you stay behind this crease in pavement with the yellow warning paint (frost heaved sidewalk) and don’t swear...you are fine”
Supervisor shows up “why are they still here”. Have them talk to building owner who was normally fine to let them wave signs if not blocking doors. Then again protesters had people openly coordinating them. You could tell in 10 seconds who was running it. They had a goal.
Why do we need a policy for something that is common sense? Sounds very appeasing to me.
Yes, but the important thing is the suspect escapes SAFELY!
And isn’t that the ultimate goal of all this?
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk