Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'll point out that none of those are state laws.
If you are trying to get by with paying officers the bare minimum, federal laws (even the constitution) always come last.
It all comes down to money. Pay officers more, spend more on training, and these problems go away.
Are you actually saying law enforcement is not required to operate within the First & Fourth Amendment? The Civil Rights Act? The Americans with Disabilities Act?
By the way, training or re-training costs also. If law enforcement needs to be re-trained in order to operate within the law, perhaps they should be required to prove they can do so before throwing money at a problem.
The police union sticks together. Their first priority is to cover for each other. They've got contracts that protect them from practically all interference. (Firemen are the same.)
1. Abolish police unions. Make policemen answerable to their superiors who can discipline them without recourse if they violate rules or laws. Their superiors are similarly answerable up the chain of command, ultimately to the Mayor who is answerable to the people.
2. Hire only black police candidates until the racial makeup of the force mirrors the city. The Dallas police chief called upon blacks to step up instead of protest and they did.
3. Make the police live in Baltimore. No more going home to the white suburbs after shift. Live in the community you're supposed to serve.
Cities _without_ police unions are often the worst cities. The problem of unions protecting bad officers if offset by good officers leaving or not coming to work for those cities in the first place (mostly due to pay being dramatically lower in non-union cities, but also due to hires being more politically driven than merit driven in non-union cities). Obviously the response to this is "so abolish police unions everywhere", but then those same candidates will simply never go into police work in the first place.
African-American police officers are in high demand. To achieve hiring only African-American officers, you will need an enormous jump in pay.
Similar problem as above. If you want officers to live where they do not want to live, they you will have to pay them more. If you don't you greatly cut your recruitment pool and end up with worse officers.
Are you actually saying law enforcement is not required to operate within the First & Fourth Amendment? The Civil Rights Act? The Americans with Disabilities Act?
By the way, training or re-training costs also. If law enforcement needs to be re-trained in order to operate within the law, perhaps they should be required to prove they can do so before throwing money at a problem.
Oh they are required to operate with the law, but like any organization, public or private, some laws will be ignored and federal laws are going to be the first ignored, not the last. Operating inside the law at all times is expensive. You have to choose where to spend your resources.
"... before throwing money at a problem." A problem that can only be solved by throwing money at it. You will never solve it any other way. No amount of "hold accountability" or "enforce the law" or any other options will solve it.
All you are doing is turning respectability politics on its head. You are using the exact same logic of white supremacists who say that African-Americans deserve a lower place in life because they have an inferior culture. That if they would just behave according to impossible standards and act like good respectable people, then all the opportunities would just come to them and it has nothing to do with those opportunities being denied in the first place. You are just as wrong as the white supremacists in your application of respectability politics.
[quote=marigolds6;45125928]Cities _without_ police unions are often the worst cities. The problem of unions protecting bad officers if offset by good officers leaving or not coming to work for those cities in the first place (mostly due to pay being dramatically lower in non-union cities, but also due to hires being more politically driven than merit driven in non-union cities). Obviously the response to this is "so abolish police unions everywhere", but then those same candidates will simply never go into police work in the first place.
They are? I don't know which are which but Baltimore, Chicago, Cleveland, Detroit have police unions I'm pretty sure. Do they get worse than those?
African-American police officers are in high demand. To achieve hiring only African-American officers, you will need an enormous jump in pay.
I will? Houston pays its cops $40K. Dallas just had a rush by blacks to join the department.
Similar problem as above. If you want officers to live where they do not want to live, they you will have to pay them more. If you don't you greatly cut your recruitment pool and end up with worse officers.[/QUOTE
I can't believe a city like Baltimore or Chicago can't produce enough blacks to fill their quota so to speak. We're not talking brain surgery here. The problem is that to get hired you have to know somebody, be a son or nephew of someone. Get rid of that, which is police union controlled, and the problem will go away.
Oh they are required to operate with the law, but like any organization, public or private, some laws will be ignored and federal laws are going to be the first ignored, not the last. Operating inside the law at all times is expensive. You have to choose where to spend your resources.
"... before throwing money at a problem." A problem that can only be solved by throwing money at it. You will never solve it any other way. No amount of "hold accountability" or "enforce the law" or any other options will solve it.
All you are doing is turning respectability politics on its head. You are using the exact same logic of white supremacists who say that African-Americans deserve a lower place in life because they have an inferior culture. That if they would just behave according to impossible standards and act like good respectable people, then all the opportunities would just come to them and it has nothing to do with those opportunities being denied in the first place. You are just as wrong as the white supremacists in your application of respectability politics.
What the heck are you going on about? You seem to be making a case that law enforcement, in general, deserves an exalted 'place in life' based on some of their members' failure to operate within the laws (or, in lieu of their inferior culture?). First, you grandly point out that "none of those are state laws" & now? What the heck?
& respectability politics? Seriously.
Quote:
...“And another thing,” the mayor thundered, “take those doggone hoodies down, especially in the summer.” “Pull your pants up,” he said as members of the congregation chimed in to help finish his thoughts, “and buy a belt, because no one wants to see your underwear or the crack of your butt.” Members of the church stood and chanted, “Buy a belt, buy a belt!”
Nutter’s thirty-minute talk neglected to mention the lack of opportunities for black youth in his city; the national unemployment rate for black sixteen-to-nineteen-year-olds now hovers around 30 percent, and in cities like Philadelphia and New York it is closer to 40 percent. Nor did Nutter speak to the severe budget cuts to public services that have occurred under his administration, particularly in the city’s division of parks and recreation. Nor did he consider the difficulties that children faced in Philadelphia’s public school system, which is rated among the worst in the nation and is so fiscally stressed that in September the city threatened to keep schools closed when the school year began.
This stuff is not about race. It never was. The BLM are useful idiots who detract attention away from the real problem by using divisive language . We have many police forces in this country run by people with zero regard for civil rights, who hire and promote bullies and idiots who essentially trample on the flag every day.
And the good cops have no choice but to stand by and watch, because speaking out in a police department is like speaking out in prison. You will get shanked.
What the heck are you going on about? You seem to be making a case that law enforcement, in general, deserves an exalted 'place in life' based on some of their members' failure to operate within the laws (or, in lieu of their inferior culture?). First, you grandly point out that "none of those are state laws" & now? What the heck?
I'm making the point that "bad cops" exist because we pay cops too little and spend too little on training them. As a result, there is no competition to be an officer, we just take whatever we can get. And they improve very little after academy. (And, in reality, get worse because we leave them on the force for too long and have them stay on the street day to day even after high stress incidents instead of removing them to desk jobs or paid leave every time they respond to a shooting, suicide, abuse, etc.)
A police officer should cost a city upwards of $200k each.
When cities want to spend under $60k/ea on an officer, like Ferguson did, they cut corners and prioritize: they operate within and enforce city ordinances first, then state laws (because state violations do not go directly into city coffers), and federal laws last.
Cities _without_ police unions are often the worst cities.
They are? I don't know which are which but Baltimore, Chicago, Cleveland, Detroit have police unions I'm pretty sure. Do they get worse than those?
New Mexico, Missouri, Mississippi, Texas, and Alabama are among the states that ban new police unions (they have some grandfathered unions, like St Louis City and Kansas City in Missouri, but all others are police associations, not unions). I think Arizona, Idaho, Utah, Tennessee, and Georgia have similar bans, but I am not sure.
(Ferguson is an infamous example of a city with no police union.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Troyfan
Quote:
Originally Posted by marigolds6
Similar problem as above. If you want officers to live where they do not want to live, they you will have to pay them more. If you don't you greatly cut your recruitment pool and end up with worse officers.
I can't believe a city like Baltimore or Chicago can't produce enough blacks to fill their quota so to speak. We're not talking brain surgery here. The problem is that to get hired you have to know somebody, be a son or nephew of someone. Get rid of that, which is police union controlled, and the problem will go away.
Well, except we _should_ be talking brain surgery. We should have college education police officers, many with advanced degrees in law and social science. We aren't yet, but even with the relatively low bar on police recruitment few African-American officers apply, and those who do can work in a suburban department with twice the pay and much less daily conflict and risk.
The politics are machine controlled, outside the police union, rather than union controlled. The union is just a lower level cog in the machine who does what the political machine says to stay where they are. As an example, while the police union in St Louis City is fairly strong and has a lot of say in hiring of individual officers, they also take all of their orders from the pipefitters union. (The pipefitters are technically a plumbers' union, but really they are the core of the Democratic party in the St Louis region, essentially hand-picking winners and losers in most elections.)
Last edited by marigolds6; 08-14-2016 at 11:53 AM..
I'm making the point that "bad cops" exist because we pay cops too little and spend too little on training them. As a result, there is no competition to be an officer, we just take whatever we can get. And they improve very little after academy. (And, in reality, get worse because we leave them on the force for too long and have them stay on the street day to day even after high stress incidents instead of removing them to desk jobs or paid leave every time they respond to a shooting, suicide, abuse, etc.)
A police officer should cost a city upwards of $200k each.
When cities want to spend under $60k/ea on an officer, like Ferguson did, they cut corners and prioritize: they operate within and enforce city ordinances first, then state laws (because state violations do not go directly into city coffers), and federal laws last.
We have bad cops because they aren't held accountable, period! It's human nature for many people to take advantage of situations like that.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
