You must log in or register to comment.

johnn48 t1_j5x8uo6 wrote

>Sir Mark said the force had not "applied the same level of ruthlessness" to upholding its integrity as it applied to fighting crime.

That’s all everyone’s wanted, the same levels of accountability as the public. The same rules, same scrutiny, same consequences, same everything. Why do we rely on the publics iPhones to record police interactions with the police rather than body cameras? Why is it a crime to lie to the FBI, yet no consequences for Police?


guzhogi t1_j5yllyr wrote

> Why do we rely on the publics iPhones to record police interactions with the police rather than body cameras?

I have a friend who worked in law enforcement. He said the cost of the body cameras, plus the server/storage infrastructure, plus the people needed to review the footage adds up to a LOT of money.

He has a point, though with all the money going into the military, there should be enough to send for everything needed to support body cameras.


johnn48 t1_j5yppwu wrote

We’ve all seen and been aware of the Militarization of the Police, perhaps some of their budgets could be directed back into what its priorities should be, Police work. Rather than buy the newest SWAT armored personnel carrier, they could spend that money on body cameras and their infrastructure. All that military equipment and tactics add to the disconnect from Police and Civilians.


Zealousideal-Cap-61 t1_j5zugt4 wrote

The UK police are not militarised and are actually underfunded. They're also required to use bodyworn video and in the UK the police aren't allowed to lie like they are in the US. In fact, several of the officers being charged are being charged for dishonesty. The UK police still need improving, hence the ones being charged, but you can't apply American issues to Britiain.


johnn48 t1_j60ool9 wrote

Obviously I’m not conversant in the problems you face in the UK. Unfortunately this isn’t the UK version of Reddit, so I’m forced to apply my American perspective of Law Enforcement to the headline. So when Sir Mark expressed his views on the level of integrity he expected, it struck a chord.


guzhogi t1_j5z5mjm wrote

I agree. I’ve seen articles on Facebook (not sure how accurate) about how some cities have implemented a social work or something program where instead of sending armed police to people in distress situations, they send social workers or people trained to deal with people with autism, schizophrenia, etc. if I remember correctly, they had some success with it. I might be getting the details wrong, but I’d love to see current reports of those kinds of practices, who successful they are, and what difficulties they have with such programs.

A while ago, I saw this really interesting documentary, “Paper Tigers”, about an alternative high school where instead of suspending kids, the staff tries to reach out and treat the underlying causes. It delves into “Adverse Childhood Experiences” or ACEs, like parents divorcing, death of family and friends, drug use (either themselves or family/friends), assault/abuse, family getting arrested, etc. I guess the more ACEs you have, the more “fight or flight” mode you’ll be in. But having even a single stable, supportive adult around can help a lot with that. Kinda heavy, but an interesting and important watch. Also available through Apple


commissar0617 t1_j6b8cit wrote

The police in yhe US got that stuff free/cheap


johnn48 t1_j6bd1x1 wrote

Despite how much is spent on the equipment, I contend it changes the perception of both the Police and the Public. We’ve seen National Guard troops in riot areas with less military equipment than the Police. Why does a SWAT team need a Lenco Bear Cat or a $650,000 military tank-like truck to transport their SWAT team to hostile situations. It changes the Public perception of the Police to an occupation force.


commissar0617 t1_j6bky97 wrote

because of things like the LA bank robbery and other incidents that police get shot at. because we have posse commitatus and most of the rest of the world does not. the MRAPs are also fairly useful in disaster situations thanks to fording and relative offroad ability.

and it's not like we're the only ones whose police have armored vehicles. hell, germany still uses water cannons in riot control.


johnn48 t1_j6bro06 wrote

The LA Bank robbery was more a matter of no body armor and assault weapons. How many incidents have justified an assault vehicle? Water cannons seem less deadly than armed Police clearing streets. My point you can probably name less than 10 instances where a SWAT assault vehicle was justified. However even less when heavily armored and armed Police made a difference. Contrast those instances when National Guard were present and their gear.


commissar0617 t1_j6bvyu6 wrote

Apples and oranges. You're soley focusing on riots. In a riot situation, an armored vehicle provides an anchor for a line, a command post with an elevated view, plus carry, and delpoy tear gas if needed, in the form of a mobile, protected position.

Plus, the national guard does utilize humvee, trucks, mraps etc on riot control duties. Plus they do go armed with rifles if not in a skirmish line.


johnn48 t1_j6bxo9z wrote

Of course I’m focused on riots, do you need an armored vehicle for traffic stops? I didn’t imply that the National Guard wasn’t armed or used military equipment. I was saying that their personal were less heavily armored and armed than some of our local police. The militarization of the police is that they get excess military equipment at rock bottom prices, so like my wife they see a sale, they go shopping no matter if they need it, “Look Dear I saved $450,000”.


commissar0617 t1_j6dk3aa wrote

Again. Other countries don't have posse commitatus, so tactical and riot situations may be handled by the military. They wear riot gear during crowd control because gee, people often throw things during a riot.

Baltimore actually had to get better gear and less lethal equipment for riot control a few years ago because many officers were injured with their old equipment.


johnn48 t1_j6dyuab wrote

You’ve probably wondered why I keep referring to the National Guard. You do realize that National Guard are not subject to the Posse Comitatus Act because they are not Federal. Because they’ve been deployed overseas, they have military equipment. I’ve no objection to large metropolitan cities making use of the excess military equipment. It’s when podunk USA finds the need to militarize their Police because they got a good deal on excess equipment.


sekirobestiro t1_j5z9d1c wrote

Stop spending tax payer money for tacti-cool gear and spend it on some S3 buckets or some shit. Fuck cops.


bk15dcx t1_j5vzy1r wrote

I've never met police that say that


justec1 t1_j5wu1lh wrote

Doctor who cared for children, ate them

The capitalization of who gives this an entirely different context that invariably comes up when headline writers use who after doctor.


DeNoodle t1_j5vy2hb wrote

The rest of them will get off scot-free.


Molotov56 t1_j5wfyii wrote

This is how the police force do layoffs


m0le t1_j5x7piv wrote

One way to get their stats for rape convictions up...


Ehellegreg t1_j68xzmp wrote

God damn. I wonder how many crimes Canadian police officers commit are swept under the rug or covered up. Scary.