Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

NetQuarterLatte t1_j0zyf35 wrote

Reply to comment by SnottNormal in New York City Councilman Erik Blottcher's office, home vandalized with hate speech by mowotlarx

>What concrete measures are thrown out beyond "give them more money?"

Take this bill for example, see if you can guess which NYC Democract voted against it: https://clerk.house.gov/Votes/2022525

−1

MillennialNightmare t1_j0zz881 wrote

> The bill also directs DOJ to make grants to states for costs associated with providing the training to law enforcement officers or mental health professionals.

Oh you mean the bill that gives them more money.

9

NetQuarterLatte t1_j1018cl wrote

>[...] providing the training to law enforcement officers or mental health professionals.

​

>Oh you mean the bill that gives them more money.

To address one of the exact things anti-police folks criticize.

−1

MillennialNightmare t1_j10el3y wrote

The point is there shouldn’t need to be a dedicated DOJ grant for this, it should be something departments across the country include in their academies and on an ongoing basis.

5

NetQuarterLatte t1_j10jgwy wrote

Why? Is violence de-escalation different across cities?

A deranged person in NYC will escalate violence much differently than a person in Seattle?

−1

MillennialNightmare t1_j10x7uz wrote

No idea what you’re even asking here. Police departments need to do this training, that’s not in dispute. The federal government shouldn’t dedicate resources to funding it.

1

NetQuarterLatte t1_j10yce1 wrote

So each department should duplicate the work of developing the training curriculum and standards for de-escalation?

But regardless of that, why are you against federal funding that can help improve things in NYC and other cities? This is an issue that impacts every city in the nation.

1

MillennialNightmare t1_j10zz3i wrote

Every training and every program doesn’t need additional funding to be carried out.

The program should absolutely be developed, that’s not in question, but federal funding shouldn’t be dedicated to funding the training across the country. There’s zero reason that can’t be incorporated into existing academy training.

5

NetQuarterLatte t1_j116uox wrote

It has to require extra funding.

Unless we can somehow make the training happen for free and in the officer's free time (without pay).

That has to come from somewhere.

Edit: so it seems that the argument boils down to a variant of "fuck the NYPD".

0

SnottNormal t1_j119tg0 wrote

Reallocate funds. The NYPD isn't hurting for money.

7

SnottNormal t1_j100c5u wrote

This is federal, not NYC. And my rep is a Republican who voted against it. She's really the only rep I'm directly concerned with. And it does throw an extra $100m+ at the problem.

That said, de-escalation training is a great idea in theory. It shouldn't have to come down from the feds. This is a city problem, but everyone is so scared of the cop unions (probably rightfully so) that nothing's gonna change.

6

NetQuarterLatte t1_j10jmzq wrote

It’s a national problem, no?

Unless you’re trying to say it’s not.

Do you believe that lack of de-escalation training is a problem that only happens in a few US cities?

−2

SnottNormal t1_j10kdz5 wrote

...we're talking specifically about the NYPD? They're a city problem, not a national one.

Yes, lack of de-escalation training is national problem. That's also not the conversation we were having.

5

NetQuarterLatte t1_j10lemq wrote

And federal funding that would have also helped NYC... is not a good thing?

The same de-escalation training material and standards they develop at the federal level can help NYC and many other cities.

I don't see why each city needs to replicate the same work.

0