Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

De-Escalation Keeps Protesters and Police Safer

fivethirtyeight.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 799 posts

Re: De-Escalation Keeps Protesters and Police Safer

#11

Post by SlavikCA »

olliej wrote: post #3

Yes, but police are functionally just wannabe soldiers, without the actual training. They want to beat people up. They want to be tough guys who have no consequences. Talking about how to fix policing means nothing until: * police go to jail * officers who do not report other officers go to jail * bosses/chiefs etc who are aware of abuses of power and brutality and do not arrest those officers go to jail * police are…

> all lawsuits are settled with funds from police pension funds

I like it most.

> police go to jail

> officers who do not report other officers go to jail

> bosses/chiefs etc who are aware of abuses of power and brutality and do not arrest those officers go to jail

All these "go to jail" stops at the "qualified immunity". And no politician yet was willing to do anything about it. We need to demand to end this "qualified immunity". That's number one force, that corrupts police.

> police officers are required to get malpractice insurance. The tax payer should not be paying for criminal behavior.

And who is going to pay that "malpractice insurance"? Tax payer again.

But I heard opinion, and I agree, that some of police attitude "shot first, ask questions later" is caused by insurance. Here is how: 1) police is looking to buy life&disablity insurance for it's officers 2) insurance providers are demanding, that policies of the police force designed in such a way, so that likehood of the injury to the officers is minimal, which in practice mean: shoot first, ask questions later. 3) police implement such policies to get life&disability insurance.

Re: De-Escalation Keeps Protesters and Police Safer

#12

Post by Consultant32452 »

coldcode wrote: post #4

Of course it does. But politicians who ramp up the rhetoric and threaten to have people killed does not. Flint and Camden and other cities where the police sat down or walked with the protestors have no issues. People connecting to people with understanding rarely results in violence. I think places where the police still walk a beat (or other regular outreach over a wide area) and get to know the locals rarely have…

There were reports of planned riots in rural Polk County. Knowing they didn't have the resources to cover wide spread area, the sheriff instructed citizens to shoot anyone who broke into their home. I support this. Telling citizens you can't help them, and they must protect themselves is very different than threatening that the state itself will kill you.

https://twitter.com/FOX13News/status/1267539936401592320

Re: De-Escalation Keeps Protesters and Police Safer

#14

Post by catssie »

WillDaSilva wrote: post #6

"Of course, as Gillham pointed out, negotiating and managing a protest can’t really work if the protest wasn’t organized ahead of time. That goes double, he said, if the topic of the protest is police brutality. It’s hard to negotiate with someone about the best way to demand they be fired." This point is important. The police can't police themselves, and for a lasting solution to this problem to emerge there'll have…

“Do not wait to strike till the iron is hot; but make it hot by striking.”

If you want change, make lasting change.

Re: De-Escalation Keeps Protesters and Police Safer

#15

Post by m0zg »

WillDaSilva wrote: post #6

"Of course, as Gillham pointed out, negotiating and managing a protest can’t really work if the protest wasn’t organized ahead of time. That goes double, he said, if the topic of the protest is police brutality. It’s hard to negotiate with someone about the best way to demand they be fired." This point is important. The police can't police themselves, and for a lasting solution to this problem to emerge there'll have…

> wasn’t organized ahead of time

Protests might have been unorganized, but riots most certainly are organized. Torching a police car carries a minimum 5 year sentence. It's not the protesters who are doing that.

Moreover, it is still being "organized". Someone keeps dropping off pallets with bricks. There are agitator leaflets all over twitter. People have been recorded on video handing out cash to "protesters" from a thick wad of bills. Someone is organizing and funding the riots.

Re: De-Escalation Keeps Protesters and Police Safer

#16

Post by emperorsclothes »

just_steve_h wrote: post #10

Folks - don't be obtuse. Police commanders know exactly what will happen when they escalate with tear gas and rubber bullets. Pro-police forces WANT mayhem. It makes people watching on TV afraid of the protests, and it changes the subject away from the widespread peaceful opposition to racist police violence.

What is the evidence for racist police violence? Black people are killed by the police in proportion to the rate at which they commit violent crime.

Re: De-Escalation Keeps Protesters and Police Safer

#17

Post by davros »

From afar, it seems to me like the big problem in US policing is a lack of calm professionalism. The de-escalation approach in the article would to me but just one aspect of taking a professional approach where safety and following rules and best practices is paramount (and prioritised over 'winning' against criminals).

Re: De-Escalation Keeps Protesters and Police Safer

#18

Post by olliej »

sockgrant wrote: post #9
olliej wrote: post #3

Yes, but police are functionally just wannabe soldiers, without the actual training. They want to beat people up. They want to be tough guys who have no consequences. Talking about how to fix policing means nothing until: * police go to jail * officers who do not report other officers go to jail * bosses/chiefs etc who are aware of abuses of power and brutality and do not arrest those officers go to jail * police are…

Sorry, your comment might make some good points but you lost me, your reader, when you made absolute claims about police officers. There certainly exist police that just want to be tough guys and beat people up. But there’s plenty officers not like that. You detract from your other points by taking such a black and white stance.

And yet none of those officers turn in the abusive officers, and in fact are often pushed out of the force, if not straight up fired.

So officers working side by side with abusive officers are absolutely complicit.

Re: De-Escalation Keeps Protesters and Police Safer

#19

Post by fasteddie31003 »

Imagine being a cop and having to deal with stuff like this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8k4L97igDjY They literally save this man's life and he kills the guy who saved his life. Cops don't work in a safe space. Years of working in a violent and hateful environment must take a serious toll on them.

Re: De-Escalation Keeps Protesters and Police Safer

#20

Post by happytoexplain »

Consultant32452 wrote: post #12
coldcode wrote: post #4

Of course it does. But politicians who ramp up the rhetoric and threaten to have people killed does not. Flint and Camden and other cities where the police sat down or walked with the protestors have no issues. People connecting to people with understanding rarely results in violence. I think places where the police still walk a beat (or other regular outreach over a wide area) and get to know the locals rarely have…

There were reports of planned riots in rural Polk County. Knowing they didn't have the resources to cover wide spread area, the sheriff instructed citizens to shoot anyone who broke into their home. I support this. Telling citizens you can't help them, and they must protect themselves is very different than threatening that the state itself will kill you. https://twitter.com/FOX13News/status/1267539936401592320

I couldn't agree more. A sheriff regretfully telling citizens they may need to kill a home intruder in self defense (giving the sheriff the benefit of the doubt - I haven't heard the message), is vastly morally different from a president gleefully declaring his intention to personally order the killing of citizens en mass who may have done nothing worse than stealing from a business. This distinction is lost on a terrifying number of sick people who are quite excited about the prospect of shooting criminals.
Post reply on HN