31–40 of 247 posts
I’ve wondered if someone could run for mayor of Uvalde on the simple platform of firing everyone in their police force, and eliminating pensions for any police officers deployed to the school.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
People who want weaker and stronger gun control laws can find consensus for the idea that trained police are the most tactically equipped to deal with an ongoing crime, and that you should not interfere with professionals who are already on the scene. 40% of Uvalde's city budget is going to police. The police went in to save their own kids, but detained and chastised parents who went in to do the same. How many more…
If by "chastised" you mean "threatened to tase", yep. They're also retaliating against one woman who went in to save her own kids. IIRC, she's on probation and they're trying to take her kids away now.
Online publication "The Root" paraphrased this (source: https://www.theroot.com/uvalde-mom-who-saved-her-children-sa...) as: "Angeli Rose Gomez told CBS News that she was informed that if she continues to talk to media about her fearless actions, she would be charged with a probation violation for obstruction of justice."
> [the videos] just show the parking lot. how is that useful
It sort of blows up the whole pro gun control argument that citizens shouldn't be expected to have to protect themselves but instead rely on law enforcement :p
Honestly in a decade they will beg the pro gun control people to save them so maybe we should do this?
I think the 'weakness' of their response is plainly obvious. If criminals can find advantages in this footage, its an opportunity to overhaul training programs and response plans. The training and response was woefully inadequate for this crisis, after all. There should be no reasonable reality in which the release of this footage is suppressed. This is an undeniable tragedy, battening down the hatches and obstinatel…
That leads to the most obvious question: "Are your training manuals and materials as closely guarded of a secret?" If not, then your implementation of them, however compromised, is not a secret either.
They pretty obviously are just embarassed by their failure.
It sort of blows up the whole pro gun control argument that citizens shouldn't be expected to have to protect themselves but instead rely on law enforcement :p
This is not, to my knowledge, an argument that anybody who is serious about gun control uses.
If they are "serious" about gun control or not would certainly be up for debate, but I have heard this argument many many times.
I think the 'weakness' of their response is plainly obvious. If criminals can find advantages in this footage, its an opportunity to overhaul training programs and response plans. The training and response was woefully inadequate for this crisis, after all. There should be no reasonable reality in which the release of this footage is suppressed. This is an undeniable tragedy, battening down the hatches and obstinatel…
That leads to the most obvious question: "Are your training manuals and materials as closely guarded of a secret?" If not, then your implementation of them, however compromised, is not a secret either.
It seems not: https://www.tcole.texas.gov/sites/default/files/CourseCMU/Ac...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They maintained control with minimal personal risk to themselves. From a "policing realism" perspective that's exactly what police do. Preventing or ending any sort of crime or violence is optional at that point, and they opted not to. This is extremely at odds with how the police want to be perceived , and managing that contradiction is certainly their biggest concern right now. From that perspective it's easy to un…
>They maintained control with minimal personal risk to themselves. From a "policing realism" perspective that's exactly what police do. Preventing or ending any sort of crime or violence is optional at that point, and they opted not to. Absolutely untrue, and has been for decades. Their hesitation to react and go in is the complete opposite of what they were trained to do, which is go in and eliminate the threat imme…
There is also a well-documented history of police coming up with convenient excuses to do whatever the hell benefits them most (see also: bodycam "malfunctions"). Don't want to get involved in a dangerous situation? Whoops, I forgot my radio! Whoops, we don't have the right gear! Guess we can't get involved for more than an hour!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They maintained control with minimal personal risk to themselves. From a "policing realism" perspective that's exactly what police do. Preventing or ending any sort of crime or violence is optional at that point, and they opted not to. This is extremely at odds with how the police want to be perceived , and managing that contradiction is certainly their biggest concern right now. From that perspective it's easy to un…
>They maintained control with minimal personal risk to themselves. From a "policing realism" perspective that's exactly what police do. Preventing or ending any sort of crime or violence is optional at that point, and they opted not to. Absolutely untrue, and has been for decades. Their hesitation to react and go in is the complete opposite of what they were trained to do, which is go in and eliminate the threat imme…
trained to do, not compelled to do
they won't be charged with a crime because they broke no law
they probably won't be fired either because their union will sue and probably win if so
they won't all be put on desk duty because the local govt cannot afford to hire replacement better-cops while also paying all of the worse-cops to sit at a desk