Police killings more likely in agencies that get military gear, data shows • Hacker News Board

Re: Police killings more likely in agencies that get military gear, data shows

#211

Post by leetcrew » Mon, Oct 12, 2020, 6:55 PM UTC

craftinator wrote: post #140

jakelazaroff wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The study controls for that variable: > The newspaper’s analysis used the military’s database and paired it with a database of fatal police shootings from across the state, controlling for statistical variables like community income, rural-urban differences, racial makeup, and violent crime rates. The article explicitly cautions against drawing conclusions about causality. My intuition is that there’s truth to both e…

Something I've long thought on is what types of people are attracted to the US police force. If you look at it economically, by what incentives are offered, it's a bit disturbing: 1) Power over others 2) Chance to stop violence 3) Little educational requirements 4) Access to cool gear 5) Immunity from law 6) Ability to help or hurt weaker people 7) Access to drugs, guns, etc... The list goes on, but I really see two…

one more thing to add to your list is that police tend to be pretty well paid for their level of education. in my area, starting salary for a police officer is not much lower than a typical salary for a junior dev. a rank-and-file cop with a few years of experience who pulls a lot of OT can make a surprising amount of money.

Re: Police killings more likely in agencies that get military gear, data shows

#212

Post by slg » Mon, Oct 12, 2020, 6:58 PM UTC

bigbubba wrote: post #198

ceejayoz wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There are many worse scenarios than that. Then why aren't they the "here's why we need an APC" argument? Or are they largely theoretical?

I think most are a third option; not theoretical, but neither occurring in America. Consider something like the 2008 Mumbai attacks in which 10 men with rifles and explosives terrorized an entire city causing hundreds of casualties. Is there any particular reason to think such a thing couldn't happen in America, where rifles and explosives aren't hard to get? Against that sort of threat, I think the police having a f…

>Is there any particular reason to think such a thing couldn't happen in America

I don't think this is the right question to ask. There are a lot of things that one can reasonably think could happen in America. Do we need to prepare every police department in the country for all those situations regardless of the odds of the worst happening? Do the costs, both literal monetary costs and the harder to measure societal costs, of militarizing our police departments outweigh the potential that an increase in police firepower will allow them to save lives in this extremely remote possibility actually happens? Maybe we are just better off leaving some of these extreme outliers as something to be dealt with by the military if it ever happens here.

Re: Police killings more likely in agencies that get military gear, data shows

#213

Post by BelleOfTheBall » Mon, Oct 12, 2020, 7:02 PM UTC

bigbubba wrote: post #198

ceejayoz wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There are many worse scenarios than that. Then why aren't they the "here's why we need an APC" argument? Or are they largely theoretical?

I think most are a third option; not theoretical, but neither occurring in America. Consider something like the 2008 Mumbai attacks in which 10 men with rifles and explosives terrorized an entire city causing hundreds of casualties. Is there any particular reason to think such a thing couldn't happen in America, where rifles and explosives aren't hard to get? Against that sort of threat, I think the police having a f…

> Is there any particular reason to think such a thing couldn't happen in America, where rifles and explosives aren't hard to get?

Is there any particular reason why a clear edge-case scenario should be our basis for arming police departments, which spend most of their time solving mundane domestic disputes, pulling apart drunken fights and responding to break-ins where someone's Playstation was stolen? We should orient policing towards deescalation based on what they usually face. If their most common problem is a drug addict high on PCP, they don't need a gun, they need proper training and, perhaps, a taser.

Re: Police killings more likely in agencies that get military gear, data shows

#214

Post by Symmetry » Mon, Oct 12, 2020, 7:03 PM UTC

13415 wrote: post #200

Symmetry wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I wouldn't bet on it being causal though I could make a plausible story that police departments that put dangerous looking military equipment in their recruitment videos tend to attract the wrong sort of people.

For a start, they should probably train police for two to four years like in other countries, instead of just a few months.

Unfortunately a lot of police training in the US is about lowering inhibitions about being the first to use violence, google "warrior training" for more details.

But I think that is a very real problem in regards to the sort of late night kinetic entries that result in the deaths of so many civilians and cops. I think that SWAT teams can have their place in large metros like LA where the sort of events that called for them happen every once in a while. But in third or fourth tier cities the local government can't afford the sort of intensive training required for a job like that but also those teams are always being sent on drug raids or things like that because there just aren't any incidents that would justify the existence of the teams otherwise. But sending a SWAT team into a situation that isn't already violent is just a terrible idea and US army forces, for instance, make an effort to avoid late night raids in a way that I wish our law enforcement community would follow.

Re: Police killings more likely in agencies that get military gear, data shows

#215

Post by jcims » Mon, Oct 12, 2020, 7:08 PM UTC

wonderwonder wrote: post #112

edward1 wrote: post #96

I think this is because the police departments that get military gear are in more dangerous areas, with more dangerous situations, leading to more deaths.

Except for the fact that the study controlled for that.

The biggest problem I have with the article is that it focuses on absolute numbers rather than any kind of proportional impact. Per-capita numbers or something along those lines would be helpful. Even the chart halfway down that appears to address proportionality doesn't indicate what percentage of indicated departments are in each distribution...you could have, for example, a university police department that's in a district with 15k violent crimes per year but they are only responsible for handling parking and property violations.

I don't doubt there's an impact, I would expect it to be honest, but it's not clear that this article is making an objective case for it.

Re: Police killings more likely in agencies that get military gear, data shows

#216

Post by cultus » Mon, Oct 12, 2020, 7:10 PM UTC

Balgair wrote: post #160

baron_harkonnen wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with your logic here is it makes the line between police and the military incredibly blurry to the point where police become just another type of military personnel. Maybe if you have criminal activity at the level of needing automatic weapons, then you need military intervention and not police. As many ex-military have pointed out in various forums, even in war situations rules of engagement for soldiers…

> The problem with your logic here is it makes the line between police and the military incredibly blurry to the point where police become just another type of military personnel. Many other countries have Gendarmerie forces that bridge this gap in various ways. The most famous being the RCMP. Other countries mix these responsibilities with varying success, but they do it intentionally. Some have found good success w…

The RCMP isn't a great example for why militarized police are a good idea.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_controversies_involvin...

Re: Police killings more likely in agencies that get military gear, data shows

#217

Post by jcims » Mon, Oct 12, 2020, 7:10 PM UTC

jessaustin wrote: post #107

082349872349872 wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's two years for the local municipal police. For comparison, nationwide we have less than 1 police fatality per 10 mm population. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_killings_by_law_enforc...

What municipality is that? That is remarkably longer than the training taken by multiple family members of mine.

There's typically a training 'residency' period for new police officers as well. Where I'm at it's one year plus the original ~600-1000 hours in academy.

Re: Police killings more likely in agencies that get military gear, data shows

#218

Post by oh_sigh » Mon, Oct 12, 2020, 7:12 PM UTC

opwieurposiu wrote: post #10

jakelazaroff wrote: post #2

> In Georgia alone, police departments and sheriff’s offices have received more than 2,700 military rifles, night vision goggles and laser gun sights, and literally hundreds of armored vehicles, including more than two dozen mine-resistant vehicles built to fight the war on terror abroad. How else will they protect themselves in the dangerous minefields of Atlanta? /s I’m glad someone has put together the data on thi…

Police in Georgia literally throw hand grenades into the cribs of sleeping babies and get away with it. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/ex-georgia-deputy-acqui...

One police officer once threw a hand grenade into the crib of a sleeping baby.

Clearly not a good thing, but your phrasing makes it sound like it is some kind of common, repeat experience.

Re: Police killings more likely in agencies that get military gear, data shows

#219

Post by throwaway0a5e » Mon, Oct 12, 2020, 7:28 PM UTC

bigbubba wrote: post #198

ceejayoz wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There are many worse scenarios than that. Then why aren't they the "here's why we need an APC" argument? Or are they largely theoretical?

I think most are a third option; not theoretical, but neither occurring in America. Consider something like the 2008 Mumbai attacks in which 10 men with rifles and explosives terrorized an entire city causing hundreds of casualties. Is there any particular reason to think such a thing couldn't happen in America, where rifles and explosives aren't hard to get? Against that sort of threat, I think the police having a f…

In the time it takes for an APC to show up some beat cop the rampage will be over. They will either run out of ammo and detonate suicide vests or someone will have managed to shoot the threat. An APC is of no use except when you know where and when you want it and those situations tend to not be the kinds of situations we want civilian police engaging in.

Re: Police killings more likely in agencies that get military gear, data shows

#220

Post by bigbubba » Mon, Oct 12, 2020, 7:29 PM UTC

BelleOfTheBall wrote: post #213

bigbubba wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think most are a third option; not theoretical, but neither occurring in America. Consider something like the 2008 Mumbai attacks in which 10 men with rifles and explosives terrorized an entire city causing hundreds of casualties. Is there any particular reason to think such a thing couldn't happen in America, where rifles and explosives aren't hard to get? Against that sort of threat, I think the police having a f…

> Is there any particular reason to think such a thing couldn't happen in America, where rifles and explosives aren't hard to get? Is there any particular reason why a clear edge-case scenario should be our basis for arming police departments, which spend most of their time solving mundane domestic disputes, pulling apart drunken fights and responding to break-ins where someone's Playstation was stolen? We should ori…

I think the biggest problem with these vehicles is the aesthetics and the mindset they attract. But in this regard, those armoured vehicles are only a small part of the problem. Their dark uniforms should be replaced with light uniforms. Replace black and dark blue uniforms with baby blue, white or 'day-glo' neons. Do the same to their guns (white plastic 'furniture' where possible), cars, and armoured vehicles. It doesn't particularly bother me that they own armored vehicles (given the armed nature of the American public), but those vehicles should be repainted to look uncool to the sort of person who fetishizes military hardware and edgy 'punisher'/'tacticool' aesthetics.

Basically, make the cops look less like the US Marines and more like UN peacekeepers (specifically their white vehicles.)