LEO - public relationship must change

We see BLM (if there is such an organization) fringe members shooting police because of perceived (real or not) injustices.

So what if this continues....injustice is seen to occur, citizen(s) shoot LEOs. Well, here's the choices:


1) something will change

2) nothing will change

If 1)
then possibilities include (maybe not exclusive to):

a) .govs will start to hide records, "clamp down", begin violating our rights in an effort to protect .govs, etc.

b) no changes to law but police will treat people nicer

c) changes to the law will be performed
I would like to see qualified immunity watered down (to almost nothing). Civil matters? They should get no relief from the public at
all.
Many LEO organizations loves to tell us gun owners to get insurance-
make them get insurance to cover their unlawful actions instead of the endless well of the people's pocketbook.

If 2) I foresee many cops (some who have done their jobs honorably) being shot due to their co-worker's perceived unlawfulness.

Nightmare said:

Empty posturing.

Click to expand...

Any ideas? No. Move along.

davidmcbeth said:

We see BLM (if there is such an organization) fringe members shooting police because of perceived (real or not) injustices.

So what if this continues....injustice is seen to occur, citizen(s) shoot LEOs. Well, here's the choices:


1) something will change

2) nothing will change

If 1)
then possibilities include (maybe not exclusive to):

a) .govs will start to hide records, "clamp down", begin violating our rights in an effort to protect .govs, etc.

b) no changes to law but police will treat people nicer

c) changes to the law will be performed
I would like to see qualified immunity watered down (to almost nothing). Civil matters? They should get no relief from the public at
all.
Many LEO organizations loves to tell us gun owners to get insurance-
make them get insurance to cover their unlawful actions instead of the endless well of the people's pocketbook.

If 2) I foresee many cops (some who have done their jobs honorably) being shot due to their co-worker's perceived unlawfulness.

Click to expand...

I kind of like your breakdown and I've posted what I thought should happen.

o Sensible RoE
o Decrease armament to encourage use of numbers not violence
o Reduction of the 'must get your man at all costs' doctrine with passion from the top down.
o Changing the way cops ride back to a two person patrol
o Stopping trying to use fishing in 'fake' car stops to try and score big
o Not chasing BGs whom you know where they live
o No shooting of non-felony stops unless they get shot at first.
o Changing the idea of 'evading a cop' to being a felony (which they can now use a firing solution)
o In general downsizing and reducing tension, de-escalation
o Treating LAC as 'nice people' and not carrying over the violent mind-set of dealing with a true predator onto a soccer mom who sasses you (or spits at you)
o Dispensing with this whole stupid thing of 'Officer Safety' being a guiding force. They're not there to be safe. They're there to be PROFESSIONALS.


But your idea of making rules or laws is doomed to fail - why locker room pressure will still be the driving way a cop works on the street. He doesn't get his man and he gets stonewalled and harassed by his fellow cops. He refuses to go on the take and he gets black-balled.

That's why you need a change of personnel (all of them college grads) Increase in their pay, upping the IQ requirements, and making the top brass responsive to the beat cop.

Maverick9 said:

I kind of like your breakdown and I've posted what I thought should happen.

o Sensible RoE
o Decrease armament to encourage use of numbers not violence
o Reduction of the 'must get your man at all costs' doctrine with passion from the top down.
o Changing the way cops ride back to a two person patrol
o Stopping trying to use fishing in 'fake' car stops to try and score big
o Not chasing BGs whom you know where they live
o No shooting of non-felony stops unless they get shot at first.
o Changing the idea of 'evading a cop' to being a felony (which they can now use a firing solution)
o In general downsizing and reducing tension, de-escalation
o Treating LAC as 'nice people' and not carrying over the violent mind-set of dealing with a true predator onto a soccer mom who sasses you (or spits at you)
o Dispensing with this whole stupid thing of 'Officer Safety' being a guiding force. They're not there to be safe. They're there to be PROFESSIONALS.

But your idea of making rules or laws is doomed to fail - why locker room pressure will still be the driving way a cop works on the street. He doesn't get his man and he gets stonewalled and harassed by his fellow cops. He refuses to go on the take and he gets black-balled.

That's why you need a change of personnel (all of them college grads) Increase in their pay, upping the IQ requirements, and making the top brass responsive to the beat cop.

Click to expand...

thanks for the breakdown from you both and completely agree on those areas you mentioned as i have wondered why police engage in hi speed traffic chases, to the detriment of other drivers...


however, look what is transpiring right now...the nice LEs are arresting individuals from FB who make a perceived threat against the LEs.

good heavens, i am at a loss to explain that with the 1st amendment in place...

i believe removing QI and holding the nice LEs personally accountable might mitigate some of the quick on the trigger events.

ipse

solus said:

thanks for the breakdown from you both and completely agree on those areas you mentioned as i have wondered why police engage in hi speed traffic chases, to the detriment of other drivers...


however, look what is transpiring right now...the nice LEs are arresting individuals from FB who make a perceived threat against the LEs.

good heavens, i am at a loss to explain that with the 1st amendment in place...

i believe removing QI and holding the nice LEs personally accountable might mitigate some of the quick on the trigger events.

ipse

Click to expand...

No personal accountability is worthless without external independent review. The higher ups will give him an 'out' or obscure information to assure he isn't chargable.

A DA who needs cop affiliation won't charge.

And LEOs who do these things KNOWING they are on camera will not stop their overly-entitled actions (remember IQ </= 100) just on the off-chance someone will recoup money. THey'll just have the police union re-compensate them and retire on a PTSD disability. Yes, that has happened.

There's a big payoff among their peers for acting all 'macho' and they're not ABLE to change their behavior. That requires introspection and thought process.

I wish, though.

Maverick9 said:

No personal accountability is worthless without external independent review. The higher ups will give him an 'out' or obscure information to assure he isn't chargable.

A DA who needs cop affiliation won't charge.

And LEOs who do these things KNOWING they are on camera will not stop their overly-entitled actions (remember IQ </= 100) just on the off-chance someone will recoup money. THey'll just have the police union re-compensate them and retire on a PTSD disability. Yes, that has happened.

There's a big payoff among their peers for acting all 'macho' and they're not ABLE to change their behavior. That requires introspection and thought process.

I wish, though.

Click to expand...

Any reliable source for the statement?

One thing that needs to be done and could be done is to drug test cops .... 2x yr (use those same roadside tests that they use on us and take the results as golden-LOL). Steroids steroids steroids.

Maverick9 said:

I kind of like your breakdown and I've posted what I thought should happen.

Click to expand...

Not contradicting; just using your post as a springboard to something more. I would like to add to your list:

Holding police to the same standard for justified lethal force as citizens.

No, really. I mean this.

How many times have you heard or read a police spokesman or police chief say, "The officer feared for his life."

Sorry, that don't cut it.

Justified lethal force in most states breaks down to three elements. But, before we discuss those, lets eliminate something else: some states have a duty to retreat. So, if we're talking about police, or whoever would fulfill that function in truly free society, then we cannot require them to retreat. So, lets set aside duty-to-retreat.

So, back to the three elements. And, boy, did I just realize a humdinger. Be sure to read all the way thru to find out who codified and taught us those three elements of justified lethal force.

The three elements: AOJ/I.

A = Ability. The person lethally defended against has to have the ability to inflict grave bodily injury or death.

O = Opportunity. The person lethally defended against has to have the right-now opportunity. He has to be close enough in space and time to exercise that ability. For example, I cannot just up and shoot someone making threats against me with a baseball bat when he is on the other side of six-foot chain link fence and across the street. He has the ability (baseball bat), but he does not have the opportunity.

J/I = "I" stands for intent. Once upon a time, the element was intent. But, over time a succession of somebodies successfully argued that you cannot read a person's mind to divine his intent. So, the element was re-worded to jeopardy. J = jeopardy. The person lethally defended against must make some demonstration that would induce a reasonable person to conclude the attack is about to begin right now! or is actually under way.

Those three elements--all three together--are necessary. And, all three combined are used to determine whether the lethal force defense was justified. Which is another way of saying all three combined are how you determine whether the defender was reasonably in fear for his life. Just being in fear doesn't cut it. It has to be a reasonable fear. And, those three elements are the yardstick against which the reasonableness of the fear is measured.

So, whenever a police spokesman or police chief, shortly after a police shooting, intones that the office said he feared for his life, you automatically know you're being scammed. That, or the agency did the fastest investigation you ever heard of. And, in either case, you are being told what to think--that the officer's fear was reasonable--instead of being told the three elements and the facts to judge for yourself. Consider. If the chief knows the facts, he can just tick off the three elements. And, give the fact or facts that support each one. Wouldn't take fifteen seconds longer.

Now, here is that humdinger I referred to earlier. Guess who codified those three elements? Yep. Police. Or, at least academia to teach them in Law Enforcement 101 or whatever the college course is called.

And, here is the legal citation for AOJ. Go on youtube and search Massad Ayoob and Judicious Use of Deadly Force. Ayoob owns and runs Lethal Force Institute--a school for citizens. He explains these points in a specific video, citing his credentials and standing to make the pronouncements.

Oh, heck. Here it is. And, realize, you get to see it for free. I had to pay for the DVD because it wasn't yet on YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m7sbHfBg92w

Maverick9 said:

No personal accountability is worthless without external independent review. The higher ups will give him an 'out' or obscure information to assure he isn't chargable.

A DA who needs cop affiliation won't charge.

And LEOs who do these things KNOWING they are on camera will not stop their overly-entitled actions (remember IQ </= 100) just on the off-chance someone will recoup money. THey'll just have the police union re-compensate them and retire on a PTSD disability. Yes, that has happened.

There's a big payoff among their peers for acting all 'macho' and they're not ABLE to change their behavior. That requires introspection and thought process.

I wish, though.

Click to expand...

Maverick9, there is no acting as they are hired to be assertive/aggressive. for example, below is the narrative from a sample report from the MMPI-2 lE psychometric instrument most agencies use. the problem arises when the hiring agent, who isn't appropriately trained in evaluation of psychometric instruments reads the words and says: INDIVIDUAL HIRED!!

personally, this individual has a few personality issues which imho, preclude them from even attending academy, let alone represent my department to the community w/badge, etc.

quote:
Bill G. is 28 years old and divorced with two children. He is being evaluated as an applicant for a police department position in a large Midwestern community.
Bill played football and baseball in high school. He completed an associate’s degree at a community college. For the past two years, he has worked as a security guard for a commercial retail complex. His background records show that he received two speeding tickets five years ago.


INTERPERSONAL RELATIONS
He appears to be a very outgoing person, forward and aggressive in relationships and able to influence others easily. Although he makes a good first impression, his relationships tend to be rather superficial.


The content of this applicant's MMPI-2 responses suggests the following additional information concerning his interpersonal relations. He appears to have rather cynical views about life. Any work involving cooperative effort may be affected by his negativism. He may view relationships with others as threatening and harmful. He feels some family conflict, but he does not seem to view this as a major problem in his life. He may be viewed as irritable and competitive. He may experience some interpersonal problems at times because of his aggressiveness.

POSSIBLE EMPLOYMENT PROBLEMS
Law enforcement applicants with this MMPI-2 profile require careful evaluation for the possibility of impulsive or careless behavior. This applicant may not pay sufficient attention to detail, and he may be somewhat overbearing in relationships with other people.
Although the applicant appears to be hard-driving and expansive, he may become overextended and have trouble completing projects. He is frequently overconfident and may make promises that are difficult to keep. He also tends to dislike practical matters, preferring to be rather vague and superficial.
There is some possibility that his interpersonal style may be a bit overbearing and might create strained relationships.

PERSONAL ADJUSTMENT
The applicant's performance on the MMPI-2 suggests that he is outgoing and considers himself to have few psychological problems. However, his overuse of denial and his tendency to overextend himself may occasionally cause problems. He tends to be very aggressive, overconfident, and somewhat self-centered, with an unrealistic view of his capabilities. At times he is overly optimistic, fails to recognize his own limitations, and is insensitive to the needs of others. He tends to be an expressive, spontaneous person who might act or make decisions without careful consideration of the consequences. Without apparent cause he may become somewhat elated, and at other times he may be moody and irritable.
unquote http://images.pearsonclinical.com/i...el/MMPI-2_Personnel_Interp_LawEnforcement.pdf

ipse

solus said:

Maverick9, there is no acting as they are hired to be assertive/aggressive. ... ipse

Click to expand...

Well, there ya go. The inability/refusal of a particular cop to follow black letter law is a result of a "a few personality issues"...great.

solus said:

Maverick9, there is no acting as they are hired to be assertive/aggressive. for example, below is the narrative from a sample report from the MMPI-2 lE psychometric instrument most agencies use. the problem arises when the hiring agent, who isn't appropriately trained in evaluation of psychometric instruments reads the words and says: INDIVIDUAL HIRED!!

personally, this individual has a few personality issues which imho, preclude them from even attending academy, let alone represent my department to the community w/badge, etc.

quote:
Bill G. is 28 years old and divorced with two children. He is being evaluated as an applicant for a police department position in a large Midwestern community.
Bill played football and baseball in high school. He completed an associate’s degree at a community college. For the past two years, he has worked as a security guard for a commercial retail complex. His background records show that he received two speeding tickets five years ago.


INTERPERSONAL RELATIONS
He appears to be a very outgoing person, forward and aggressive in relationships and able to influence others easily. Although he makes a good first impression, his relationships tend to be rather superficial.


The content of this applicant's MMPI-2 responses suggests the following additional information concerning his interpersonal relations. He appears to have rather cynical views about life. Any work involving cooperative effort may be affected by his negativism. He may view relationships with others as threatening and harmful. He feels some family conflict, but he does not seem to view this as a major problem in his life. He may be viewed as irritable and competitive. He may experience some interpersonal problems at times because of his aggressiveness.

POSSIBLE EMPLOYMENT PROBLEMS
Law enforcement applicants with this MMPI-2 profile require careful evaluation for the possibility of impulsive or careless behavior. This applicant may not pay sufficient attention to detail, and he may be somewhat overbearing in relationships with other people.
Although the applicant appears to be hard-driving and expansive, he may become overextended and have trouble completing projects. He is frequently overconfident and may make promises that are difficult to keep. He also tends to dislike practical matters, preferring to be rather vague and superficial.
There is some possibility that his interpersonal style may be a bit overbearing and might create strained relationships.

PERSONAL ADJUSTMENT
The applicant's performance on the MMPI-2 suggests that he is outgoing and considers himself to have few psychological problems. However, his overuse of denial and his tendency to overextend himself may occasionally cause problems. He tends to be very aggressive, overconfident, and somewhat self-centered, with an unrealistic view of his capabilities. At times he is overly optimistic, fails to recognize his own limitations, and is insensitive to the needs of others. He tends to be an expressive, spontaneous person who might act or make decisions without careful consideration of the consequences. Without apparent cause he may become somewhat elated, and at other times he may be moody and irritable.
unquote http://images.pearsonclinical.com/i...el/MMPI-2_Personnel_Interp_LawEnforcement.pdf

ipse

Click to expand...

so effectively NONE of us should be in law enforcement LOL, we are all rather cynical, from what I have read here.

Ezek said:

so effectively NONE of us should be in law enforcement LOL, we are all rather cynical, from what I have read here.

Click to expand...

i have just been cut to the quick with your scathing comment ~ to even be put into or associated with that horrid cynical group where people are motivated by self-interest; distrustful of human sincerity or integrity, oh the humanity...

i feel better...

Ezek, some prefer to do an objective analysis and evaluation of an issue in order to form a unbiased judgment so they can be correct in their cynical position, said by the reigning president of Diogenes fan club!!

ipse

solus said:

i have just been cut to the quick with your scathing comment ~ to even be put into or associated with that horrid cynical group where people are motivated by self-interest; distrustful of human sincerity or integrity, oh the humanity...

i feel better...

Ezek, some prefer to do an objective analysis and evaluation of an issue in order to form a unbiased judgment so they can be correct in their cynical position, said by the reigning president of Diogenes fan club!!

ipse

Click to expand...

Mission objective achieved.

in all seriousness, I dont' find cynicism to be detrimental, as it seems to be more in touch with reality then optimistic views.

OC for ME said:

Well, there ya go. The inability/refusal of a particular cop to follow black letter law is a result of a "a few personality issues"...great.

Click to expand...

Well he has a point. My LEO friends all admit they hire for certain 'types' including an 'enforcer' who is sent out to put fear into those citizens who are not complying.

These 'enforcers' are known 'roid users, gym rats and or have histories of bad attitudes. They will be used up and until they become a liability and then they are discharged as 'acceptable losses', rather than cost the department money.

What's amazing is just how long they will keep these types on board, amassing a huge dossier of complaints, all of which have been successfully swept under the table by the internal investigations team (who is skilled in doing that).

We learned from Mark Furman just how rampant this kind of thing is. The cops not only do this, they have pet names for it like 'rough ride' and 'falling down the stairs' and 'hiding the plumber's helper'.

So mea culpa, I forgot myself, OC for Me.