Why are American blacks always having issues with the Police?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I was listening to NPR this afternoon and the founder of Blue LIves Matter was on. He said some stuff I agree with, like much better training for police. He mentioned the Tamir Rice case and said Ohio police training academy is "only" about 600 hours of training. And then they just have about 2 hours of training after graduation.

He said it was unfair to the police to give them so little training, then "things like this happen," and we rake the police all over the coals.

I had never looked at it from that perspective, but I do know that highly professional police departments do lots of training, as I've mentioned before in other threads (autism, substance abuse, mental health, domestic violence, de-escalation, taser use, etc.). These have been presented to me as a way to keep the public safer to reduce the need to use force. But I see it now from the police perspective, too.

He also said that local governments weren't funding the required training and gear. And I can see that in many, MANY police departments across the nation.

I wonder if that's something that the feds can provide grants for. Targeted at training, and ensuring that training meets certain standards. Rather than outfit them with military gear as happened after 9/11.

Absolutely. A colleague of mine used to be a police academy trainer and he told me that his city gave no training at all in how to de-escalate a situation, and as a result many did not know how to stay cool under pressure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Your missing the point. We have too many "trigger happy" cops.

It would be great if all cops were Superman. But, you know what? They are human. Here's a clue........they want to go home at night to their families.

Sure, some should be more cautious.

And, to the Eric Garner case--that looks really, really bad. But, let's remember, the supervising policeman at the scene was an African American woman. So, this is not a racial issue. And, Garner did not do what he was asked. And, he was not shot. I think it was mishandled.

We do not yet know the details of these most recent cases. They both look very bad--but we only see what happened after the incidents began.

I am sure there are bad cops, but let's get the whole story first.

Freddie Gray's case should not have been prosecuted. The charges are largely a result of people jumping to false conclusions and a prosecutor who loves the camera.
Michael Brown's case rightfully did not bring an indictment. Under oath, not on national news, stories changed. The protesters went on emotion and hearsay and very false testimony of one guy who was with Brown. This false story resulted in looting, etc.

Treyvon Martin? Two sides to that story. Neither participant was innocent. Neither participant had a stellar record. Was there evidence to bring a trial? Not clear. Both were known to be hotheads.

They took her badge and gun for failing to properly supervise. The strangler still has his badge and gun, but he's on desk duty for the duration of his NYPD career.

[Anonymous]

I think the most effective things that can be done in the term near are:

1. Independent investigations and prosecutions of police misconduct at the state level (i.e., not the local DA - they are biased)

2. Independent civilian review boards that have the power to fire and discipline ill-behaved officers

3. More funds for on-going:
a. training of police, particularly de-escalation strategies;
b. support for mental health care of officers with no repercussions for seeking help;
c. frequent rotations of duties (i.e., no officer should spend years on patrol or SWAT - too much stress and compounded effects of PTSD);
d. creation of a mental health force that deals solely with disturbed individuals who need to be forcefully admitted to the hospital and who do not possess weapons

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

You mean like Eric Garner, who had no weapon and was raising his hands in the air as police calmly walked up to him in a huge group, wrestled him to the ground and choked him to death? WE ALL SAW THE VIDEO. Clearly the police were not scared or in danger -- they chose to kill him because it pissed them off that he did not do what they said.

Same with Ferguson. You heard the neutral bystanders say, "Oh my God, he had his hands up." He was shot because he pissed the police officer off by calling him a pussy and walking away. If the police cannot deal with situations like this without resorting to murder, then they should not be police officers in this great country. Nor should they own a gun, IMO. I fear for their wives, children and neighbors

The police gave Garner a command. He did not obey and was belligerent. He got shot. Lesson to be learned: when the police tell you to do something you are to shut up, listen, and do what you are told. They are in a high stress job where their lives are in danger every day. Only stupid fools try to fight and argue with an armed policeman and they get killed for their stupidity. Not saying they should be, just it can be avoided.

Oh, so I guess the two videos we have seen were manufactured on a sound stage in Area 51?

No, but what we get to hear is censored and screened. We only get to see and hear what the news media wants us to see and hear. Not in every case but enough of them to discern a pattern.

We all heard the cellphone video of the completely neutral bystanders who said "OMG, he had his hands up and they shot him." They had no stake in the fight AT ALL. We all heard it. You did too. Don't pretend otherwise.

Assumption #1: the bystanders are neutral.
Assumption #2: :"they" had no stake in the fight
Assumption #3 what we all heard from the cellphone video told the whole story.

Time and time again the media is trying to act as judge and jury before all the evidence is presented. Just as in the case of Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown I refuse to allow my emotions to be impacted, I refuse to make a judgment until I see all the facts. I refuse to allow the media try and drag me down the garden path.

I am NOT saying these policemen are innocent, or that what they did was right, or anything because I have not examined all the evidence and there has not been a trial. All I am saying is, take with a grain of salt all that you see and hear on sound and video that is released across the internet.

Again, what country are you from??? In the united States, the police do not kill you for not obeying a command -- they arrest you. We are a great country, a civilized country. If you want to live in a country where the police have a right to kill people who do not "obey a command" then GO SOMEWHERE ELSE.

We ALL saw the video. He was not belligerent. He was calmly standing with his hands in the air. My God, if you think that warrants his killing by police, then I have no way or reasoning with you. Clearly you think this could never happen to you or your loved ones. It could.

You're right that police are supposed to arrest you when you disobey an order, and not kill you, but knowing that the cops can be trigger-happy, wouldn't it be prudent to just obey orders?? I just read of a case in DC where the guy was brandishing what looked to be a real gun and refused to drop it when the cop told him to. Given that the cop was fearful for his life, he actually sounded very reasonable. (There is a tape from his body cam.) Kept screaming.."drop the gun and let's talk about this." But the guy refused to drop the gun, and was pointing it. The cop had a split-second to make a decision, and he obviously feared for his own life. He shot and killed the guy, and only after that it was determined it was a fake gun. (They look a LOT like real guns.) Its very unfortunate that the guy is dead, but why not just drop your gun when ordered to and facing an armed officer?

Your missing the point. We have too many "trigger happy" cops. This has probably been a problem for many years. But now that everyone has a video camera in their pocket, we are seeing what really happens when a bad cop meets an innocent situation, and we don't like it. We need better training for cops to stay cool under pressure and better ways of weeding out the bad cops before they kill someone.

I'm not missing the point. It's a horrible pattern, I agree. All I'm saying is not to be a "hero" - and refuse to give in to the cop, who may or may not be wrong - because of this problem we have with cops not staying cool under pressure. We see they don't. We see they need better training. But knowing that (some) react poorly, why risk it? Just do what the cop says. That doesn't preclude the need for better training. It just increases the likelihood that you'll survive that specific encounter.

Your still missing the point. The citizen being pulled over is also under pressure. Nobody likes being stopped by a cop even under the best of circumstances. But that citizen may also be on drugs, mentally ill, have just come from his mother's funeral, be late for a job interview or headed for his next terrorist attack. We can't control who the police will encounter and what those people will do. But we can control who becomes a police officer, provide them with good training, and hold them accountable for their actions. This is necessary both for safety of all citizens as well as the police officers themselves.

[Anonymous]

All of the apologists for the police are missing the point entirely. If we can't trust the police -- if we don't look to the police to protect us -- we are doomed. When a family calls the police because their mentally ill son is suicidal, and the police arrive only to shoot the mentally ill son as well as the innocent neighbor, a mother, then we're better off with no police at all.

The police themselves should say loud and clear that it's wrong for the police to kill unless it's a last resort. But they don't. They say things like "you don't know what it's like" and "you weren't there" (yes we were. we've seen the videos. We were there.) They are condoning this wave of police violence. Shameful and cowardly of them. They should all stand in solidarity, with the voice of Nakia Jones.

[Anonymous]

^^^^ Plus I'd like to add that this is a political discussion board, not a basic urban survival skills board.

[Anonymous]

I suppose this is politically incorrect, but does anyone have any sympathy for the police? Five officers were killed in cold blood last night, and i believe we should grieve their loss of life, too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It sounds more to me like the police have issues with American blacks.

Exactly

Could it possibly be because cops including black cops have been killed by said race more often and more often they see said race on their wanted list?

Don't provide facts to this group. It messes with their emotional flare-ups

Here are some facts for you, but don't let that get in the way of your reality.

http://www.newsweek.com/who-kills-police-officers-315701

True Fact: Over 10 years Blacks made up only 13 percent of the national population (and black males made up an even smaller percentage), but they committed 43 percent of the murders of police officers -- which is obviously a DISPROPORTIONATELY high percentage. Another sad fact (per MacRandall's post):
"79% of the suspects who fired on NYPD officers in 2012 were black; 5% were white.
http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/downloads/pdf/analysi...
THAT is the REAL reason that police are wary of black males -- because too many black males commit too many violent crimes. CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR -- that is the real reason for "racial profiling" -- NOT "racism." Contrary to the MYTH that is being put out there, the police force is NOT full of bad human beings -- racism is NOT rampant in the police force. The police are getting thrown under the bus & unfairly painted as villains (to push an agenda, like "reparations"). Two wrongs don't make a right.

Statistics do not justify the last two killings. And I don't care to debate whether racism is rampant or not. The number of innocent black men who get shot and killed is far too high. They have not lost their human rights because of statistics.

Innocent is rarely true. It's high because there are more black males caught by cops of any race. Continue being blind to the root of the problem. It will get you no where and society no where when you don't pay attention to what is really wrong.

Sorry but that does nothing for the families who lost their husbands and fathers.

Hmm what was obamas speech on black fathers again?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I suppose this is politically incorrect, but does anyone have any sympathy for the police? Five officers were killed in cold blood last night, and i believe we should grieve their loss of life, too.

You've got an incorrect concept of being politically correct. As many have said in the press, you can be pro-black and pro-police at the same time. You can be passionately for ending police brutality and passionately pro-police at the same time. In fact, I'd argue that those who love the police the most want to see an end to the ones who abuse the system. It hurts the rest of the exceptionally good police officers, and there are many.

It's a given that people grieve the police.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are not training cops to be calm under pressure. There is no reason they are training them with those video scenarios of people they encounter, and they have to decide on a dime if they have a gun or not. That's just crazy. It sets them up to shoot people.

They need to train the to understand human beings and their role in society. And if they are not comfortable with the idea they may lose their lives on the job, I'm sorry, they are in the wrong line of work.

But most criminals aren't Jean Valjean from Les Mis who only stole a loaf of bread. If most criminals were just Jean Valjean, the cops would be very comfortable and would be more willing to put themselves on the line and negotiate with the good human being inside of the individual threatening them.

Maybe cops should just be allowed to deal with people the way a psych nurse would: you go nuts and threaten the floor, you get a tranquilizer and a straight jacket. Cops deal with people who usually aren't normal, productive members of society, who are a threat to society the same way a schizophrenic who shoved someone in front of a train is a threat.

Actually, the police are dealing with minor things ALL THE TIME. Much moreso than violent crime.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:All of the apologists for the police are missing the point entirely. If we can't trust the police -- if we don't look to the police to protect us -- we are doomed. When a family calls the police because their mentally ill son is suicidal, and the police arrive only to shoot the mentally ill son as well as the innocent neighbor, a mother, then we're better off with no police at all.

The police themselves should say loud and clear that it's wrong for the police to kill unless it's a last resort. But they don't. They say things like "you don't know what it's like" and "you weren't there" (yes we were. we've seen the videos. We were there.) They are condoning this wave of police violence. Shameful and cowardly of them. They should all stand in solidarity, with the voice of Nakia Jones.

The above is a farce. Newsflash for Millennials: Watching a video is NOT the same as "being there". I'd wager my last dollar that you've never put your life on the line in the service of others, so don't pretend that you've been there. You haven't and for you to claim otherwise is both inane and insulting.

Moreover, the first part of your claim is equally ludicrous. The police absolutely do say (and establish as a matter of both policy and law) that it's wrong to kill except as a last resort. What serious people know is that in the heat of the moment, it's very difficult to know when the last resort is necessary. This is not a simple issue, except for simple folk.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It sounds more to me like the police have issues with American blacks.

+1 How ignorant do you have to be to not know this.

Sounds more to me that police have issues with people who break the law and resist arrest.

What country are you from? I ask because here in America, we live by a system of laws. In America, if you break the law you get arrested, not shot. And if you resist arrest in America, we have a law regarding that -- it's called "resisting arrest." You go before a judge and jury, and if you're found guilty, a judge decides your sentence and death is not one of the options.

So what country are you from, where police get to shoot people for resisting arrest? We don't do that in this great country.

I like how you have a high expectation for one party, police officer, to follow the proper procedure, while at he same time you are ok that he person will be resisting arrest. Don't you think that the life would me much easier for all if both sides follow the rule?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think the most effective things that can be done in the term near are:

1. Independent investigations and prosecutions of police misconduct at the state level (i.e., not the local DA - they are biased)

2. Independent civilian review boards that have the power to fire and discipline ill-behaved officers

3. More funds for on-going:
a. training of police, particularly de-escalation strategies;
b. support for mental health care of officers with no repercussions for seeking help;
c. frequent rotations of duties (i.e., no officer should spend years on patrol or SWAT - too much stress and compounded effects of PTSD);
d. creation of a mental health force that deals solely with disturbed individuals who need to be forcefully admitted to the hospital and who do not possess weapons

+1,000,000 - This is excellent.
Curious what your background/profession is.

[Anonymous]

Different races and communities have different perspectives regarding law enforcement. In white enclaves, interactions between white UMC citizens, such as the interactions are, revolve around parking tickets, noise complaints, car seat checks, vacation checks, and the like. It's a whole other world for African Americans. White UMC Americans don't really think the problems of cities will spill over into cities. The unspoken assumption is, I guess, that law enforcement wouldn't let it happen. An honest conversation regarding race must ask white America why? Why do you take so many actions--on purpose, subconsciously, or whatever--to seal yourselves in bubbles?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Different races and communities have different perspectives regarding law enforcement. In white enclaves, interactions between white UMC citizens, such as the interactions are, revolve around parking tickets, noise complaints, car seat checks, vacation checks, and the like. It's a whole other world for African Americans. White UMC Americans don't really think the problems of cities will spill over into cities. The unspoken assumption is, I guess, that law enforcement wouldn't let it happen. An honest conversation regarding race must ask white America why? Why do you take so many actions--on purpose, subconsciously, or whatever--to seal yourselves in bubbles?

^^ into suburbs