Reply to Kristin Mink

Forum Index » Metropolitan DC Local Politics

Reply to "Kristin Mink"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]She's three years too late to reimagine policing.    They've already dumped a ton of mandates on the department and the department is now struggling to stay afloat.  One of the results is increased violent crime.   The political leaders should try working WITH the police department rather than against it to help improve staffing and operations.    Quit treating them like public enemy number 1.  they are county employees too.  [/quote]

It would help if they were interested in reform. They are not. They do not have any interest whatsover in racial equity, they get offended if you even mention race. They need to buckle up and be ready to be partners but if they aren't the politicians are going to keep at it because the electorate demands it.[/quote]

DP here.

Have you actually watched any of the council meetings? The police have shown up, ready and willing to work. The council has thrown inaccurate data around, often blaming MCPD directly for the faults of policing everywhere. I’ve been nothing but impressed with the professionalism shown by police administration, who have to endure the unfounded hate being flung by members of the council.

Have you actually witnessed what the public wants? The latest public forum clearly demonstrated that the public wants MORE policing, which seemed to come as a surprise to council members.

The police aren’t the enemy. Perhaps if the council could work with them, the council could see that. [/quote]

We obviously have different perspectives on the same meetings. I find MCPD to be very dishonest and disingenuous. But that's not surprising since you don't think MCPD should be held accountable for anything. I mean, increased crime is happening everywhere, that must mean there is nothing MCPD can do about it. The opioid epidemic is everywhere so no point in MCPD doing anything about it. I'm surprised you think we should even fund MCPD since you think national problems can't be addressed locally.[/quote]

This isn’t worth continuing. Yes, we have differing perspectives. A person (MCPD, in this case) isn’t being dishonest simply because you disagree with their point. Also, nowhere did I say MCPD shouldn’t be held accountable. Nowhere. Please find that line and point it out to me. Why can’t a person support the police AND expect accountability? The two are not in opposition to each other. The rest of your post is just manufactured garbage that has nothing to do with my comment.

If you are going to address MCPD in the same disingenuous manner you just addressed me, then they have no hope. [/quote]

That's not why I think they are dishonest, but keep saying that to convince yourself everyone who disagrees with you is stupid and wrong.

And yes you said, "The council has thrown inaccurate data around, often blaming MCPD directly for the faults of policing everywhere."

That means you don't think MCPD should ever have to even discuss a problem if it is one of the "faults of policing everywhere". Please.[/quote]

Holy crap that is one insane (and completely wrong) interpretation of PP’s words. [/quote]

It is the logical conclusion, you just don't want to admit it. You don't believe racism is real, just say that[/quote]

I’m a DP and not the one you are replying to.

That is not a logical conclusion. And how did you make this gargantuan jump to whether racism is real? Where did that even come from? [/quote]

Because that is what it all comes down to. You don't want to talk about it so you wave your hands and say oh it's everywhere, that's not MCPD's fault and they can't solve it. Basically an excuse to do nothing because you don't think it is real and therefore don't see the point in doing anything about it.[/quote]

I’m the original PP who posted about the council. I’m so confused by your series of responses. Who says racism isn’t real, and who says there no point in addressing racism here in Montgomery County? You can’t point ANYWHERE on this thread to those comments. Your interpretation is absurd.

It’s this type of thinking that worries me about our council. Beliefs about policing shouldn’t be this binary. MCPD has been regarded as a model department for many years, often sending officers to be chiefs in other jurisdictions. It has been ahead of the curve on training initiatives. It’s okay to acknowledge the good that comes out of the department. Acknowledging the good doesn’t mean avoiding the work that still needs to be done, or refusing to admit when there is wrongdoing. It seems, however, that the council (and the poster above) equates ANY positive mention of police as somehow horrible. [/quote]

Then what is the point of saying "blaming MCPD directly for the faults of policing everywhere"? The issues here are real. You can deny it but don't pretend you're trying to deny these issues exist. [/quote]

Different poster here, but one who's absolutely had it with the simplistic attempt this county is making toward closing racial equity gaps.

The whole traffic study is comparing stops to census data, which is a widely discredited benchmark for a mobile population.   For a lot of reasons, which I'm happy to go into if someone cares.

But here's why the county's system sets its own departments up for failure.    We don't know the drivers of the disparities.  There are many.   Many of which are outside of the county department's control.  Any county department, including police.   Because the county departments are dealing with a population that has been impacted by systemic racism at every level.  Health care, income, wealth, education, environment, and the criminal justice system.   Police can't control any of those differences.

You can alter police engagement to try to close those gaps, but without extremely careful analysis of how it impacts actual community safety, you almost always end up hurting vulnerable communities more.     Police traffic enforcement plummeted from about 100,000 stops a year to about 36,000 a year.   And traffic fatalities went up.  Guess who they were?  They were disproportionately people of color.    I am sure their families are not interested in sacrificing more lives to reduce traffic stops.  [/quote]

Which benchmark do you recommend?[/quote]

The cheapest would be non-at-fault accident data.   Understanding no benchmark is perfect.  A good data analysis specifies both the strengths and the weaknesses of its methodology.  MoCo doesn't do that.

But Connecticut uses a sophisticated, multi step process.   What they describe below is what we are doing, and what's wrong with it.  We are bush league compared to them.

"The impetus for using multiple statistical tests to identify discrimination in the second phase
was an insight made by members of the advisory board that [b]most other jurisdictions typically
choose a single analytical method for evaluating disparities. The board observed that this choice
often divided stakeholders[/b] when one group did not agree with the results or assumptions of that
particular test, that is, racial disparities exist or not. Such an approach to analyzing traffic stop
records only served to further fracture the distrust between law enforcement and communities of
color."

http://computationaljusticelab.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/1745-9133.12528.pdf

And their actual reports.

https://www.ctrp3.org/analysis-reports/reports [/quote]
You said earlier that, "The whole traffic study is comparing stops to census data, which is a widely discredited benchmark for a mobile population." But the study you linked to references using census data as one of the data points so it is hardly widely discredited. It sounds more like census data has limitations, like any benchmark.[/quote]

Reread Phase II of the analysis they perform.[/quote]

Nowhere does it say or imply that using Census data is "widely discredited". It acknowledges both benefits and limitations of Census data.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics