Reply to Why is the Montgomery County Council + Executive so anti-cop?

Forum Index » Metropolitan DC Local Politics

Reply to "Why is the Montgomery County Council + Executive so anti-cop?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]

But that's not what they are proposing.  They want all traffic enforcement gone.   They want to shift traffic to the Department of Transportation.   Both automated and live traffic enforcement (they are doing a study on that now).  And then fire police because they aren't "needed" anymore, and shift the funds to mental health services.

[/quote]

Shifting traffic enforcement to MCDOT is shifting traffic enforcement to MCDOT, not getting rid of traffic enforcement. What's more, I think that traffic enforcement should be shifted to MCDOT. Let the police focus on criminal offenses (like DUIs), not civil offenses (like speeding). Also, state law governs where speed cameras can go, whether it's the police or MCDOT placing them.

And mental health services also shouldn't be a policing matter. It's bad for the police, it's bad for people with mental health issues, it has bad outcomes for everyone - why would the police oppose this?[/quote]

*State law requires people to obey police regarding traffic enforcement.  There is no state law that says we have to obey civilian enforcers of any sort.  https://law.justia.com/codes/maryland/2019/transportation/title-21/subtitle-1/sect-21-103/  That could be changed, but it has to be done at the state level, not at the county.  So they are SOL if they think they can do it themselves.

If you shift it to transportation, what provisions are you making both for employee safety at traffic stops as well as driver safety at traffic stops?  What is the background vetting process of civilian employees?   It's not as good as the police vetting process.  If you conduct a similar background check, are you prepared to pay a salary commensurate with hiring and retaining appropriately-qualified and safe employees?

Police get trained to drive, too.  Will the transportation employees get trained as well?  What's the cost there?  What other training will civilians need?  What is the backup protocol if they find an angry, potentially violent driver who tries to back up over them?  Or swing their car door out to hit them?  Or push them into traffic?  Police are trained to avoid or mitigate that.   Civilians aren't.   They could be.  But is that the most efficient use of tax dollars when there is a system in place now?

What safeguards will you put in place to ensure the civilian transportation employee conducts him/herself appropriately at the stop?  And doesn't demand sexual favors or masturbates in front of the person stopped?  To ensure they don't demand bribes to avoid issuing citations?  Police have dash video cameras and body cameras.   Will you issue those on civilians?  What's the cost?  Why not improve the system you have now instead of eliminating it in favor of the unknown?   Even Berkeley just ditched their commitment to moving toward civilian traffic enforcement and went instead with a refined police reform package that addresses racial disparities and traffic stop safety -- by police. https://www.berkeleyside.com/2021/02/24/berkeley-police-reform-traffic-stops-racial-disparities

*State law specifies the types of areas that a speed camera can be installed.   For most of the state, a local jurisdiction can only place a speed camera near a school.  Period.  Montgomery County has an exception that allows for installation in residential areas.    After that, placement is determined by the local jurisdiction based on speed and and crash data.  That's the most equitable, non-biased way to do it.  If you allow politicians to cater to citizen requests, you will have bias that disproportionately impacts people of color and income.  And you can't prove otherwise when people start suing.   Much of overpolicing happens at the request of others with power.   You take away what objectivity there is in the system and make it entirely political.    And we know how that goes.

*The police are not opposing increasing mental health services at all.    Everything I've read says they support it.   But everything I've listened to during these briefings says that mental health workers don't want to respond without police because it's dangerous.    Everyone is focusing on the subject of a stop or call, but nobody is paying any attention to everyone else at the scene.    Police, victims, bystanders, new civilian staff.   Politicians have a duty to the civilian employees that they put in harm's way.

*Nobody in the local police reform movement is recognizing the systems that are set up already to ensure both officer and community safety.   And nobody is addressing what it will take to replicate it elsewhere.  Nobody says they are perfect.  They can be improved.  Why aren't people focusing on that?  Truly,  I am dumbfounded that nobody is suggesting making improvements within policing, but instead going straight to the facile "solution" of eliminating policing.     Instead, please be Berkeley.    [/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