Yes, Starchild. Because, if I wore a video camera and showed just how normally sh*tty police talk to me, or look at me in a nice neighborhood, as they drive by…its all a ‘I better not say a word, if I got some place to be on time’ power trip.
Once, a elder Chinese woman witnessed an account of a escaped/walk away county jail inmate, bald head dope feind pic on flyer…at Powell and Market 10am bus stop: afterwards in extremely broken English, she said “police no like black. Not hair you on pic”
White guy said, “please, let me buy you breakfast. We all are not like that. Still, I woulda let him have it, but that’s terrible you coulda say a word uh?”
Just a cop power trip for the tourist, it seems how horrible he talked to me.
Why not just abolish the police department and give criminals and rioters a free hand?
This proposal as stated is so blatantly ridiculous that it is hard to believe anyone with any common sense would take it seriously. Requiring the cops to take a course taught be civil liberties advocates would be telling them not to do what they were hired to do; enforce the law.
Criminals and rioters have never been much of a problem. Police have. See "democide"
Protecting you from individual criminals is not my problem. Nor is it anyone's' problem but yours. But you and your ilk want public welfare.
It makes more sense to give drugs to addicts, than give you welfare cuz you are too lazy or opportunistic to protect yourself.
But you want others who do protect themselves to pay for your protection too. And you even use the hackneyed scare tactics of "rioters" "chaos" etc to justify your irresponsibility.
I can't imagine a more horrible world.
Indeed, I do not believe many do take such articles seriously, since such articles rant about what is wrong, but seldom offer concrete and realistic suggestions of how things could be made right.
Also, the general public is simply not interest in real solutions that would upset the status quo on unions (police have powerful unions), relatively low local taxes (local control of police as well as schools went away with Proposition 13), the Nanny State (more people prefer to delegate safety than directly contract for it or assume personal responsibility for it). Some people do get agitated temporarily and sporadically when a high-profile incident happens; but other than shouting slogans and obstructing traffic, do not go any further and connect the dots between high support for the Nanny State and the Nanny State's sometimes violent power.
Anthony Gregory's article does tangentially allude to a connection, while mentioning that things worked better when cops walked the street and had a relationship with the community they served -- that is, the Nanny State was smaller and therefore less powerful. However, Gregory calls for abolition of government police, suggesting that the free market would come up with replacements such as private police and self protection "within 24 hours." His credibility wanes a bit when in his list of police wrongdoing he includes the killing of Oscar Grant, who was killed by private police.
Well, you all clamoring for doing away with the current structure of "law enforcement," wake me up when you are ready for a serious discussion of how the current mess came about and what can be done to remove the mess without burning cities to the ground and going back to 1776.
Marcy
I guess you did not own any of the stores that got burned to the ground during riots and chaos! However, I completely agree that we ourselves are primarily responsible for our own safety. If I owned a store, I would be on the roof with an AK47 during a riot, making sure my merchandise was not looted or burned -- until police came and took my gun away, as they have done with store owners who dared to defend themselves in he past, but that's another story.
Marcy
Les,
Are you really saying that police can't enforce the law without violating people's civil liberties? I mean, above and beyond the more or less unavoidable civil liberties violation of arresting people who in some cases will turn out to be innocent? I think in such cases people should receive compensation from the State. But that issue aside, you don't offer any details on why you think police being taught classes by civil liberties advocates (i.e. people with libertarian views on personal freedoms) is "so blatantly ridiculous that it is hard to believe anyone with any common sense would take it seriously". Here are some of the kinds of things I think officers should be told during training:
• It is your honor, duty, and responsibility to put yourself at risk before putting any civilian at risk. If you carry a firearm, do not shoot first unless necessary to save a life other than your own
• Do not draw your weapon on people unless you have reasonable belief that they are armed and present a threat
• Tell people what they're being arrested for at the time of their arrest, and give it to them in writing, along with your name and badge number [pre-printed cards with common offenses listed on them and the appropriate one(s) circled can be used].
• Use only the absolute minimum amount of force necessary to subdue someone or take them into custody
• If you cannot subdue someone or forcibly take them into custody without incurring a substantial risk of seriously injuring them, do not attempt to do so; wait for backup
• The people you arrest are innocent unless and until they formally plead guilty before a judge or are convicted in a jury trial -- always treat them accordingly, even if you believe they are guilty or believe you witnessed them commit a crime!
• If someone asks you, "Am I being detained?" or "Am I free to leave?" or words to that effect, you immediately answer the question "yes" or "no", and if you answer "yes", immediately tell them what they are being detained for.
• Inform witnesses to an incident how they can pick up a copy of the police report of an incident in person, or take their email or mailing addresses if they would like to be sent a copy.
• Write up your police report within 24 hours of the incident and physically deliver or have delivered a copy of the report to any suspects and victims within 48 hours of the incident
• Give a card with your full name, badge number, title, and station contact information to any person who asks for this information upon request.
• When arresting someone, state, "You are now under arrest," read them their rights, and ask politely whether they will peacefully cooperate. If they say yes, do not handcuff them unless they are suspected of a violent felony or you have probable cause to believe they may try to escape. Before physically attempting to handcuff someone or forcibly take them into custody, ask, "Do you have any injuries or medical issues I should be aware of?" and ensure they are treated appropriately for any conditions they may have.
• If you are wearing a body camera when you approach a civilian to interact with them, turn it on, and let any civilians you are interacting with know that the scene is being video recorded and how they can obtain a copy of the recording prior to asking them any questions or taking any other action except as may be necessary in an emergency situation.
• Treat every civilian you come into contact with, with the professionalism, respect, patience, humility, and consideration that you would want to be afforded to yourself or to a loved one if you or they were interacting with police in a similar situation.
• Carry a device with you on which you can access any written law you seek to enforce, and allow anyone who requests to see the law, or read it to them, prior to making any arrest, except in an emergency situation.
• If someone disputes with you the meaning of the law, or how it applies to a situation, take the time to listen to the person and consider what they are saying, because they may be right and you may be wrong. If you are unsure whether a law has been violated or not, give the individual the benefit of the doubt.
• If a civilian asks you at any time you are on duty what is happening in a situation or what you are doing, respond promptly and politely and provide the information requested, unless it is an emergency situation and you do not have time to respond, or if disclosing particular information would interfere with an investigation
• Inform arrestees immediately upon arrest that they are allowed to make a phone call and allow them use of their phone for this purpose, unless doing so would be unsafe or delay them being taken in for booking (under most circumstances, suspects should be allowed to use their phones from the back of your squad car as they are being taken in). If a suspect desires to make his or her call in private, inform them that they will be able to do this at the station immediately after being booked, or before being booked if booking within 15 minutes of their arrival is not possible.
• Do not arrest anyone unless you have probable cause to believe they committed a violent felony and this is what you're arresting them for, or they are a clear and present threat to public safety (e.g. someone who is drunk and disorderly); in other cases, issue them a citation requiring them to appear in court
• When making a traffic stop, your first interaction with a motorist or person using transportation whom you have pulled over should be to greet them politely. Do not ask the individual, "Do you know why I stopped you?". Tell them why you stopped them, inform them what the penalty for the offense is, and ask whether they have anything to say in their defense. If you have any other questions you'd like to ask them, first tell them that you would like to ask some questions, but inform them that they have the right to refuse to answer any question they do not wish to answer, and may do so without penalty.
Do you have a problem with any of these policies? If so, which and why?
Marcy,
I'm not sure what kind of concrete and realistic suggestions you're looking for, but there are plenty out there, including some I've made myself, all the way up to and including abolishing government police entirely as Anthony Gregory advocates and in that respect going back to the "no standing army" conditions of the early United States. I don't see any reason to think cities would burn to the ground if it weren't for these standing armies.
Oscar Grant wasn't killed by private police, he was killed by a government BART cop.
Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))
Hi Starchild,
Excellent list of suggestions. However, it seems they refer to the current police structure, while my comments referred to Gregory's article which mostly called for abolishing the current structure. I have not seen any concrete suggestions as to how we all go about doing that.
Now if you are talking about improving the current system, OK you have given good suggestions below. The only problem is that most of these rules are already on the books, and seem to apply more to a traffic stop for a broken tail light than to a highly charged life threatening situation.
Regarding your belief that cities would not burn to the ground, given today's expectations, if it were not for "standing armies" (I will go with your hyperbole for now) -- from your lips to the gods' ears!
I thought we were talking about City police, which does not include BART police.
Marcy
Starchild:
My, what a lengthy list of rules! The police would so hamstrung by rules they wouldn't be able to get anything done.
I am reminded about what someone said about laws regarding businessmen. There are so many laws and regulations that it is impossible to make thru the day without violating some of them or at least one of them.
If you want to abolish the police department, you should say so and not make up a whole catalog of rules for them to follow.
Les
Les,
Are you really saying that police can't enforce the law without violating people's civil liberties? I mean, above and beyond the more or less unavoidable civil liberties violation of arresting people who in some cases will turn out to be innocent? I think in such cases people should receive compensation from the State. But that issue aside, you don't offer any details on why you think police being taught classes by civil liberties advocates (i.e. people with libertarian views on personal freedoms) is "so blatantly ridiculous that it is hard to believe anyone with any common sense would take it seriously". Here are some of the kinds of things I think officers should be told during training:
• It is your honor, duty, and responsibility to put yourself at risk before putting any civilian at risk. If you carry a firearm, do not shoot first unless necessary to save a life other than your own
• Do not draw your weapon on people unless you have reasonable belief that they are armed and present a threat
• Tell people what they're being arrested for at the time of their arrest, and give it to them in writing, along with your name and badge number [pre-printed cards with common offenses listed on them and the appropriate one(s) circled can be used].
• Use only the absolute minimum amount of force necessary to subdue someone or take them into custody
• If you cannot subdue someone or forcibly take them into custody without incurring a substantial risk of seriously injuring them, do not attempt to do so; wait for backup
• The people you arrest are innocent unless and until they formally plead guilty before a judge or are convicted in a jury trial -- always treat them accordingly, even if you believe they are guilty or believe you witnessed them commit a crime!
• If someone asks you, "Am I being detained?" or "Am I free to leave?" or words to that effect, you immediately answer the question "yes" or "no", and if you answer "yes", immediately tell them what they are being detained for.
• Inform witnesses to an incident how they can pick up a copy of the police report of an incident in person, or take their email or mailing addresses if they would like to be sent a copy.
• Write up your police report within 24 hours of the incident and physically deliver or have delivered a copy of the report to any suspects and victims within 48 hours of the incident
• Give a card with your full name, badge number, title, and station contact information to any person who asks for this information upon request.
• When arresting someone, state, "You are now under arrest," read them their rights, and ask politely whether they will peacefully cooperate. If they say yes, do not handcuff them unless they are suspected of a violent felony or you have probable cause to believe they may try to escape. Before physically attempting to handcuff someone or forcibly take them into custody, ask, "Do you have any injuries or medical issues I should be aware of?" and ensure they are treated appropriately for any conditions they may have.
• If you are wearing a body camera when you approach a civilian to interact with them, turn it on, and let any civilians you are interacting with know that the scene is being video recorded and how they can obtain a copy of the recording prior to asking them any questions or taking any other action except as may be necessary in an emergency situation.
• Treat every civilian you come into contact with, with the professionalism, respect, patience, humility, and consideration that you would want to be afforded to yourself or to a loved one if you or they were interacting with police in a similar situation.
• Carry a device with you on which you can access any written law you seek to enforce, and allow anyone who requests to see the law, or read it to them, prior to making any arrest, except in an emergency situation.
• If someone disputes with you the meaning of the law, or how it applies to a situation, take the time to listen to the person and consider what they are saying, because they may be right and you may be wrong. If you are unsure whether a law has been violated or not, give the individual the benefit of the doubt.
• If a civilian asks you at any time you are on duty what is happening in a situation or what you are doing, respond promptly and politely and provide the information requested, unless it is an emergency situation and you do not have time to respond, or if disclosing particular information would interfere with an investigation
• Inform arrestees immediately upon arrest that they are allowed to make a phone call and allow them use of their phone for this purpose, unless doing so would be unsafe or delay them being taken in for booking (under most circumstances, suspects should be allowed to use their phones from the back of your squad car as they are being taken in). If a suspect desires to make his or her call in private, inform them that they will be able to do this at the station immediately after being booked, or before being booked if booking within 15 minutes of their arrival is not possible.
• Do not arrest anyone unless you have probable cause to believe they committed a violent felony and this is what you're arresting them for, or they are a clear and present threat to public safety (e.g. someone who is drunk and disorderly); in other cases, issue them a citation requiring them to appear in court
• When making a traffic stop, your first interaction with a motorist or person using transportation whom you have pulled over should be to greet them politely. Do not ask the individual, "Do you know why I stopped you?". Tell them why you stopped them, inform them what the penalty for the offense is, and ask whether they have anything to say in their defense. If you have any other questions you'd like to ask them, first tell them that you would like to ask some questions, but inform them that they have the right to refuse to answer any question they do not wish to answer, and may do so without penalty.
Do you have a problem with any of these policies? If so, which and why?
Marcy,
I'm not sure what kind of concrete and realistic suggestions you're looking for, but there are plenty out there, including some I've made myself, all the way up to and including abolishing government police entirely as Anthony Gregory advocates and in that respect going back to the "no standing army" conditions of the early United States. I don't see any reason to think cities would burn to the ground if it weren't for these standing armies.
Oscar Grant wasn't killed by private police, he was killed by a government BART cop.
Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))
Les,
If you think this list of rules is long, consider the list of laws and rules that civilians are expected to know and obey! This is nothing. I've seen employee manuals for retail jobs that are much longer! The Libertarian National Committee's Policy Manual is about 70 pages long. Seriously, this is a very *short* list, comparatively speaking. It was not meant to be exhaustive, and I figure that a well-informed panel of libertarian-minded civil liberties advocates and experts would come up with a list of rules governing police conduct with civilians at least several times as long. In fact I'll bet that current procedures telling police officers what to do in such situations are at least several times as long, although I'm pretty sure they also lack at least some of the important protections and safeguards included here.
Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))
Hi Marcy,
Thank you, glad you find value in them. Yes, my suggestions do refer to the current police structure. They do not go as far as I'd like to go. But I'm willing to see incremental change as long as it's in a positive direction and doesn't tend to interfere with or preclude more positive change down the road.
And it was my understanding as well that we were talking about municipal police, but BART police are not "private" -- they are still part of the government, and from the evidence, they often seem to act like it.
I only have a rough idea of what current rules and training are for municipal police officers. I think there ought to be a lot more transparency than there is about both. My suggestions below were meant to encompass emergency, high-pressure situations as well as more routine situations, with the exceptions noted where I've added caveats along the lines of "except in emergency situations". Like I said, the reforms I would ideally like to see are definitely more radical. For instance, not allowing police to carry guns at all except in special circumstances.
Abolishing government police overnight and expecting voluntary alternatives to emerge that quickly, as Anthony Gregory appears to suggest, does not seem to me the best possible approach, however I would take it over the status quo (i.e. on the button-pushing litmus test, I would push the button to get rid of all government police forces now if I had that option). Ideal I think would be to phase them out more gradually in order to give voluntary alternatives time to emerge and work out any issues.
Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))
Hi Starchild,
I am with you in the pursuit of the ideals you describe, always have been. That is why I spent so much time and effort when LPSF was trying to help the Patrols, and when Ron Getty was trying to devise a ballot measure to promote the kind of neighborhood policing Anthony Gregory mentions in his article. Unfortunately, sometimes good alternatives are difficult to develop.
Let's find ways to encourage the general public to hold police accountable for following such rules as those in your list.
Marcy
I would agree that there are far far too many laws. 90% of all law should be summarily repealed. But ......we have all these laws because voters have voted for lawmakers who passed these laws. My original post tried to say that, if we don't like the laws in force, then we should work to elect people who will repeal or amend them. I do not think it right to vilify or demonize the people who enforce the laws.
Asking civil liberties experts to write rules for the police would be like asking defence lawyers for murderers and rapists to write rules about what the police can and cannot do. Civil liberties experts would care only about the right to protest; they would be utterly oblivious to the rights of other citizens being trashed by the protesters.
Les
Les,
If you think this list of rules is long, consider the list of laws and rules that civilians are expected to know and obey! This is nothing. I've seen employee manuals for retail jobs that are much longer! The Libertarian National Committee's Policy Manual is about 70 pages long. Seriously, this is a very *short* list, comparatively speaking. It was not meant to be exhaustive, and I figure that a well-informed panel of libertarian-minded civil liberties advocates and experts would come up with a list of rules governing police conduct with civilians at least several times as long. In fact I'll bet that current procedures telling police officers what to do in such situations are at least several times as long, although I'm pretty sure they also lack at least some of the important protections and safeguards included here.
Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))
Les,
So you would find fault with the person who puts a contract out on your life, and maybe the people who put him up to it, but hold the hitman who actually shoots you blameless? He's only doing his job, after all.
On civil liberties advocates (even defense lawyers) writing the rules of engagement, it seems to me that someone who is more worried about the crimes of the State than about the crimes committed by individuals should think this a prudent precaution. Which category of crimes are you more concerned about?
Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))