Calm Posted June 24, 2020 Posted June 24, 2020 2 hours ago, bluebell said: I like this idea. But considering the high level of violence that happens with mental health calls, this could be very dangerous for crisis workers, which makes me apprehensive. According to the article that may be more perception than reality and I am thinking may be in part because of reactions when someone shows up in a uniform. I will see if I can find stats on this, but I know schizophrenics are more danger to themselves and rarely to others. 2
Calm Posted June 24, 2020 Posted June 24, 2020 (edited) Quote The importance of de-escalation and persuasion was emphasized in various ways by officers in the sample, not only as a normative priority (the right thing to go), but as the best means of securing compliance. In describing their communication style during mental health encounters or other situations involving trauma, another officer replied, Me, personally, what I found to be most of the time very effective is I like – as much as possible, I like to reduce images and impressions of force… like I want to come to the person in as much a gentle way as possible, and I’m not ready to hurt you. Like I’m not here to jump on you and grab you, and handcuff you, and to Taser you…. If I can get the person, and so that kind of leads into the second thing, which is if I can get the person to talk, that’s ideal as well because I can hear what’s in their mind, what are their motivations. So gentle, no force, listening… https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6295210/ Quote A different officer expressed a similar concern related to the “revolving door” problem: … I feel like sending them to the hospitals, per se, are just revolving doors, it seems like. Because you see them, because you see them there, and they come back. And then it’s the same issues over again… I think if there was more things like a specific clinic within at least one district, or close, maybe two districts in the city. Or police districts can share one, or something. I would think they’d truly get the help that they need… (nonCITqual13) When asked to share ideas about alternative mental health resources, alternatives to hospital emergency rooms (ERs) were considered. One officer suggested it would be helpful to bring people to a location that is separate from standard ER settings. The officer suggests that in ER settings, “they [call subjects] always feel betrayed, like you brought ‘em to the hospital and they just gonna stick ‘em with needles, strap ‘em to the bed, and fill ‘em with medication, which usually happens, but can we do it in a different way, you know?” (CITofficer9). When asked to further describe such a place, the officer said, Just a nicer area, somebody who have – and I know that this does not exist – have the patience to actually listen to them, listen to their rant or whatever, their complaint, because some – in mental illness, I find out that what they’re saying may not be true for that situation, but in some instances, there is some truth in there. You have to look at the whole – there is some truth somewhere in there, but to be able to distinguish that and put them in present time may be difficult, but if you’re a trained person, I think you can do that because I can almost do that, and I’m not even trained. Quote Traumatic mental health episodes pose serious safety risks for police. Departments that have implemented CIT training report reductions in officer injuries. https://www.governing.com/topics/public-justice-safety/gov-mental-health-crisis-training-police.html Crisis workers would be better trained to assess situations and know when they need additional help. Options are also having one police officer, perhaps in plain clothes and one crisis worker. Edited June 24, 2020 by Calm 1
Calm Posted June 24, 2020 Posted June 24, 2020 (edited) Quote c. Of all calls for service involving people believed to have mental illnesses, law enforcement officers encounter individuals at risk of harming someone else relatively infrequently. The Albuquerque (N.Mex.) Police Department’s CIT program reported that in one year 14 percent of Police officers in Honolulu (Hawaii) city and county noted that a person’s behavior was “assaultive or calls for service involved a suspect possessing a weapon. violent” in 12.2 percent of their 148 encounters with people believed to have mental illnesses. understanding Mental Illness and violence* THE STEREOTyPE THAT PEOPLE WITH MENTAL ILLNESSES are more likely than the general population to be violent is not fully supported by the evidence.12 Several large-scale research projects found a weak statistical association between mental illness and violence.13 The association becomes stronger, however, when a person with a mental illness has a co-occurring substance use disorder and/or is not taking his or her medication.14 Still, it is important to note that research focusing solely on people with mental illnesses who were involuntarily committed to a psychiatric facility may distort the rela- tionship between violence and mental illness as these individuals represent only a small fraction—the most severely ill—of this group.15 Although data are scarce on the precise number of law enforcement field contacts with some- one with a mental illness who is exhibiting violent or aggressive behavior, research shows that officers do respond to calls for service that involve people with mental illnesses whose violent behavior is at issue.16 For law enforcement policymakers, the critical question is not whether people with mental ill- nesses are dangerous, but how best to maintain safety when violent or dangerous behavior results in calls to law enforcement. https://www.nccpsafety.org/assets/files/library/LE_Responses_to_Mental_Illnesses_-_Policy_and_Practice.pdf Quote What are the outcomes of law enforcement officers’ responses to people with mental illnesses? a. Though violent outcomes are relatively rare, law enforcement has reported that these encounters can present risks for all involved. According to FBI Uniform Crime Reporting statistics, during a ten-year period (1997–2006) 1,058 officers were assaulted and 13 officers feloniously killed in the line of duty when “handling persons with mental illnesses.” This represents approximately 1.8 percent of all assaults and 2.3 percent of felonious killings during this time period. 29 In the Police Executive Research Forum (PERF) 2004 study of 28 police departments with specialized responses to people with mental illnesses, nearly half of the departments reported that a tragic incident involving a person with a mental illness served as a main impetus for developing the program.30 Officers surveyed in a study on police use of force considered “mentally impaired” people significantly more “threatening” during arrests and “required more effort to arrest,” but did not consider this population more likely than individuals without “mental impairments” to inflict injury on officers. b. Officers handle a majority of incidents informally by talking to the people According to this given the percentage of mental health calls and the percentage of those calls that end in violence, mental health calls have a lower likelihood of violence than calls in general. sorry about the formatting, it messes up a few of the sentences. On my phone so if I remember will correct it later. Edited June 24, 2020 by Calm 2
Calm Posted June 24, 2020 Posted June 24, 2020 (edited) Quote But some advocates say any interaction with law enforcement can intensify the situation to a dangerous degree. “If you’re paranoid and you think folks are out to get you and the police show up, it’s just going to make things worse,” Boykin said. Peer crisis counselor Niki Jones said onlookers and officers too often see people experiencing mental health crisis as dangerous, “When in reality they’re the victims of pretty constant misinterpretation and injustice,” she said. “We don’t need weapons. We know that the strongest de-escalating tools are kindness and our words, and those historically work most of the time.” https://www.capradio.org/articles/2020/06/16/should-police-be-responding-to-mental-health-calls-this-group-says-no-and-offers-an-alternative/ Quote Erin Kerrison, a Berkeley professor who studies race, health and criminal justice, says the way police react to someone who has a mental illness, or even seems like they might have a mental illness, depends heavily on the color of that person’s skin and the neighborhood where the incident occurs. “Even that framework of people who are suffering from mental illness pose a threat that’s fundamentally flawed,” she said. “And that also has a racial component to it with respect to whose pain or suffering is recognized and acknowledged.” Quote This model has been shown to work in other places. The city of Oakland is currently launching a $40,000 pilot to test non-policing strategies on mental health calls. Their program is modeled after a project in Eugene Oregon, which was started by social activists three decades ago but is now city-supported and funded at around $80,000 annually. Its organizers argue that sending community mental health workers out to these scenes is cheaper than paying firefighters or police officers. Edited June 24, 2020 by Calm 1
bluebell Posted June 24, 2020 Posted June 24, 2020 2 hours ago, Calm said: https://www.capradio.org/articles/2020/06/16/should-police-be-responding-to-mental-health-calls-this-group-says-no-and-offers-an-alternative/ Good to know, thanks!
Amulek Posted June 24, 2020 Posted June 24, 2020 14 hours ago, Calm said: Could you explain what you mean by this please (couple of ways to interpret this and I do t want to assume the wrong one)? I'm just saying that the general threat that minorities feel about their lives potentially being endangered by the police isn't the same as the immediate threat that law enforcement officers are currently being exposed to during the protests. 1
Amulek Posted June 24, 2020 Posted June 24, 2020 15 hours ago, bluebell said: So everyone against capitol punishment should refuse to pass any laws? No. The problem with overcriminilization is that we have so many laws on the books that it's impossible for anyone to even be aware of them all - let alone follow them. And since all of these laws potentially end up being enforced by the police, there is a chance that even a minor offence might end up generating an incident involving violence. That's how we end up with situations like the killing of Eric Garner. 1
bluebell Posted June 24, 2020 Posted June 24, 2020 (edited) 2 hours ago, Amulek said: No. The problem with overcriminilization is that we have so many laws on the books that it's impossible for anyone to even be aware of them all - let alone follow them. And since all of these laws potentially end up being enforced by the police, there is a chance that even a minor offence might end up generating an incident involving violence. That's how we end up with situations like the killing of Eric Garner. I agree we have too many laws. And enforcement is often too rigid. I did things in high school that would have gotten me a talking to by the police and a visit with my parents, that would result in charges of criminal mischief for kids and a trip before a judge today. It makes the choices of youth much higher stakes than we dealt with. There is so little room for kids to navigate growing up now. Edited June 24, 2020 by bluebell 2
Meadowchik Posted June 24, 2020 Posted June 24, 2020 22 minutes ago, bluebell said: I agree we have too many laws. And enforcement is often too rigid. I did things in high school that would have gotten me a talking to by the police and a visit with my parents that would result in charges of criminal mischief for kids today and a trip before a judge today. It makes the choices of youth much higher stakes than we dealt with. There is so little room for kids to navigate growing up now. Also, the tendency to address issues with force makes it dangerous. My son is 19 with autism and will run down the sidewalk when he's late to martial arts. When he's not in a hurry, he'll walk while drumming his pencil-size sticks in the air. Living as white people in the UK, I don't worry that he'll be hurt by a misunderstanding police officer. However, this would be completely different in the US, still worrisome if he were white, much moreso if he were Black. 1
The Nehor Posted June 24, 2020 Posted June 24, 2020 22 hours ago, Amulek said: Police officers are presently under intense strain, facing violent attacks that have included officers being shot, hit by cars, assaulted with rocks, etc. I'm grateful that when I go to work I don't have to worry about somebody setting my vehicle on fire. That isn't to say that every use of force by law enforcement has been justified. They clearly haven't been. And when LEO's engage in unjustified, unlawful behavior they should be held accountable for that. But when I see protesters breaching police precincts and whatnot, how do you think the police ought to respond? The protesters are under extreme stress due to people being literally murdered. Who do we have higher standards for? The people we trust to wield the power of the state or victims of brutality? Look up the videos of the worst cases of brutality. Many were unprovoked and there is enough context to see that. It was not a fight or flight response due to extreme stress. 1
The Nehor Posted June 24, 2020 Posted June 24, 2020 21 hours ago, Storm Rider said: It may be worthwhile if the draft was reinstituted and one either serves in the military or the police. It makes me think of conversations with vegans who have grown up in cities and have never been around livestock, growing vegetables - the basics of running a small farm. The city dweller screams at the country folk about how evil they are for everything from not being organic growers to eating meat. Yet, they don't have a clue about what it means to run a farm, working with the soil, or animals. I think individuals might change their mind about how to do things or what is acceptable if they worked full time with the public in the same capacity of the police. I do not say this thinking that individuals should accept unjustified violence from our police, but being required to work with large crowds in volatile situations is not easy and in today's world it seems they are all just one step about from being a mob. The current protests did NOT start out as peaceful; they started out as violent, ugly, protests and were very much in the same vein of protests that began with Rodney King and have attended almost every major protest since. This includes the raping and pillaging after hurricane Katrina in the Superdome. Crowds turn into out-of-control mobs too quickly. The current protests were largely peaceful with some violence occurring, usually on the periphery. They have gotten more aggressive because of police aggression or idiocy. They are not even trying to deescalate. We don't need nearly enough military or police to justify a draft and that is a silly suggestion. It implies no one knows how hard policing is. It is so hard not to intentionally kill people that pose no threat? Really? I've been in some fights. I have won and lost some fights and, even given the opportunity, I did not take the time to make sure the other person was dead nor did the other person when I lost. There is a systematic rot in the whole institution. It has been there a long time. The history of policing is a fraught mess and historically the people never really trusted the police until everyone tried to give them a fresh paint job and a PR blitz in the 70s and 80s to make them "friends of the community". This trusting of law enforcement is the anomaly, not the distrust. Historically there was little in the way of police forces in early America. There were constables and that was about it. Once the Industrial Revolution hit harder in the 1800s suddenly the political and business elite had stuff to protect in the cities. Suddenly police forces started appearing, primarily to offload the cost of protecting business assets to taxpayers and to break strikes and control the dangerous (poor, immigrants, free blacks). Police forces were the personal attack dogs of the political machines that ran a lot of America on the local levels. Police could be used to shut down illicit businesses (prostitution and the like) but tacitly ignore the same going on when supported by the powers that be. They were not complicit in corruption; they existed primarily because there was corruption. In the South it was even worse. Early larger scale law enforcement were the "slave patrols" designed to catch and punish runaways. When slaves were freed they started pushing mass incarceration in the South of free blacks because slavery was not illegal. It just required that the person be convicted of a crime. There were some shady prison plantations trying to carry on as if nothing happened. Then came the Prohibition era and it got uglier but I will stop there for now. 2
The Nehor Posted June 24, 2020 Posted June 24, 2020 4 hours ago, Amulek said: I'm just saying that the general threat that minorities feel about their lives potentially being endangered by the police isn't the same as the immediate threat that law enforcement officers are currently being exposed to during the protests. Last I checked there has not been a single police fatality firmly connected to the protests. There have been police fatalities occurring but not at the protests themselves and some people have tried to tie unrelated deaths to the protests and have claimed (without evidence) that they are connected. Maybe there has been one in the last few days but I have not seen it. At least 24 civilians are dead. A few due to protesters, some due to "Proud Boys", and many due to police action. Whinging about their danger is ridiculous. Of course they are more than a little scared and many are quitting. The protesters do not see that as a problem. If your job is to rebuild law enforcement on a fundamental level having less of it to change is not exactly a big worry.
The Nehor Posted June 24, 2020 Posted June 24, 2020 3 hours ago, bluebell said: I agree we have too many laws. And enforcement is often too rigid. I did things in high school that would have gotten me a talking to by the police and a visit with my parents, that would result in charges of criminal mischief for kids and a trip before a judge today. It makes the choices of youth much higher stakes than we dealt with. There is so little room for kids to navigate growing up now. We don't even know how many laws we have. Sure, if you read the (last time I read up on it) 51 large volumes of the federal code you will get all the stuff Congress has done. Then you have to add in the regulatory guidelines punishable by law from federal agencies. Note that this should probably be a "no no" with only Congress having the power to make actions illegal. The irony is that federal law is relatively brief compared to most state codes. Then add in state law and local law and most people probably fall under multiple local jurisdictions. I am currently in technical violation of at least two local, one state, and one federal law. Most are not enforced and I am probably in violation of more I don't know about. Ignorance of the law is not an excuse though so I could be prosecuted on the ones I do not know. Clearly any responsible citizen would sit down and read the federal, state, and local codes where they live. It should only take a few years. It is a crazy culture. We have made it so police in most jurisdictions can pull over almost anyone with some feeble justification. I have said that if I run for office I am going to take on the boring job of reading the law codes for my jurisdiction and trying to repeal 95% of them. 2
ksfisher Posted June 24, 2020 Posted June 24, 2020 16 minutes ago, The Nehor said: Historically there was little in the way of police forces in early America. There were constables and that was about it. Once the Industrial Revolution hit harder in the 1800s suddenly the political and business elite had stuff to protect in the cities. Suddenly police forces started appearing, primarily to offload the cost of protecting business assets to taxpayers and to break strikes and control the dangerous (poor, immigrants, free blacks). What this also meant was that police forces had little or no investigative ability. If a crime was committed and not perpetrator was apparent the police had little or no ability to investigate. Police forces also had little or no ability to coordinate with law enforcement officers in other states. So if you made it over the state line you were pretty much out of reach. If you child was missing or your wife or daughter raped law enforcement could did little unless there was a witness and the were abouts of the criminal known. One thing this led to was the rise of the private detective. Crime victims (or their relatives) would hire a private detective to track down a criminals and exact some form of justice. Yes, early police forces were more of a town watch and protection for businesses. The expansion and modernization of policing allowed that protection to be expanded to more and more layers of society. 1
The Nehor Posted June 24, 2020 Posted June 24, 2020 11 minutes ago, ksfisher said: What this also meant was that police forces had little or no investigative ability. If a crime was committed and not perpetrator was apparent the police had little or no ability to investigate. Police forces also had little or no ability to coordinate with law enforcement officers in other states. So if you made it over the state line you were pretty much out of reach. If you child was missing or your wife or daughter raped law enforcement could did little unless there was a witness and the were abouts of the criminal known. One thing this led to was the rise of the private detective. Crime victims (or their relatives) would hire a private detective to track down a criminals and exact some form of justice. Yes, early police forces were more of a town watch and protection for businesses. The expansion and modernization of policing allowed that protection to be expanded to more and more layers of society. No, there were forms of community justice that got around that. The question is if the current remedy is worth it or even if there is a better one.
ksfisher Posted June 24, 2020 Posted June 24, 2020 34 minutes ago, The Nehor said: No, there were forms of community justice that got around that. You're referring to lynchings? 35 minutes ago, The Nehor said: The question is if the current remedy is worth it or even if there is a better one. No policing will ever work if the members of the community refuse to obey the law. Bad policing is a product of the society that produces it. Apples don't fall far from trees. Violence begets violence.
Amulek Posted June 24, 2020 Posted June 24, 2020 (edited) 2 hours ago, The Nehor said: The protesters are under extreme stress due to people being literally murdered. At the protests? I'm sorry, but the police are under stress because cops are actually being attacked at the protests. If you think that's equivalent to the stress somebody feels about a man's death which took place over a month ago, you go right ahead and believe that. Quote Who do we have higher standards for? The people we trust to wield the power of the state or victims of brutality? I'm skeptical that all of these protesters you presume to be "under extreme stress" are, in fact, victims of brutality. Quote Look up the videos of the worst cases of brutality. Many were unprovoked and there is enough context to see that. It was not a fight or flight response due to extreme stress. As I said before, including being repeated in the post which you just quoted from, "when LEO's engage in unjustified, unlawful behavior they should be held accountable for that." I'm not trying to excuse bad behavior by law enforcement, but I am unwilling to tolerate bad behavior from lawless rioters either. Edited June 24, 2020 by Amulek 1
Amulek Posted June 24, 2020 Posted June 24, 2020 1 hour ago, The Nehor said: Last I checked there has not been a single police fatality firmly connected to the protests. There have been police fatalities occurring but not at the protests themselves and some people have tried to tie unrelated deaths to the protests and have claimed (without evidence) that they are connected. Maybe there has been one in the last few days but I have not seen it. It's technically true that, at least so far, it has only been former police officers like David Dorn who have been killed. The officer who was shot in the back of the head in Las Vegas is merely paralyzed from the neck down, on a ventilator and unable to speak, so I guess that doesn't count. And the officer in NYC who was stabbed in the neck survived because the attacker missed the artery, so I guess that's another one we can ignore. Along with the four officers shot in St. Luis, who - again, didn't actually die, so I suppose we can also pretend there's nothing to see here either. Quote At least 24 civilians are dead. I am aware. In fact, I posted a link previously which has a breakdown on large portion of them with details about the circumstances surrounding their deaths. Quote A few due to protesters, some due to "Proud Boys", and many due to police action. Whinging about their danger is ridiculous. Sorry, but just saying that the cops have killed "civilians" doesn't cut it. Please provide references for any unjustified deadly uses of force by law enforcement which have taken place during the protests. Quote Of course they are more than a little scared and many are quitting. The protesters do not see that as a problem. Of course they don't. Ironic as that may be. 2
bluebell Posted June 24, 2020 Posted June 24, 2020 (edited) This article is interesting. 72,000 Utahns have changed to Republican since May. https://kutv.com/news/local/72k-utahns-affiliated-with-republican-party-since-may-ahead-of-primary-election?utm_source=second-street&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=KUTV+Daily+-+06%2f24%2f20 They are thinking it’s mostly due to the election for governor. Edited June 24, 2020 by bluebell 2
Calm Posted June 24, 2020 Posted June 24, 2020 (edited) 5 hours ago, The Nehor said: The history of policing is a fraught mess and historically the people never really trusted the police until everyone tried to give them a fresh paint job and a PR blitz in the 70s and 80s to make them "friends of the community". CFR please. As a child in the 60's in Illinois and California I remember being taught police were our friends, there was the Andy Griffith show with the ideal police in the 50s. I would very much like to see that the shift was from mistrust to trust rather than the reverse (I also remember books and movies like Serpico making police corruption a hot topic and that becoming a popular theme in film and TV, such as the Dirty Harry movie that dealt with a police vigilante group and numerous cop shows having episodes on vice cops joining the dark side). Edited June 24, 2020 by Calm 1
Calm Posted June 24, 2020 Posted June 24, 2020 4 hours ago, The Nehor said: there were forms of community justice that got around that. Such as?
Calm Posted June 25, 2020 Posted June 25, 2020 (edited) 4 hours ago, ksfisher said: Violence begets violence. If the violence begins with police (and if one looks at the history in many communities I think it is a fair position to claim it did), then isn't it the responsibility of the police to be the ones who break the cycle? Edited June 25, 2020 by Calm
Calm Posted June 25, 2020 Posted June 25, 2020 (edited) 4 hours ago, Amulek said: At the protests? I'm sorry, but the police are under stress because cops are actually being attacked at the protests. And protestors aren't? Have you watched the videos of drivebys by police firing at people standing on the corner and parked cars? I have read some unofficial communications among police and military. They are spreading the idea they are in danger of their lives. I am not saying the comments aren't accurate, rather that I suspect it is much more what the police are hearing and being prepared for prior to getting out on the street that is affecting the over reaction of firing on and arresting journalists and help station supporters and ignoring those in need as well as protestors just as protestors were expecting violence from police due to the very issues of why they were out there protesting (past deaths and injuries due to police brutality). Both groups have valid reasons to be in fear for their health and lives, imo. The media and word of mouth is providing plenty of evidence. Discounting one group's fear and elevating the other's seems to be ignoring the reality of what we are seeing and hearing. Edited June 25, 2020 by Calm
ksfisher Posted June 25, 2020 Posted June 25, 2020 31 minutes ago, Calm said: If the violence begins with police (and if one looks at the history in many communities I think it is a fair position to claim it did), then isn't it the responsibility of the police to be the ones who break the cycle? Violence begins long before the first blow is struck. It begins with the society we live in. 1
Amulek Posted June 25, 2020 Posted June 25, 2020 1 hour ago, Calm said: And protestors aren't [being attacked at the protests]? Not with deadly force, no. And not always without justification either. Quote Have you watched the videos of drivebys by police firing at people standing on the corner and parked cars? There's lots of videos - I can't say that I've seen the specific one you are referring to, but I highly doubt the officers are firing their service weapons at random people for no reason. Rubber bullets maybe (which is still likely an unjustified use of force), but they aren't just roaming around and wantonly killing people for no reason. Quote I have read some unofficial communications among police and military. They are spreading the idea they are in danger of their lives. When people are walking up and shooting cops in the back of the head, stabbing them in the neck with knives, etc., I honestly don't know how you would characterize that other than being "in danger of their lives." Quote Both groups have valid reasons to be in fear for their health and lives, imo. Health? Maybe. Lives? Not so much. I have yet to see a single, clear example demonstrating unjustified use of deadly force on the part of law enforcement. If you know of one, please share. Quote Discounting one group's fear and elevating the other's seems to be ignoring the reality of what we are seeing and hearing. The reality is that non-lethal weapons like tear gas, rubber bullets, and bean bags which are being employed to break up crowds aren't in the same league as actual bullets and knives which are being used in attempts to take people's lives. That's not me elevating one groups fear over another - that's my honest opinion about the level of risk each group is facing.
Recommended Posts