The Shooting Gallery: Police Violence MEGATHREAD

[MadImmortalMan]

"us vs. them".

I think that mentality goes way beyond unions, and in fact the latter stuff you mentioned is probably just a side effect of the overall way of looking at the public. Old time cops used to think of themselves as protectors of the public, and would go into their work knowing that they might be called upon to put themselves in danger in order to protect non-cops. Even guilty ones. It was that sense of sacrifice that made them heroes to the public. Now, the mentality is the cop will survive at all costs, "better judged by twelve than carried by six" and all that.

With that change in mentality, the public is accordingly losing the respect they held for the police.

[OttoVonBismarck]

To some degree I think  focusing too much just on unjustified shootings is a problem, because while they are the most tragic incident, they are more or less extremely rare. There are millions of police-citizen interactions ever year, and only a small portion of a percent are unjustified shootings.

I think the shootings are more the tip of the ice berg. Cops routinely be at blacks, and arrest them for no reason. Using the process of being arrested as a punishment. For people who cannot make bail it can result in days or weeks in lock up before it gets sorted out--that's assuming it's something where the prosecutor just drops the charges and kicks the guy--tacitly admitting, many times, that the guy was just locked up for "pissing off a cop", something not illegal but that police can usually turn into a big hassle for you. Sometimes the crime is one where if the officer is making the claim, then that's enough to get the guy to plead guilty anyway--even if he did nothing wrong.

[Malthus]

I certainly think that the prevalence of handguns specifically is a major factor. Cops are understandably a lot more trigger happy if they are more worried that the guy reaching for his pocket is reaching for a gun.

That doesn't explain why Blacks are twice as likely to be shot, though.

Upthread, I said I thought there were three factors (in no order) that explained the stats:

1. More handguns

2. Historic racism/racial antagonism

3. Black historic poverty

I think there's probably (obviously) different reasons about why more people are shot by police in America vs why more blacks (versus their share of population) are shot.

I think more guns in America than essentially anywhere else is probably the #1 reason we have so many police shootings in general. Fuck, regular British patrol cops don't even carry.

I think the reason more blacks are shot is pretty simple down to two reasons:

1) Police have a racist predisposition to viewing blacks as more dangerous and treat them as so, even when it isn't justified. [A fix for this would be to get police to respond more to the situation, not the skin color of the person.]

2) Police have vastly more interactions per capita with blacks than whites. The more interactions, the more "chances" of a bad outcome like an unjustified police shooting (or maybe even a legally justified, but possibly preventable, police shooting.) More roll of the dice, so to speak.

I think I'm saying more or less the same thing, only in less detail.

1. More people overall are shot because of handguns and the fear or handguns.

2. Historic racism explains both police animosity towards Blacks, and Black animosity toward police - those sentiments feed on each other (Blacks get treated worse on average, and so are more likely to respond badly to police interference).

3. Historic Black poverty leads to more police interactions. People who are not only more likely to be poor, but more likely to be 'historically' poor - in short, an underclass - are more likely to be involved in criminality, on average.

[Berkut]

Fair.

No, it actually isn't.

Cops have no problem saying another cop screwed up - once all the evidence is in.  But the radio guy doesn't want to wait for due process or investigation - they want "hot takes" in the immediate aftermath of a tragedy.

Some of these police shootings that garnered police attention have generally shown police actions to be justified (see Michael Brown shooting in Ferguson).  Some of these police shootings appear to show police actions to be unjustifiable (see Philando Castille a few days ago).  But it's wrong to immediately criticize each and every police shooting without waiting for all the facts to be known.

The problem with this theory is that the facts do not prove them out.

There are hundreds of police shootings a year, and from the analysis of how many are prosecuted, it would appear that somewhere between none and zero percent are decided to be illegal.

[Berkut]

Bullshit, this has nothing to do with unions. There are plenty of cops who are not in unions who have this same problem.

This is about a police culture, not a union culture.

Actually it's definitely a union problem, you just don't want to attack a leftist sacred cow and enrage your Daily Kos buddies. All cops are either in formal unions, or have some level of FOP relationship (which in non-unionized departments still exists as a "Fraternal Organization.") You actually see all the problems of police forces in all other unionized work places, it's just no one writes articles about the factory worker who is a lazy fuck up but can't be touched because he's a 25 year seniority union guy.

People do sometimes write articles about bad school teachers who get protected by unions, but much less often. But you see this in all unionized work forces, the union protects bad members. It's almost their key function.

LOL, yes I am well known as the Languish Champion of Public Sector Unions.

[OttoVonBismarck]

I think blacks just get hassled a lot more than whites, even ones who are doing nothing to justify it.

Years ago I committed a classic bureaucratic fuck up. My driver's license had expired, and I missed the 30 day window to renew it. At the same time, my vehicle registration had expired (in the U.S. you typically have to "register" your car with the State and get it renewed every 1-3 years, and pay a set of revenue-generating fees and sometimes personal property taxes depending on state), and while I was insured I had forgotten to put my new car insurance card in my glove box.

I get pulled over for the dead tags. Cop comes up and talks to me, and I basically have none of my paperwork in order. No valid insurance card, expired driver's license, expired registration. I tell him that I do have insurance, I just don't have the new card. He basically just tells me to be sure to get my registration and driver's license renewed (verbal warning), and took me at my word on the car insurance.

As a strict matter of law, if he couldn't verify I had insurance he was supposed to take possession of the car and impound it. I've heard horror stories of people in the same situation where the cop agrees to wait while they run and print off an insurance card at the library or something, but sometimes they get their cars impounded. Now a days they have digital cards you can bring up on your phone that most states accept as valid, but this was back before that was a thing.

I have a strong suspicion if I wasn't driving a nice car, wasn't a professionally dressed middle aged white dude, but was a black guy in shabby clothing driving a beater, that scenario would've turned out 100% different. It wouldn't have been "serious", but I'd be looking at lots of fines and fees that I wouldn't have had the money for it if I was poor. Tickets for all the expired shit, fees to get my car out of impound, fees to the towing company for towing it etc.

[Barrister]

Fair.

No, it actually isn't.

Cops have no problem saying another cop screwed up - once all the evidence is in.  But the radio guy doesn't want to wait for due process or investigation - they want "hot takes" in the immediate aftermath of a tragedy.

Some of these police shootings that garnered police attention have generally shown police actions to be justified (see Michael Brown shooting in Ferguson).  Some of these police shootings appear to show police actions to be unjustifiable (see Philando Castille a few days ago).  But it's wrong to immediately criticize each and every police shooting without waiting for all the facts to be known.

The problem with this theory is that the facts do not prove them out.

There are hundreds of police shootings a year, and from the analysis of how many are prosecuted, it would appear that somewhere between none and zero percent are decided to be illegal.

Then that's a legal system issue, not a "police won't denounce police violence" issue.

[Valmy]

These days you can also pull up your insurance card on your cell phone. I had to do that when I went to go pay a ticket and I left my insurance card in my car.

[Berkut]

Fair.

No, it actually isn't.

Cops have no problem saying another cop screwed up - once all the evidence is in.  But the radio guy doesn't want to wait for due process or investigation - they want "hot takes" in the immediate aftermath of a tragedy.

Some of these police shootings that garnered police attention have generally shown police actions to be justified (see Michael Brown shooting in Ferguson).  Some of these police shootings appear to show police actions to be unjustifiable (see Philando Castille a few days ago).  But it's wrong to immediately criticize each and every police shooting without waiting for all the facts to be known.

The problem with this theory is that the facts do not prove them out.

There are hundreds of police shootings a year, and from the analysis of how many are prosecuted, it would appear that somewhere between none and zero percent are decided to be illegal.

Then that's a legal system issue, not a "police won't denounce police violence" issue.

Hard to prosecute without evidence, and when it is a few cops words against the dead guys, it is not surprising that there are literally ZERO (or close enough to make no difference) successful prosecutions.

[Valmy]

Then that's a legal system issue, not a "police won't denounce police violence" issue.

Either one would go a long way to preserving public order and diffusing the crisis. Even if you think the police shouldn't have to do so you have to ask yourself the question: is it better for the police to have to compromise a bit  or to be hated throughout the country? What is more dangerous for the carrying out of their duties?

[DGuller]

Then that's a legal system issue, not a "police won't denounce police violence" issue.

One doesn't preclude the other.  The DA will intentionally sabotage the case in order to get probably their only non-indictment of the career from the grand jury precisely because they know that even "moderate" cops will not be understanding.  And even if DAs are completely honest and not cowardly, they have to deal with these "moderate" cops perjuring themselves to protect their colleagues.

[Habbaku]

I like to link this story every so often to really get my blood up:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-chicago-police-detective-manslaughter-trial-0421-met-20150420-story.html

In a stunning, abrupt end to the first trial in years of a Chicago police officer for a fatal off-duty shooting, a Cook County judge acquitted the veteran cop Monday on a legal fine point, drawing outrage from the black victim's family and leaders in the African-American community.

Judge Dennis Porter ruled that prosecutors failed to prove that Dante Servin acted recklessly, saying that Illinois courts have consistently held that anytime an individual points a gun at an intended victim and shoots, it is an intentional act, not a reckless one. He all but said prosecutors should have charged Servin with murder, not involuntary manslaughter.

Servin cannot be retried on a murder charge because of double-jeopardy protections, according to his attorney, Darren O'Brien.

[DGuller]

Does double jeopardy apply if DA was deliberately incompetent?  There wasn't really any jeopardy there the first time, was there?

[OttoVonBismarck]

I think just like a citizen-elected school board oversees school districts we should have similar boards overseeing police departments, that have final say over disciplinary issues and etc. We also should end elections for prosecutors and judges--it's a true blight on our system of law.

[LaCroix]

Then that's a legal system issue, not a "police won't denounce police violence" issue.

One doesn't preclude the other.  The DA will intentionally sabotage the case in order to get probably their only non-indictment of the career from the grand jury precisely because they know that even "moderate" cops will not be understanding.  And even if DAs are completely honest and not cowardly, they have to deal with these "moderate" cops perjuring themselves to protect their colleagues.

but yeah, prosecutors would prosecute more cops if the laws were changed. a prosecutor isn't going to press charges if there's insufficient evidence.

@dps: I considered training, but more in the military context. I just don't know enough about available training procedures that could make a difference without turning cops into soldiers.

@malthus: OVB handled the response. I don't think there's much more for me to add. if we want proportional black deaths, the problems facing the black communities need to be fixed. that's a whole other discussion that doesn't really involve police departments, IMO.

@habbaku: prosecution screwed up. that's all there is to that story.