Twin Cities Carry Forum Archive http://ellegon.com/forum/ |
|
How do we fix law enforcement http://ellegon.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=13114 |
Page 1 of 5 |
Author: | MostlyHarmless [ Wed Jun 03, 2009 6:13 pm ] |
Post subject: | How do we fix law enforcement |
The presence and popularity of this sarcastically-named forum testifies loudly to the anger and frustration that some hold toward law enforcement. So, imagine you were Michael Campion, or imagine you were the chair of whatever house or senate committee deals with this stuff. How would you improve law enforcement in Minnesota? |
Author: | Traveler [ Wed Jun 03, 2009 6:49 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
Wow, now that is an excellent question. It must be rhetorical, however, because there is no answer to it. The POST requirements did not improve things, IMHO. With the exception of the horrible accident response time and techniques back then, I believe the good old days of asking a veteran "Hey, you want a part-time night job?" was a good hiring technique for most police departments. Forty years ago a blind eye was turned toward officers that used department time to further their Las Vegas travel agency businesses. It was also expected that some officers would sell football number tabs out of their hats during working hours as they visited bars and restaurants all throughout the East Side of St. Paul. Today the scrutiny has become much more intense, and subsequently the antics of police officers have become much more sophisticated. I would much rather have a return of the "boys will be boys" attitude of yesteryear than the near Mafia "brotherhood" of today. |
Author: | chunkstyle [ Wed Jun 03, 2009 7:22 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
1) Ban police unions. 2) Return control of the police to the people who pay their salaries, i.e., us. Maybe democratically elected police commissions, in the larger jurisdictions (Mpls/St.Paul). 3) Older minimum starting ages, and possibly real-world private (non-security) employment experience as a hiring requirement. 4) More non-"special" people involved in cadet training. 5) No more IADs. Department investigations done by outside agencies. 6) De-militarization. People who have the veneer of an occupying army will eventually start to act like one. Simple things, like elimination of military rank names, "softer" uniforms, more facial hair allowed in dress code. Alternatively, we could use a volunteer firefighter model. Most cops become part time civilians, with only training, investigations, and command cadres as career professionals. |
Author: | Dee [ Wed Jun 03, 2009 8:29 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
Just a couple of things that I do not agree with: Quote: 1) Ban police unions. Most companies/organizations that have unions usually deserve them. Whether they agree with their member's behavior, most unions will just try to enforce the conditions of their union agreements. Many of the conditions in those agreements stem from incidents that have previously occurred when management might have treated employees badly. Quote: 6) De-militarization. People who have the veneer of an occupying army will eventually start to act like one. Simple things, like elimination of military rank names, "softer" uniforms, more facial hair allowed in dress code. The reason that Police organizations have ranks (or some kind of organizational structure) is that it is supposed to build morale and foster a sense of professionalism. You want police officers to be proud of their organizations and therefore not want to let them down. You do not want a disorganized or demoralized police force. That will only increase the number of egregious incidents. As for accountability, aren't most police commissioners accountable to either a mayor or city councils (elected officials, in other words)? To stop these incidents, you have to set down your policies before hand, make sure that everyone is aware of them and (rigidly) enforce them (and weed out the offenders). A lot of this attitude comes down from the top, if the higher ups are willing to countenance this behavior, it will continue. I've got to say this; All of the Police Officers, Sheriff's Deputies and State Troopers that I have personally dealt with have been nothing but courteous and professional. Of course, I have always been courteous to them to start with, however, I am aware that there are bad eggs in every profession and you read about them all the time. Not picking on you Chunkstyle, just my opinion. |
Author: | Macx [ Wed Jun 03, 2009 9:43 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
the following will look like it is tongue and cheek. . . . if it offends, it was meant tongue in cheek, if not. . . . well 5 year plan. Good change never comes fast. Two of the following per year in any order: 1. Patrol officers are not allowed to carry firearms or the SWAT team should be disbanded. . . one or the other, not both. They can make their own choice but it should be either patrol with firearms or SWAT not both. 2. Canidates from out of state with nationally accredited Bachelors degrees (in Crim Just or Law Enf) and relevant experience will not be passed over in favor of POST certified locals with 1/2 the education and experience playing H.S. football. 3. Accountability of the community policing flavor, officers must live in the precinct they are assigned to, officers must make a quota of non-criminal/ non-traffic citizen contacts "I listened to Mrs. Jones about the thug with the loud stereo two doors down and her recollection of the minutes of the last knitting club meeting, it was the 15 minutes between my 4th and 5th calls of the night" should be common place in officer logs & regarded as legitimate and neccessary parts of patrol. Citizens should know their officers and perhaps community block parties or some such should be used to build those relationships. 4. Just something personal from my dealings with MPD, non-patrol officers called every business day for a month (or more) and failing to return a single call should have their pensions yanked and walking papers printed. This one goes out to you Officer Dale Barsness Even one returned call, even if it was only to say "F off and die" woulda been better customer service than the months of answering machine and nadda in the returned call dept. Dale, you are a disgrace to badges everywhere and a shameful excuse for a biped. Worse was the cowardice when I went to your section in person and you told the deskie to tell me you weren't there & I waited for your captain and midway into the conversation with him you "magically" appeared from inside the section and threatened to arrest me for asking a question. Glad you have a new captian now, she has already indicated that she realizes what a low life you are & hopefully she will do the right thing with your career . .. yes, Dale, I would like fries with that. 5. Warrants should have probable cause listed and the right doors and or property should be kicked in/ taken. There should be consequences not medals for getting it wrong. Criminal damage to property is the minimum charge an officer on a wrong door raid should get. Each officer should be willing to stake their career on each raid . .. if they aren't that sure, they shouldn't serve the warrant. If they do anyway and get it wrong, they should be treated with the same system as if Joe Public kicked in your door and started taking stuff regardless of whether it was on his Christmas list or not. 6. All non-patrol officers are required to work a number of shifts per month on patrol, from chief to desk sarge . . . . everybody sees at least a little of the streets each month, no exceptions, sicktime comes out of your non-patrol days. Three weeks vacation/ sicktime still leaves you a week on the street even if you are the chief! Four weeks vacation and two of sicktime gives you two weeks on the street. This is tied to the community policing aspect & non-patrol officers have the same residency requirement i.e. a desk sarge must work her week of patrol in the precinct she lives in. 7. As Chunk said Quote: Ban police unions. 8. As Chunk said Quote: De-militarization. People who have the veneer of an occupying army will eventually start to act like one. Simple things, like elimination of military rank names, "softer" uniforms, more facial hair allowed in dress code. 9. Traffic is radically altered such that speed enforcement takes a back seat to red light running, tailgating and other violations that statistically cause more accidents. Follow statistics, whatever is causing the most accidents at a given time should be given the highest priority for enforcement. 10. Officers and victim advocates are required to offer crime victims information on MN carry law. Officers are required to know the law such that they can answer any basic question. Yearly, officers must take a 25 question quiz on MN 624.714, any wrong answer requires the officer to take a permit to carry class on the officer's dime. At least 12 different quizzes should be in the pool, administered at random. |
Author: | MostlyHarmless [ Wed Jun 03, 2009 10:14 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
Macx wrote: 2. Canidates from out of state with nationally accredited Bachelors degrees (in Crim Just or Law Enf) and relevant experience will not be passed over in favor of POST certified locals with 1/2 the education and experience playing H.S. football. Given the current pay levels and working conditions, why would anyone with a four-year degree want to work in local law enforcement? And if they did, would the results be better than they have been at the various federal agencies where the entrance standards and pay are higher? BATF, ICE, and FBI aren't exactly paragons of collaborative community policing or willing upholders of the bill of rights. Quote: Warrants should have probable cause listed and the right doors and or property should be kicked in/ taken. There should be consequences not medals for getting it wrong. I would like to paraphrase this as saying, in essence, "cops shouldn't fuck up." No one can legislate away fuckups or eliminate them by executive order. It's an outcome, not a decision. Among the knobs that can be turned are the criteria for no-knock raids, so as an example a reduction in their use as a matter of policy is something that actually could be changed. Quote: 9. Traffic is radically altered such that speed enforcement takes a back seat to red light running, tailgating and other violations that statistically cause more accidents. Follow statistics, whatever is causing the most accidents at a given time should be given the highest priority for enforcement. I see both sides of this. The main premise of speed enforcement is that excessive speed tends to lead to other unsafe behaviors. Tailgating and road rage aren't usually a problem if both cars are trying to cruise at about the same speed. |
Author: | mrokern [ Wed Jun 03, 2009 11:01 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
I think Chunk's #3 is critical. There's no way that some 21-year old fresh out of tech college knows shit about shit. Sorry kiddies. Go out, bust your ass in the real world for a few years, learn what everyday people in the community go through by BEING ONE OF THEM, and then, if you still decide that you want to serve, come back when you're 30 and smarter. Most police work isn't about who can run the fastest or shoot the straightest. The best weapon a good cop has is between their ears, not hanging on their duty belt. -Mark |
Author: | Macx [ Wed Jun 03, 2009 11:05 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
Quote: Given the current pay levels and working conditions, why would anyone with a four-year degree want to work in local law enforcement? Quote: would like to paraphrase this as saying, in essence, "cops shouldn't fuck up." Quote: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. |
Author: | jdege [ Wed Jun 03, 2009 11:37 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
It's not the police that are broken, but our society in general. We have far too many folks who think that they have no responsibility for their own safety. If we taught our citizens to be more self-reliant, they'd be threatened less by the world, and would pressure the police less to provide the sort of absolute security that no amount of policing can provide. |
Author: | Macx [ Thu Jun 04, 2009 12:10 am ] |
Post subject: | |
jdege wrote: It's nto the police that are broken, but our society in general. We have far too many folks who think that they have no responsibility for their own safety. If we taught our citizens to be more self-reliant, they'd be threatened less by the world, and would pressure the police less to provide the sort of absolute security that no amount of policing can provide. Quote: 10. Officers and victim advocates are required to offer crime victims information on MN carry law. Officers are required to know the law such that they can answer any basic question. Yearly, officers must take a 25 question quiz on MN 624.714, any wrong answer requires the officer to take a permit to carry class on the officer's dime. At least 12 different quizzes should be in the pool, administered at random. Yes. Personal responsibility has been the biggest obstacle I have found in bringing our truth to the Anti 2A. |
Author: | chunkstyle [ Thu Jun 04, 2009 1:54 am ] |
Post subject: | |
Dee wrote: I've got to say this; All of the Police Officers, Sheriff's Deputies and State Troopers that I have personally dealt with have been nothing but courteous and professional. Of course, I have always been courteous to them to start with, however, I am aware that there are bad eggs in every profession and you read about them all the time. Not picking on you Chunkstyle, just my opinion. Oh yes, I'd say that 5 out of every 6 cops I have met were good guys. But the 1 of 6 is too many to tolerate. What's more, there is still too much of the "us vs. them" attitude, that "we are the chosen ones" thing going on, and it makes even the good ones turn a blind eye to the abuses of the bad. |
Author: | Fubar [ Thu Jun 04, 2009 3:10 am ] |
Post subject: | |
chunkstyle wrote: 1) Ban police unions. Quote: 2) Return control of the police to the people who pay their salaries, i.e., us. Maybe democratically elected police commissions, in the larger jurisdictions (Mpls/St.Paul). Quote: 3) Older minimum starting ages, and possibly real-world private (non-security) employment experience as a hiring requirement. Quote: 4) More non-"special" people involved in cadet training. Quote: 5) No more IADs. Department investigations done by outside agencies. Quote: 6) De-militarization. People who have the veneer of an occupying army will eventually start to act like one. Simple things, like elimination of military rank names, "softer" uniforms, more facial hair allowed in dress code. Quote: Alternatively, we could use a volunteer firefighter model. Most cops become part time civilians, with only training, investigations, and command cadres as career professionals. |
Author: | Fubar [ Thu Jun 04, 2009 3:47 am ] |
Post subject: | |
Macx wrote: 1. Patrol officers are not allowed to carry firearms or the SWAT team should be disbanded. . . one or the other, not both. They can make their own choice but it should be either patrol with firearms or SWAT not both. One possible arrangement is to have a statewide SWAT team and prohibit local agencies from having their own teams, but this provides problems with local control. If the Bloomington SWAT team went crazy, the residents of Bloomington would have a better chance of correcting the problem that if a state SWAT team behaved badly in their city. Quote: 2. Canidates from out of state with nationally accredited Bachelors degrees (in Crim Just or Law Enf) and relevant experience will not be passed over in favor of POST certified locals with 1/2 the education and experience playing H.S. football. Quote: 3. Accountability of the community policing flavor, officers must live in the precinct they are assigned to, officers must make a quota of non-criminal/ non-traffic citizen contacts "I listened to Mrs. Jones about the thug with the loud stereo two doors down and her recollection of the minutes of the last knitting club meeting, it was the 15 minutes between my 4th and 5th calls of the night" should be common place in officer logs & regarded as legitimate and neccessary parts of patrol. Citizens should know their officers and perhaps community block parties or some such should be used to build those relationships. You are definitely right, the relationship needs to be better and both sides need to commit to putting in the effort. [Your personal (and seemingly quite valid) rant against a specific Minneapolis officer deleted] Quote: 5. Warrants should have probable cause listed and the right doors and or property should be kicked in/ taken. There should be consequences not medals for getting it wrong. Criminal damage to property is the minimum charge an officer on a wrong door raid should get. Each officer should be willing to stake their career on each raid . .. if they aren't that sure, they shouldn't serve the warrant. If they do anyway and get it wrong, they should be treated with the same system as if Joe Public kicked in your door and started taking stuff regardless of whether it was on his Christmas list or not. Quote: 6. All non-patrol officers are required to work a number of shifts per month on patrol, from chief to desk sarge . . . . everybody sees at least a little of the streets each month, no exceptions, sicktime comes out of your non-patrol days. Three weeks vacation/ sicktime still leaves you a week on the street even if you are the chief! Four weeks vacation and two of sicktime gives you two weeks on the street. This is tied to the community policing aspect & non-patrol officers have the same residency requirement i.e. a desk sarge must work her week of patrol in the precinct she lives in. Quote: 9. Traffic is radically altered such that speed enforcement takes a back seat to red light running, tailgating and other violations that statistically cause more accidents. Follow statistics, whatever is causing the most accidents at a given time should be given the highest priority for enforcement. Quote: 10. Officers and victim advocates are required to offer crime victims information on MN carry law. Officers are required to know the law such that they can answer any basic question. Yearly, officers must take a 25 question quiz on MN 624.714, any wrong answer requires the officer to take a permit to carry class on the officer's dime. At least 12 different quizzes should be in the pool, administered at random. |
Author: | jdege [ Thu Jun 04, 2009 5:43 am ] |
Post subject: | |
Fubar wrote: Macx wrote: 1. Patrol officers are not allowed to carry firearms or the SWAT team should be disbanded. . . one or the other, not both. They can make their own choice but it should be either patrol with firearms or SWAT not both. I wouldn't disarm the police, I'd simply remove their authority for carrying. IOW, in my perfect world a cop could carry only under his authority as a law-abiding citizen, under exactly the same restrictions as anyone else. |
Author: | larryflew [ Thu Jun 04, 2009 7:41 am ] |
Post subject: | |
I think the idea is that people who are exceeding the speed limit by 10 to 15 mph are the ones who could end up tailgating or getting into accidents. Have been a "speeder" by your definition for 45 years and have never had an accident because of it, do not tailgate or get into accidents and drove 70-90 miles a day just back and forth to work for most of those years which works out to over 25K per year. IMO it is tailgaters, persons weaving in an out of traffic, red light runners, people pre-occupied with whatever from cell phones to putting on make up who cause the most accidents but it's easier to catch speeders. Besides, speed doesn't kill, it's the sudden stop that does that. |
Page 1 of 5 | All times are UTC - 6 hours |
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |