General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forumsret5hd
(22,500 posts)does that include the ones who didnt actually participate in bad/illegal behavior, but did nothing to prevent other cops from doing so?
If not, man
you gonna have some mighty slim pickins.
multigraincracker
(37,637 posts)professional courtesy. That is a violation of their oath of office as it is a violation of the Constitution. Arrest them.
ret5hd
(22,500 posts)Now, how much of a raise should we give those dozen or so remaining cops?
multigraincracker
(37,637 posts)A Master Degree or more and one big raise.
I've met a few brass that had PHDs and they were excellent and knew what they were doing. To be an administrator in a department, an advance degree and pass some test, then pay them accordingly.
former9thward
(33,424 posts)Doing nothing but moving papers from one side of a desk to the other. And no cops on the street. Yep, that will work...
multigraincracker
(37,637 posts)is better than having armed thugs with badges out there.
WhiskeyGrinder
(26,945 posts)Javaman
(65,704 posts)Many many many good cops failed to act.
So they are no better than the bad cops.
multigraincracker
(37,637 posts)snot
(11,803 posts)what if any psychological testing goes into hiring decisions and whether it could or should include implicit bias testing?
multigraincracker
(37,637 posts)Probation period that includes no weapons until complete.
Jedi Guy
(3,476 posts)If your goal is to ensure that absolutely no one wants to be a cop, this would be a fantastic way to go about it. Otherwise, it's a ludicrous idea. If trainee officers are being given calls and sent into potentially dangerous situations where they might need to defend themselves, they need to be armed.
Pairing trainees with a field training officer (FTO) works just fine. At the start, the FTO takes the lead while the trainee watches and learns. As the trainee progresses, the roles gradually reverse and the FTO observes how they're doing. If all goes well, the FTO gives the green light and the trainee becomes a rookie and can function on his or her own. If all doesn't go well, the FTO recommends remedial training or, if necessary, decides the trainee doesn't have what it takes.
The exceptions to this rule are the rinky-dink sheriff's departments where the sheriff can deputize his buddies and/or the biggest contributors to his election campaign. Just about every other law enforcement agency uses the system I described.
multigraincracker
(37,637 posts)weapons are issued?
Go on youtube and watch the "Audit the Police" videos to see what a lack of Civil Rights training can cost a town, city or state. Ask some of your friends of Color how much they trust or fear cops as they are trained now.
Jedi Guy
(3,476 posts)Either they get a criminal justice degree and/or they go through the academy. The exception would be the rinky-dink sheriff's departments where the sheriff can deputize anyone he likes. Those situations are just accidents waiting to happen, IMO. Part of the solution would be nationwide standards for law enforcement officers, but since policing is a state/local issue and not a federal one, I don't know what that'd look like.
Jedi Guy
(3,476 posts)I worked as a dispatcher for the police department in a large city in Arizona. Our recruitment process involved a thorough background check (in which they contacted relatives, former employers, former coworkers, and even neighbors), a polygraph test, two different personality tests, and two interviews with a psychologist from the department's behavioral sciences unit. I'm sure there's a fair bit of variance since not every department can afford all that, and that's particularly true of sheriff's departments.
What's missing, at least in my opinion, is follow-up care. Every officer, regardless of how long they've been a cop, should have regular evaluations with a psychologist, just as a temperature check to see how they're doing and where their head is at. Every six months feels about right to me. These check-ins would allow behavioral sciences to spot potential psychological issues before they become problematic.
There should also be mandatory evaluations after any major incident, by which I mean any incident that involves serious injury or loss of life.
multigraincracker
(37,637 posts)I'm calling for automatic blood test on every cop after any use of force. Police use and abuse substances at the same rate as the general population. Steroids are common with cops.
Jedi Guy
(3,476 posts)There are just going to be times when officers are going to have to use physical force. It's right there in the description of "law enforcement." In any instance where the use of force is excessive to the situation and/or unjustified, the officer should at the bare minimum have a touch-base with a psychologist to examine what happened and why.
I don't think periodic drug testing is a bad idea, either. Quite apart from the steroid question, police confiscate and impound narcotics and other substances. If an officer tests positive for, say, heroin, then the department should start asking a lot of questions.
NowISeetheLight
(4,002 posts)I agree with the follow-up care. Dad was a cop for 36 years and retired as a chief of a Minneapolis suburb. I remember times when hed come home when he was a sergeant on 3-11 shift and just be quiet. Something happened at work. He never really talked about it.
FakeNoose
(41,601 posts)If they get through the retraining, THEN give them all a raise.