Did you sit him down and explain "google" to him? There are many incidents of bad cops (kind of like bad priests!) just hanging out their shingle in another location. when they get caught.
the bail on the cops should be ZERO because they should be under the jail for conspiring to make up false charges and not allowed to bond out.
I mean, fair play, the sheer level of chutzpah this takes.... It's like Dayton trying to explain educational theory to meerkats.
No. It was a social situation and I was a guest in someone's house. There's a time and a place for everything and that wasn't either one.
Newark, New Jersey is making progress. Newark Police officers did not fire a single shot during the calendar year 2020, and the city didn’t pay a single dime to settle police brutality cases. That’s never happened, at least in the city’s modern history. At the same time, crime is dropping, and police recovered almost 500 illegal guns from the street during the year. This is a remarkable success story, all done at a time when serious crime in Newark has dropped by 40 percent in the last five years. They hired more Black and brown officers, began training programs based on best-practices, required any officer who uses force in any way to report it in detail, and for the supervisor to review it. The bad cops were suddenly outed.
So my theory might be working! I have often posited "no more white cops" but as a watered down version (and more realistic) hiring more cops who reflect the demographics of the city they police is also a great idea. Newark is majority minority. Thus the police force should ideally be majority minority, providing no standards are lowered - I don't play quota hiring. But encouraging a demographic to consider a career in law enforcement (or any career) makes a lot of sense. IMHO what Newark is doing might end up being successful in the long term and more cities will take their policing in this direction.
It may be a good formula, but it sounds like a Chief and Mayor who meant business and the willingness of the Justice Department to get involved were the difference...I mean it's not like there's anything all that hard to figure out about what they're doing. Some nuts, like...say...Portland might be harder to crack.
I'd assume that there is a certain amount of luck involved in Newark police not having to fire any shots in 2020 versus other years that has little to do with their hiring, policing strategies, etc. Indeed, the article at the link talks about an officer-involved shooting on New Year's Day. Although the shooting very well may have been justified, it is not as though it reflects either way on whether the reforms have "worked." And if it had been just hours or minutes earlier, and there had been a NPD shooting in 2020, it's not like the reform efforts inherently would have been a success or failure because of that change in circumstance. I would tend to doubt that in a standard year, say, prior to the consent decree, they were shooting off bullets like they were Yosemite Sam at a hootenanny, and then the changes implemented got them under control.
They've literally never had a shooting free year prior to that during the time they tracked it, so I'd say monumental changes to culture and the engagement of the Dept of Justice probably had more than a little impact.
What makes you think that it is the changes in the culture as opposed to just luck? Did the changes in the culture stop on Jan. 1, 2021, or was it just that a situation happened on that day that made the officer (rightly or wrongly) shoot that just as easily could have happened on Dec. 31?
Well, for one thing, it never happened before, so the odds of it happening the same year they imposed significant changes seem small. Hell, BLM protesters tried to take over one of their precincts. ~1700 people stormed a precinct and the police didn't shoot. For another, it's what the police themselves are saying. They changed policies to de-escalation, and that had an impact. https://newjersey.news12.com/newark...-shot-in-2020-thanks-to-de-escalation-program
The changes that NPD implemented presumably have been an ongoing thing since (and before) the consent decree they entered into in 2016. It's probably not worth trying to pinpoint any given change to a year, but it is almost certainly not a clear-cut causal connection that there was reform and then no shooting. The police have every incentive to say "Look at how our reform efforts are working" and they may even genuinely believe it. That doesn't make it any more true that the reform efforts caused the lack of officer-involved shootings in 2020 for them versus it being true that there were reform efforts under way in 2016-2020, there were no officer-involved shootings in 2020, and those two facts operating independently of one another.
The question would be if the number of police shootings have been going down since the consent decree. And it's not just the police saying that it's working, it's also activists who pressured the police into accepting the consent decree in the first place. That doesn't mean everything is perfect in Newark - arrests and use of force are up. But less dead people is almost always better. The police unions are also resisting the civilian oversite council's right to subpoena. But all of the reporting I've seen shows this as an example of a police force learning to work better in it's neighborhoods, and there are general positive reactions to the changes by the communities. They say that the police are integrated better, and their hiring practices are more diverse. 3/4 of the police are now black and hispanic, much more reflective of Newark's diversity.
I'm not questioning whether the department is moving in the right direction. The question I'm raising is whether the reforms directly caused there to be no police shootings in 2020 or was that more or less random. It's not something that we will be able to resolve. But it makes far more sense to me that it was just coincidence that in 2020 there were no police involved shootings than there were situations where officers encountered situations that they would have had them shoot prior to the reforms being enacted but now they de-escalated or had some other way of resolving things.
Going in the right direction changes the boundaries of the number of shootings. So luck may have played a part in this particular year, but it's not just luck that this is the first time no shootings ever happened - because the reforms moved the needle in the right direction, and for the first time there was the possibility of that happening. This is what all public policy is about - it can never assure X never happens, what it can do is lower the prevalence of X, and sometimes then on any given year X doesn't happen.
Speaking of Newark, Fox just ran a piece on how a 'mob' attacked Newark police officers for trying to arrest two brothers on firearms charges. The police officers were engaged, their cameras ripped off, and beaten. More police arrived on the scene, four people were arrested for aggravated assault, no shots fired. Fox tried to portray this as a negative event, that the police were weak for not killing anyone. All to make the consent decree look bad. Can't have this type of policing be successful. But final result, the 'mob' were 4 brothers, they were all arrested, and a couple of police officers spent 30 mins in a hospital for contusions. And no one got shot. This is how police should behave.
The Nebraska sports ball team was once referred to as "blackshirts." It could be that people don't scour all of history for any possible offensive connections before they innocently choose a name for their little club. Soulless monsters, the lot of them.
I doubt a quick Google search really counts as 'scouring history,' but by all means continue to defend beleaguered institutions like the SPD that are under constant attack by the evil PC police.
Which sports ball team is that? And when did they change their name? And why? Apparently, the Cincinnati Reds changed their name to the Redlegs during one of the Communist scares in the US. Given that "brownshirts" is a term with an unsavory connotation, if I'm going to start an organization that features "shirts" in the name, I'm gonna do a google search on the term, I don't care what color one attaches to it. Given that the fucksticks who started the Proud Boys took their name from an unreleased song from a Disney movie and that there's an overlap between Proud Boys/various other white supremacy groups and cops, you're going to have to offer some serious evidence if you expect me to believe that it's a coincidence.
I named my local Boy Scout troop the Gestapo. That's cool, right? What, you guys expect me to crack a history book every time I name a group? Friggin' wokelords.
interesting...."that's how police should behave." Elwood - paging Elwood! Can you weigh in here with your professional opinion?
I'm not a cop - Elwood is. Thus his opinion would be more insightful. That said let's think about this: the police were trying to arrest these guys on weapons charges. What would have happened if these guys had gotten their hands on one or more of the cops weapons? My point is would it be better for the cops to get physically attacked and risk having their weapons taken and likely used against them (or against the general public) or would it be acceptable if the cops had shot people resisting arrest when they were being arrested for weapons charges? These guys weren't being arrested for selling loose cigarettes or shoplifting.
If the cops weren't armed...ahhh...never mind. Anyway, "Blackshirts" is the long-standing nickname for the University of Nebraska's football defensive team. They got the nickname when the rules changed to allow full-time two platoon football and the coach wanted to make sure everyone knew which side was which.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crim...t-attempt-prompting-new-wave-of-unrest-in-min here we again, maybe: apparently the cops fucked up by shooting an armed suspect resisting arrest who may have shot at the cops - what the hell were they thinking?
