FBI Director thins cops are worse than bank tellers and blackjack dealers

[dead0man]

link NY Times

You must be logged in to read this quote.

James O. Pasco Jr., executive director of the National Fraternal Order of Police has different opinion.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Nhoj]

The FBI and Police trading insults is news?

[Associate Justice PiT]

     This is sort of what I've been concerned about for a while; the growth in anti-police sentiment creates a reaction among the police that leads to more problems. With that said, being "wary of confronting suspects" would not be a characteristic form for that reaction to take.

[JerryArkansas]

Of course he is right.  Many cops use their position of power to abuse citizens.  Not realizing that fact just exacerbates the problem.  Cops need to face hard punishments for doing wrong, something that isn't happening now.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

what point is being made here with the thread title?

[MaxQue]

Having said how the local police force act (especially compared to my experience in other cities), yes, they are worse than those. That's true of my local police, anyways.

[dead0man]

what point is being made here with the thread title?

Bank tellers and blackjack dealers are video taped while working and it doesn't make them not able to do their jobs.  Cops shouldn't have any problem with it either.

[MaxQue]

what point is being made here with the thread title?

Bank tellers and blackjack dealers are video taped while working and it doesn't make them not able to do their jobs.  Cops shouldn't have any problem with it either.

Well, why in various juridictions police unions lobby governements to make illegal to videotape a cop?

[dead0man]

Because police unions, like unions in general, feel they must protect the worst among them.


edit-and I said "shouldn't have a problem with it", I didn't say that none of them have a problem with it.

[MaxQue]

Because police unions, like unions in general, feel they must protect the worst among them.


edit-and I said "shouldn't have a problem with it", I didn't say that none of them have a problem with it.

I suppose and you are right, except that unions don't "feel" they must protect the worst among them, they have a legal duty to do so (it's a service they pay with their dues).

[Torie]

what point is being made here with the thread title?

Bank tellers and blackjack dealers are video taped while working and it doesn't make them not able to do their jobs.  Cops shouldn't have any problem with it either.

Well, why in various juridictions police unions lobby governements to make illegal to videotape a cop?

Lobby away. The 1st amendment makes such a ban on videotaping a dog that just won't hunt. Alas, this is another area, where the government really needs to spend more money. Being a good cop, who follows the law, while still being effective, is a very high skilled job. You are not going to get the quality of cops you want, paying them 30K to start or whatever. That's the goal of the police chief in Hudson. He wants to try to shut down a few locations which are high crime, and take up half the time of the police force, so that he can cut in half the number of cops, and increase their pay commensurately. We are fortunate to have him.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

The FBI is dirtier than most police departments, easily.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Alas, this is another area, where the government really needs to spend more money. Being a good cop, who follows the law, while still being effective, is a very high skilled job. You are not going to get the quality of cops you want, paying them 30K to start or whatever. That's the goal of the police chief in Hudson. He wants to try to shut down a few locations which are high crime, and take up half the time of the police force, so that he can cut in half the number of cops, and increase their pay commensurately. We are fortunate to have him.

And how exactly does he propose "shutting them down"?  And how does he propose to keep from being a case of whack-a-mole that leads to them setting up either elsewhere in Hudson, or in Greenport?

[Torie]

Alas, this is another area, where the government really needs to spend more money. Being a good cop, who follows the law, while still being effective, is a very high skilled job. You are not going to get the quality of cops you want, paying them 30K to start or whatever. That's the goal of the police chief in Hudson. He wants to try to shut down a few locations which are high crime, and take up half the time of the police force, so that he can cut in half the number of cops, and increase their pay commensurately. We are fortunate to have him.

And how exactly does he propose "shutting them down"?  And how does he propose to keep from being a case of whack-a-mole that leads to them setting up either elsewhere in Hudson, or in Greenport?

You just stay on top the hot spots, hit the landlord with code violations, and pressure the landlord to kick the tenants out, and in general, make it in the best interests of the perps to relocate elsewhere, outside of Hudson. As I say, it is only about 6 buildings, all owned by private slumlords rather than public housing, or housing run by non profits (we have that in Hudson), which are well managed, and where the tenants are expected to behave, and which are regularly inspected. A couple of the hotspots have been recently sold, and the tenants will be evicted over time, so that the buildings can be fixed up. In an gentrifying town like Hudson, and the pace of that is really picking up now, with projects going on here, there and everywhere, this strategy is viable.

Since moving to Hudson, I have a much more favorable opinion of government housing and housing owned by non profits, that is affordable, or housing privately owned with tax rebates and rules to follow than formerly. I have been very impressed by how well run they are, and how they are careful in selecting tenants. Little Hudson has expanded my horizons in so many ways. I feel so very fortunate.

I must say, that in general, I am impressed at just how well NY manages its subsidy programs, at least with respect to housing. It's much better than in CA.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

what point is being made here with the thread title?

Bank tellers and blackjack dealers are video taped while working and it doesn't make them not able to do their jobs.  Cops shouldn't have any problem with it either.

Aren't the complexity of the decisions we ask of those jobs, and their repercussions, just a tad different?

[dead0man]

Totally.  Life and death, liberty and detention....they have that power, backed up by the state, over all of us.  The skill set needed and the type of mental makeup required aren't in all of us, and they should be compensated well to get the best.  Certainly more than bank tellers and card dealers.

They still shouldn't take issue with being filmed.  They should desire it in fact.  For their own protection.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Totally.  Life and death, liberty and detention....they have that power, backed up by the state, over all of us.  The skill set needed and the type of mental makeup required aren't in all of us, and they should be compensated well to get the best.  Certainly more than bank tellers and card dealers.

They still shouldn't take issue with being filmed.  They should desire it in fact.  For their own protection.

Yes, of course they should.  They are also human, so that might impact how they are doing their jobs, even if it shouldn't.

[dead0man]

No doubt about it.  People in general act differently when they know they are being filmed.  Which is why cameras on cops are good.  Good cops aren't going to care much, and will just do their job like normal.  Bad cops are very much going to care, and will bitch about it, but they will also act better knowing their actions are being recorded.  It won't get rid of all police shenanigans, but having them will certainly lower it and make it easier to get to the truth either way.

[Seneca]

No doubt about it.  People in general act differently when they know they are being filmed.  Which is why cameras on cops are good.  Good cops aren't going to care much, and will just do their job like normal.  Bad cops are very much going to care, and will bitch about it, but they will also act better knowing their actions are being recorded.  It won't get rid of all police shenanigans, but having them will certainly lower it and make it easier to get to the truth either way.

That all sounds great. Unfortunately, these body cameras seem to turn off just before people get the sh**t beat out of them. To actually solve this issue, the links between the city/county Attorney Generals and police departments need to be severed. As it is, there is no incentive for AGs to prosecute "bad cops"[1] and plenty of disincentives.

[1] ACAB

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

    This is sort of what I've been concerned about for a while; the growth in anti-police sentiment creates a reaction among the police that leads to more problems. With that said, being "wary of confronting suspects" would not be a characteristic form for that reaction to take.

Anti police sentiment is nothing new. It has a many decade history in Oakland. Barely any of their cops live there, and people really don't trust them. Compare to Richmond, CA which a few years ago decided to take a better approach to policing. Crime has dropped a lot there.