US Anti-Police Protests and Riots Thread III

[North Washington Republic]

I think what they are looking for is radical change, a revolution if you will. They have a deep distrust in these institutions and believe they are rotten to the core and are incapable of reform, thus must be torn down and be rebuild.

A very correct and overall good take.

Well, it’s certainly not what I personally believe. However, after reading and listening(many on this very website), that is my takeaway.

[San Lumen]

What makes you think he supports riots?

I don't think he supports the riots. I think he's acting in bad faith to make it appear that he's on the side of protestors while still gaining the benefits of the police cracking down when protests begin escalating. Essentially, his stance isn't one rooted in logic, but rather in political expedience. Because there was nothing deserving of condemnation from the police tonight. They handled the situation precisely as they should have if the goal was preventing escalation.

What makes you say that? Mayor Elliot said "gassing is not a human way of policing" and he didn't agree with police using pepper spray, tear gas and paintballs against demonstrators.

[Fahran]

What makes you say that? Mayor Elliot said "gassing is not a human way of policing" and he didn't agree with police using pepper spray, tear gas and paintballs against demonstrators.

He's kinda leaving police with very few options to engage in effective riot control at this point, especially if he condemned tonight's police response. Which he seems to have. At the same time, I imagine he still expects them to do the job. Again, he wants to have his cake and eat it too, and that's just not feasible unless he doesn't expect the police to listen to him or he expects the police to allow protests to go unimpeded even when there's an immediate risk of violence.

Because the police were just maintaining a presence up until incitement occurred.

[Blue Nagia]

A very correct and overall good take.

Well, it’s certainly not what I personally believe. However, after reading and listening(many on this very website), that is my takeaway.

It's "drain the swamp", but with actual draining of the real swamp instead of enabling it.

If you supported "drain the swamp", rationally you should be on the side of the radical left.

[San Lumen]

What makes you say that? Mayor Elliot said "gassing is not a human way of policing" and he didn't agree with police using pepper spray, tear gas and paintballs against demonstrators.

He's kinda leaving police with very few options to engage in effective riot control at this point, especially if he condemned tonight's police response. Which he seems to have. At the same time, I imagine he still expects them to do the job. Again, he wants to have his cake and eat it too, and that's just not feasible unless he doesn't expect the police to listen to him or he expects the police to allow protests to go unimpeded even when there's an immediate risk of violence.

The police do answer to him ultimately and police department that decided to completely ignore the elected government of the city they serve would get no respect from anyone.

I doubt the mayor expects the police to allow protests to go unimpeded if there is a threat of violence.

[Fahran]

It's "drain the swamp", but with actual draining of the real swamp instead of enabling it.

If you supported "drain the swamp", rationally you should be on the side of the radical left.

I'm not an anarchist so I don't support dismantling the state. I also don't think dismantling the state will do much to address racial disparities. In fact, it could potentially make them worse.

[North Washington Republic]

Well, it’s certainly not what I personally believe. However, after reading and listening(many on this very website), that is my takeaway.

It's "drain the swamp", but with actual draining of the real swamp instead of enabling it.

If you supported "drain the swamp", rationally you should be on the side of the radical left.

Well, I’m am not and never have been a Trump supporter.

[Fahran]

The police do answer to him ultimately and police department that decided to completely ignore the elected government of the city they serve would get no respect from anyone.

And why did they ignore the elected government? Have the orders they've been giving to officers been feasible? Or do officers simply enjoy hitting folks with tear gas?

I doubt the mayor expects the police to allow protests to go unimpeded if there is a threat of violence.

There was an explicit threat of violence tonight. And the mayor condemned the police response to that threat of violence if I'm reading things correctly. Again, tonight's response was the most appropriate one any police agency could manage while avoiding escalation.

[San Lumen]

The police do answer to him ultimately and police department that decided to completely ignore the elected government of the city they serve would get no respect from anyone.

And why did they ignore the elected government? Have the orders they've been giving to officers been feasible? Or do officers simply enjoy hitting folks with tear gas?

I doubt the mayor expects the police to allow protests to go unimpeded if there is a threat of violence.

There was an explicit threat of violence tonight. And the mayor condemned the police response to that threat of violence if I'm reading things correctly.

A police department that ignores the city government is a rouge agency. That's not a how a democracy functions.

I don't think that's what he did.

[Postauthoritarian America]

How do you expect Black people to react to police killing unarmed young Black men and getting away with it?

Officer Chauvin is currently on trial. Officer Potter has been charged with second-degree manslaughter. Someone also saw fit to leak her address for what was probably an accidental shooting. Nobody expects black people to not be upset,

And nobody is buying that the shooting was accidental.

but, at the same time, the municipal government and police have no intention of allowing riots to get out of control.

Left to its own devices, the municipal government might come up with a better way to deal with the unrest than an overwhelming militarized law enforcement presence that provokes exactly the kind of escalation we've been seeing. Unfortunately the state government is still snakebit from the reaction to George Floyd's murder and has doubled down on the repression.

That doesn't actually help anyone at a time when we're seeing some efforts to implement reforms and punish cops who shoot unarmed black men.

The state Senate, controlled by guess who, has yet to hold one hearing on police reform.

Elected officials, prosecutors, etc. might could take action to stop police killing and police impunity, then cops might not have to erect barricades outside their precinct houses or call in hundreds of state troopers and National Guards to keep people from burning them down.

They have taken action. Potter has literally been charged. She was charged within two days of the shooting.

iirc she was charged Wednesday after the Sunday shooting. With man 2. Then let out of confinement on 100k bail. And reportedly waved at the cameras during her arraignment. As far as a lot of the protesters are concerned the prosecutor may as well have pissed on Daunte Wright's corpse. The case may still go to the state AG, as the Floyd case did after the Hennepin County prosecutor's efforts were found to be inadequate.

Brooklyn Center just imposed an emergency curfew starting at 11pm local. Media showed a handful of protesters arrested, at least one hooded and being carried by law enforcement.

[Kowani]

Daunte Wright memorial in Los Angeles was destroyed by right-wingers ...

Much as I disapprove of their actions, I'm not sure if I can condone name dropping them like that.

Much as I disapprove of their actions, I'm not sure if I can condone name dropping them like that.

This too. At least addresses weren't posted, so it's not quite doxxing yet, but it's still uncomfortably close.

"oh no, i did deliberately provocative thing in public while knowingly on camera, how dare people know who i am"
my sympathy here is extremely limited

Agreed. Tonight law enforcement didn’t engage at all until people started to attempt to breach and cut the fence. Some folks believe that police shouldn’t even use non-lethal methods to defend themselves. It just pure “fu*k the police”

I don't even really see a need for violence in connection with the killing of Daunte Wright at the moment. Kimberly Potter, the officer who shot Daunte Wright, ostensibly due to panic and poor training, has been arrested and charged with 2nd degree manslaughter. There's a good reason to suspect she'll either be indicted and convicted or, at the very least, fired. The municipal government is supportive of BLM and efforts to reform police departments, though, notably, a lot of their proposals probably won't do much to address shootings of this nature.

We would need people more suitable for high-stress situations and that probably means putting more money into police recruitment and police training to draw larger pools of recruits, enable a more competitive selecton process for officers, and higher quality training for these sorts of situations. We'd also need to take broad steps to address racial disparities and the fraught relationship between the police and the black community.

addressing this
no i'm sorry this is bullshit
so first, let's examine some quick facts
1: Kim Potter was a veteran with 25 years on the force, and head of the police union
you don't get there by being sloppy
2: tasers and firearms in practically every police department (and that of brooklyn centre) are cross-drawn
one has to reach with their weak hand in order to draw a taser, a thing that everyone should notice
3: a glock (her firearm) weighs much more than much as the average taser, and the taser comes with features to preventthis sort of confusion
this is not a disparity that can be chalked up to "stress" or "incompetence"

nor can this solved with any sort of "better training" or "giving the police more money"
Behind every cop with a taser there is a judge issuing a warrant, a prosecutor arguing for that warrant, a professor calling tasers and warrants "community policing reform," a taser company that raises profits with each police shooting, and a "task force" they all sit on together.
the problem is the reason for the existence of police, and the culture of violence that inculcates every police department in the country
the mentality of Force as a method of solving problems is the ultimate killer of the victims of police in this country
this specific incident has happened before, and it will happen again unless the whole poisonous structure is overhauled

[Fahran]

A police department that ignores the city government is a rouge agency. That's not a how a democracy functions.

A municipal government that gives poor or inconsistent orders cannot expect those orders to be followed because they lead to untenable situations. The police have also had to deal with a massive shift in leadership this week, so being further hamstrung by a municipal government deadset on antagonizing a suboordinate government entity doesn't really inspire confidence. That said, if officers want to let Brooklyn Center be stormed to comply with government orders, I wouldn't begrudge them. They also shouldn't use tear gas or fences when protestors filter into the mayor's house.

[San Lumen]

A police department that ignores the city government is a rouge agency. That's not a how a democracy functions.

A municipal government that gives poor or inconsistent orders cannot expect those orders to be followed because they lead to untenable situations. The police have also had to deal with a massive shift in leadership this week, so being further hamstrung by a municipal government deadset on antagonizing a suboordinate government entity doesn't really inspire confidence. That said, if officers want to let Brooklyn Center be stormed to comply with government orders, I wouldn't begrudge them. They also shouldn't use tear gas or fences when protestors filter into the mayor's house.

So you want police to either ignore the government or stop doing their jobs entirely? They would be held accountable if they let the mayor be assassinated.

[Washington Resistance Army]

And why did they ignore the elected government? Have the orders they've been giving to officers been feasible? Or do officers simply enjoy hitting folks with tear gas?


There was an explicit threat of violence tonight. And the mayor condemned the police response to that threat of violence if I'm reading things correctly.

A police department that ignores the city government is a rouge agency. That's not a how a democracy functions.

I don't think that's what he did.

In case you haven't noticed American democracy is in rapid freefall. Appeals to how things should function don't mean much anymore.

[Postauthoritarian America]

And why did they ignore the elected government? Have the orders they've been giving to officers been feasible? Or do officers simply enjoy hitting folks with tear gas?


There was an explicit threat of violence tonight. And the mayor condemned the police response to that threat of violence if I'm reading things correctly.

A police department that ignores the city government is a rouge agency. That's not a how a democracy functions.

I don't think that's what he did.

A large part of the Brooklyn Center mayor's, and Minneapolis council's, dilemma is that the response to Daunte White's murder has been rolled into the planned preparations for the reaction to the verdict in the Derek Chauvin trial and so is being controlled by the state. The National Guard answers to the Governor and the state patrol answers to the public safety commissioner, and both have used teargas and "less lethal" munitions.

[Neu California]

And why did they ignore the elected government? Have the orders they've been giving to officers been feasible? Or do officers simply enjoy hitting folks with tear gas?


There was an explicit threat of violence tonight. And the mayor condemned the police response to that threat of violence if I'm reading things correctly.

A police department that ignores the city government is a rouge agency. That's not a how a democracy functions.

I don't think that's what he did.

So, what, the police are all reds now? Or redshirts? Or are they all putting on makeup?

Sorry, just having a little fun. I agree with your post wholeheartedly.

[Fahran]

So you want police to either ignore the government or stop doing their jobs entirely? They would be held accountable if they let the mayor be assassinated.

My entire point is that the police cannot effectively do their job if the government tells them not to do the job. You can't tell police to keep violence from escalating while robbing them of most of the available means to prevent violence from escalating. A completely hands-off approach doesn't work, as my previous post on this subject illustrates.

Why? If they're complying with his orders to not engage in more abrasive policing methods, even towards crowds that have expressed violent intent, one would assume that they're doing the job as instructed. The thing is that the mayor is going to be selective about this because he's full of it. The minute the violence inconveniences him the mask will come off and he'll be fine with the police doing what they did tonight to protestors.

The same thing has happened else-where.

[Kowani]

A police department that ignores the city government is a rouge agency. That's not a how a democracy functions.

I don't think that's what he did.

In case you haven't noticed American democracy is in rapid freefall. Appeals to how things should function don't mean much anymore.

no, no, no
we're all just supposed to sit back and pretend everything is functional
god forbid we realize how deeply broken everything is
it might make us (my apologies for the bad language) radical

[Borderlands of Rojava]

Officer Chauvin is currently on trial. Officer Potter has been charged with second-degree manslaughter. Someone also saw fit to leak her address for what was probably an accidental shooting. Nobody expects black people to not be upset, but, at the same time, the municipal government and police have no intention of allowing riots to get out of control. That doesn't actually help anyone at a time when we're seeing some efforts to implement reforms and punish cops who shoot unarmed black men.


They have taken action. Potter has literally been charged. She was charged within two days of the shooting.

I think what they are looking for is radical change, a revolution if you will. They have a deep distrust in these institutions and believe they are rotten to the core and are incapable of reform, thus must be torn down and be rebuild.

Cause they are. Most times police do not face serious punishment when they abuse their power, cause if they did you wouldn't see the protests we're having now.

[Fahran]

addressing this
no i'm sorry this is bullshit
so first, let's examine some quick facts
1: Kim Potter was a veteran with 25 years on the force, and head of the police union
you don't get there by being sloppy

Given most officers go a substantial portion or all of their career without ever discharging a firearm, I think you're overstating the relevance of Potter's experience by emphasizing the number of years she's been on the force and her position within the police union. From what I've read, we don't actually know much about her history with disproportionate force, her ability to manage high-stress situations where limited violence becomes necessary, or almost anything else about her career aside from its longevity. I could be completely wrong about her in this regard, but I do think we should wait to see what comes out - with a reasonable suspicion that she and fellow officers will say what benefits them.

Just a possiblity though, incompetent people remain and excel in organizations all the time, especially if nothing ever reveals their incompetence.

2: tasers and firearms in practically every police department (and that of brooklyn centre) are cross-drawn
one has to reach with their weak hand in order to draw a taser, a thing that everyone should notice
3: a glock (her firearm) weighs much more than much as the average taser, and the taser comes with features to preventthis sort of confusion
this is not a disparity that can be chalked up to "stress" or "incompetence"

It has happened at least fifteen times in the past. I do think stress or incompetence provides a better explanation than deliberate intent to kill in these cases and, judging by the second-degree manslaughter charge, it would seem that's the stance the prosecution will take when this case comes to trial.

nor can this solved with any sort of "better training" or "giving the police more money" Behind every cop with a taser there is a judge issuing a warrant, a prosecutor arguing for that warrant, a professor calling tasers and warrants "community policing reform," a taser company that raises profits with each police shooting, and a "task force" they all sit on together.

In this case, the warrant for Daunte Wright seems to have been legitimate, especially if you're a fan of gun control. Fleeing arrest, owning a gun without a license, and failure to appear in court are things that would require policing to address. The issue here is that Potter shot Wright instead of tazing him or arresting him later at his home. That could have been avoided with procedural changes, a more level-headed and composed officer, and a number of other things.

the problem is the reason for the existence of police, and the culture of violence that inculcates every police department in the country
the mentality of Force as a method of solving problems is the ultimate killer of the victims of police in this country
this specific incident has happened before, and it will happen again unless the whole poisonous structure is overhauled

I don't think any society thus far has eschewed the use of force as a method of solving problems when push comes to shove, Ko. Even some protestors who oppose that use of violence are using force as a method of solving said problem. I agree with quite a few of your criticisms of policing and institutional racism, but this isn't one of them.

[Kowani]

addressing this
no i'm sorry this is bullshit
so first, let's examine some quick facts
1: Kim Potter was a veteran with 25 years on the force, and head of the police union
you don't get there by being sloppy

Given most officers go a substantial portion of their careers without ever discharging a firearm, I think you're overstating the relevance of Potter's experience by emphasizing the number of years she's been on the force and her position within the police union. From what I've read, we don't actually know much about her history with disproportionate force, her ability to manage high-stress situations where limited violence becomes necessary, or almost anything else about her career aside from its longevity.

i am not so certain about the relevance of this
a long career may not mean much on its own
a long career and a position as head of the police union and a field-training officer?
it seems highly suspect for anyone to reach those positions without at least some degree of knowledge of how to use their firearm on the job
if you're going to ascend to positions of power in ostensible meritocracies-and we've seen nothing to suggest that this department is obscenely corrupt-then it seems like a massive assumption to make that the person is, in fact, a noob with no clue how to handle firearms

2: tasers and firearms in practically every police department (and that of brooklyn centre) are cross-drawn
one has to reach with their weak hand in order to draw a taser, a thing that everyone should notice
3: a glock (her firearm) weighs much more than much as the average taser, and the taser comes with features to preventthis sort of confusion
this is not a disparity that can be chalked up to "stress" or "incompetence"

It has happened at least fifteen times in the past.

yes, most of those prior to the modification of tasers to avoid this sort of thing
this is a meaningless point, the circumstances are vastly different, and the excuse does not fly

I do think stress or incompetence provides a better explanation than deliberate intent to kill in these cases and, judging by the second-degree manslaughter charge, it would seem that's the stance the prosecution will take when this case comes to trial.

it's almost like the prosecutor works with police on a daily basis, and isn't really an independent figure in any sense of the word
funny how that works
oh, it's easier to prove, don't get me wrong
it's just insufficient

nor can this solved with any sort of "better training" or "giving the police more money" Behind every cop with a taser there is a judge issuing a warrant, a prosecutor arguing for that warrant, a professor calling tasers and warrants "community policing reform," a taser company that raises profits with each police shooting, and a "task force" they all sit on together.

In this case, the warrant for Daunte Wright seems to have been legitimate, especially if you're a fan of gun control. Fleeing arrest, owning a gun without a license, and failure to appear in court are things that would require policing to address. The issue here is that Potter shot Wright instead of tazing him or arresting him later at his home. That could have been avoided with procedural changes, a more level-headed and composed officer, and a number of other things.

this is either a deliberate misreading of the point i was making or a failure to understand it
i do not appreciate either

the problem is the reason for the existence of police, and the culture of violence that inculcates every police department in the country
the mentality of Force as a method of solving problems is the ultimate killer of the victims of police in this country
this specific incident has happened before, and it will happen again unless the whole poisonous structure is overhauled

I don't think any society thus far has eschewed the use of force as a method of solving problems when push comes to shove, Ko. I agree with quite a few of your criticisms of policing and racism, but this isn't one of them.

indeed
no society thus far has
in case you did not notice, almost every society thus far has been varying degrees of terrible
you look to the past as the limit of what we can do, not the baseline
heroes to be emulated, not humans to be surpassed
why did Duante Wright flee arrest? because arrest leads to prison if convicted, and quite likely destitution if not
jailed while waiting for a court date, what happens? bills pile up, you lose your job, your connections slip away
if convicted, well, we all know what happens
you become dehumanized, thrown into some of the worst experiences we as a society decide are permissible for a person to undergo
you've been thrown away, like trash
maybe you get raped while you're in there
maybe the guards beat your skull open with a meat cleaver
even if you avoid the worst case scenarios, you've been through the greatest dehumanization possible
and what happens when you get out?
all of a sudden, you're unemployable
can't find housing, because the programs won't take you, the banks won't risk giving you a loan
schooling? forget it, buddy
if you're lucky, your family will support you
and now you have to live with the knowledge that you'll always be a drain on them, because you've been barred from providing for yourself
and what if they don't?
well now you're really on your own
and there it is, the crushing weight that you lived up to the stereotypes, that you failed your parents and your community
and of course, the poverty
always there, the poverty
so what do you do?
become homeless and beg? sleep on the streets in the cold, forgotten by everyone?
is that living?
what's the other option?
ah, yes-crime
and so the cycle repeats

and that is what I call a moral failure
that, i call an injustice without peer, made only worse by the trumpeting of freedom that is blasted from every institution, television program, and radio station every day, a mocking hypocrisy of the abandonment and suffering of the people who have been, from the moment of this nation's birth, abused at every turn

so yes
perhaps we do see it differently
how clear is your vision?

[Kowani]

hellworld
Federal judge issues temporary restraining order barring Minnesota state law enforcement from arresting or using force against journalists covering protests; journalists do not have to disperse

how do the police respond?
by punching and macing journalists, of course

by "processing" local journalists after taking them all to a checkpoint, where their ID and faces are photographed
by assaulting those journalists, throwing them to the ground

what's all this about "law and order?"
"public safety"

and wait 'till you hear about what happened in Portland

[Fahran]

i am not so certain about the relevance of this
a long career may not mean much on its own
a long career and a position as head of the police union and a field-training officer?
it seems highly suspect for anyone to reach those positions without at least some degree of knowledge of how to use their firearm on the job
if you're going to ascend to positions of power in ostensible meritocracies-and we've seen nothing to suggest that this department is obscenely corrupt-then it seems like a massive assumption to make that the person is, in fact, a noob with no clue how to handle firearms

There's a substantive difference between field training and an actual high-stress scenario. This is acknowledged both by the officers I've met and the US Department of Criminal Justice. To quote an older source from 1987...

However, most recruit training programs leave a wide gap between the classroom and the "real worldw of police work. The classroom will not suffice in and of itself to adequately prepare the new officer to understand the police role and how to fulfill it.

Source

I do also want to point out that framing this as incompetence does not make the killing of Daunte Wright any better. It simply changes the nature of the problem that remains to be addressed. Police agencies may be framed as meritocratic institutions, but when promotions and merit are measured based on more routine activities that often do not require as much escalation you're meritocracy isn't going to reflect who is best able to respond to situations that fall outside the norm.

Potter may well have been proficient with firearms and tazers in a controlled setting, and then screwed up the minute she had to use them in a non-controlled setting. I know you're not keen on anecdotes, but my grandfather and brother told me stories of privates, who had spent months undergoing even more comprehensive training than the police, freezing or cracking under pressure.

Again, it's possible Potter had the relevant experience and competence to handle this situation and that she simply chose to shoot Daunte Wright for some unknown reason or due to racism. I could be completely wrong about what happened, but I think the problem is often as much about procedural issues and officer malfeasance as it is about racial bias, which, as I pointed out earlier, is undoubtedly present. That said, I think even if we had no racial biases we would still see stuff like this if the procedural and training problems aren't fixed.

yes, most of those prior to the modification of tasers to avoid this sort of thing

And yet there remains the possibility of slip-ups for a number of reasons. This is almost certainly what happened given Potter is caught on video screaming tazer repeatedly before discharging her pistol.

Also, most police departments, including Brooklyn Center, require that officers carry their guns on their dominant side and Tasers on the opposite side to lower the risk of confusing the two weapons, the experts said. That’s also what Axon, the maker of the Taser, recommends.

“You can tell from the video that the Brooklyn Center officers were doing that,“ Smith said.So what’s more likely, Smith said, is that Potter experienced something called “slip and capture.”

“It’s not like she looked at her gun and thought it was a Taser,” Smith said. “It’s a horrible, horrible motor glitch that could happen in high-stress situations. I liken it to when you get into a rental car and go to start it up, you automatically reach for what’s familiar to you before realizing that you’re not in your car. The same issue could have happened here with the Taser.”

Maria Haberfeld, who is also a John Jay professor and co-author of “Use of Force Training in Law Enforcement: A Reality Based Approach,” said, “People underestimate the level of stress police officers experience during traffic stops.”

“A lot of police officers get killed doing what should be routine traffic stops” and a veteran officer like Potter would be acutely aware of that, Haberfeld said. “The longer you are on the job, the more layers of stress you accumulate. And errors of judgment happen when you are under stress.”

Kenney added, “I can only assume muscle memory is what happened here.”

“There is no indication that the officer intended to use deadly force,” the professor said. “That said, it goes nowhere near excusing this mistake.”

Source

One plausible solution would be to remove firearms completely from the tool-kit of officers, but this would have the deleterous effect of leaving them outgunned by even many petty criminals.

it's almost like the prosecutor works with police on a daily basis, and isn't really an independent figure in any sense of the word
funny how that works
oh, it's easier to prove, don't get me wrong
it's just insufficient

It's impossible to overstate the extent to which the institutions that cooperate to form the criminal justice system are incestuous, but, at the same time, we have minimal reason to suspect that the charges were brought in bad faith. A lot of the frustration hinges on the fact that this is a systematic problem that black people have faced perpetually, with only gradual improvements from decade to decade, and that folks have often struggled with impunity to effect meaningful change. And I get why that's frustrating. I really do.

this is either a deliberate misreading of the point i was making or a failure to understand it
i do not appreciate either

I took it as a generalized indictment of the criminal justice system, and there's a lot to criticize, but I'm not certain where we can find fault with the local district attorney or the judge in this instance. They did their jobs appropriately and upheld enforcement of the laws that the state legislature had passed. I'm not certain I'm keen on those laws, but that's a different matter.

As for tazers, there's a lot to challenge regarding the narratives about their effectiveness and ability to reduce the risk of escalation during encounters between police officers and belligerent/resisting suspects. There's a lot of moving parts to these problems because, as you pointed out, there are systematic.

My focus tends to be on directly fixing problems as they arise. In part because I don't really trust sweeping changes to systems or institutions that have the capacity to backfire in serious ways. In such cases, I want to see what society is getting before we commit to it. Hence my more cautious proposals about officer training, policing procedures, and the various conventions and policies across institutions that contribute to racial inequalities and other forms of injustice.

indeed
no society thus far has
in case you did not notice, almost every society thus far has been varying degrees of terrible

And so we continuing trying to improve them where we can by gradual trial and error. However, with regard to violence and coercion, I've become convinced that all society, however decentralized, however anarchic, however kind, is predicated on them. It pops up under different names every time I hear someone's bold new theory about how we should organize society. Or else remains a lurking specter in any serious inquiry left unaddressed. I think the striving should be towards harnessing violence to justice. In this case, that's what appalls the sensibilities - that the violence, the killing, was unjust and unnecessary.

you look to the past as the limit of what we can do, not the baseline
heroes to be emulated, not humans to be surpassed

I dream of surpassing my heroes and heroines every day. I often converse with them as equals with respect to the Great Conversation, but they remain important to me as paragons, symbols, and manifestations of some good. That's not to say they aren't flawed. I know full well they are. Just as my parents are flawed, just as my professors are flawed, so are my heroes and heroines flawed. I strive to learn from the flaws as often as I learn from the virtues, but they still serve to structure my paradigm. And there's some value in that.

why did Duante Wright flee arrest? because arrest leads to prison if convicted, and quite likely destitution if not
jailed while waiting for a court date, what happens? bills pile up, you lose your job, your connections slip away
if convicted, well, we all know what happens
you become dehumanized, thrown into some of the worst experiences we as a society decide are permissible for a person to undergo
you've been thrown away, like trash
maybe you get raped while you're in there
maybe the guards beat your skull open with a meat cleaver
even if you avoid the worst case scenarios, you've been through the greatest dehumanization possible
and what happens when you get out?
all of a sudden, you're unemployable
can't find housing, because the programs won't take you, the banks won't risk giving you a loan
schooling? forget it, buddy
if you're lucky, your family will support you
and now you have to live with the knowledge that you'll always be a drain on them, because you've been barred from providing for yourself
and what if they don't?
well now you're really on your own
and there it is, the crushing weight that you lived up to the stereotypes, that you failed your parents and your community
and of course, the poverty
always there, the poverty
so what do you do?
become homeless and beg? sleep on the streets in the cold, forgotten by everyone?
is that living?
what's the other option?
ah, yes-crime
and so the cycle repeats

and that is what I call a moral failure
that, i call an injustice without peer, made only worse by the trumpeting of freedom that is blasted from every institution, television program, and radio station every day, a mocking hypocrisy of the abandonment and suffering of the people who have been, from the moment of this nation's birth, abused at every turn

so yes
perhaps we do see it differently
how clear is your vision?

There's much to be said against the criminal justice system, and it should be improved upon when and where we can improve upon it. But why would a suspect inclined to flee from the police in fear of some punishment not still flee if the punishment was less lofty and he or she reasonably believed they could escape? If the penalty for unlicensed possession of a firearm while committing another crime had been less than the maximum of $3,000 fine and a year in prison been less, would Wright still have attempted to flee?

I do not think you can perceive the actual maximum sentence in this case as an injustice or wickedness. What you call injustice are the elements of bureaucracy and absolute power over lives that creep into the discourse whenever we broach modernity, and even these, in many cases, may be preferable to the unsystematic and brutish violence that preceded them. That doesn't mean there's not work to be done, but I don't think we can simply forgo punishing criminality while we wait to reform the system and I don't think we can tear it all down either. Communal justice sounds great until we arrive back at lynchings and blood feuds.

[Kowani]

i am not so certain about the relevance of this
a long career may not mean much on its own
a long career and a position as head of the police union and a field-training officer?
it seems highly suspect for anyone to reach those positions without at least some degree of knowledge of how to use their firearm on the job
if you're going to ascend to positions of power in ostensible meritocracies-and we've seen nothing to suggest that this department is obscenely corrupt-then it seems like a massive assumption to make that the person is, in fact, a noob with no clue how to handle firearms

There's a substantive difference between field training and an actual high-stress scenario. This is acknowledged both by the officers I've met and the US Department of Criminal Justice. To quote an older source from 1987...

However, most recruit training programs leave a wide gap between the classroom and the "real worldw of police work. The classroom will not suffice in and of itself to adequately prepare the new officer to understand the police role and how to fulfill it.

Source

I do also want to point out that framing this as incompetence does not make the killing of Daunte Wright any better. It simply changes the nature of the problem that remains to be addressed. Police agencies may be framed as meritocratic institutions, but when promotions and merit are measured based on more routine activities that often do not require as much escalation you're meritocracy isn't going to reflect who is best able to respond to situations that fall outside the norm.

Potter may well have been proficient with firearms and tazers in a controlled setting, and then screwed up the minute she had to use them in a non-controlled setting. I know you're not keen on anecdotes, but my grandfather and brother told me stories of privates, who had spent months undergoing even more comprehensive training than the police, freezing or cracking under pressure.

Again, it's possible Potter had the relevant experience and competence to handle this situation and that she simply chose to shoot Daunte Wright for some unknown reason or due to racism. I could be completely wrong about what happened, but I think the problem is often as much about procedural issues and officer malfeasance as it is about racial bias, which, as I pointed out earlier, is undoubtedly present. That said, I think even if we had no racial biases we would still see stuff like this if the procedural and training problems aren't fixed.

yes, most of those prior to the modification of tasers to avoid this sort of thing

And yet there remains the possibility of slip-ups for a number of reasons. This is almost certainly what happened given Potter is caught on video screaming tazer repeatedly before discharging her pistol.

Also, most police departments, including Brooklyn Center, require that officers carry their guns on their dominant side and Tasers on the opposite side to lower the risk of confusing the two weapons, the experts said. That’s also what Axon, the maker of the Taser, recommends.

“You can tell from the video that the Brooklyn Center officers were doing that,“ Smith said.So what’s more likely, Smith said, is that Potter experienced something called “slip and capture.”

“It’s not like she looked at her gun and thought it was a Taser,” Smith said. “It’s a horrible, horrible motor glitch that could happen in high-stress situations. I liken it to when you get into a rental car and go to start it up, you automatically reach for what’s familiar to you before realizing that you’re not in your car. The same issue could have happened here with the Taser.”

Maria Haberfeld, who is also a John Jay professor and co-author of “Use of Force Training in Law Enforcement: A Reality Based Approach,” said, “People underestimate the level of stress police officers experience during traffic stops.”

“A lot of police officers get killed doing what should be routine traffic stops” and a veteran officer like Potter would be acutely aware of that, Haberfeld said. “The longer you are on the job, the more layers of stress you accumulate. And errors of judgment happen when you are under stress.”

Kenney added, “I can only assume muscle memory is what happened here.”

“There is no indication that the officer intended to use deadly force,” the professor said. “That said, it goes nowhere near excusing this mistake.”

Source

One plausible solution would be to remove firearms completely from the tool-kit of officers, but this would have the deleterous effect of leaving them outgunned by even many petty criminals.

it's almost like the prosecutor works with police on a daily basis, and isn't really an independent figure in any sense of the word
funny how that works
oh, it's easier to prove, don't get me wrong
it's just insufficient

It's impossible to overstate the extent to which the institutions that cooperate to form the criminal justice system are incestuous, but, at the same time, we have minimal reason to suspect that the charges were brought in bad faith. A lot of the frustration hinges on the fact that this is a systematic problem that black people have faced perpetually, with only gradual improvements from decade to decade, and that folks have often struggled with impunity to effect meaningful change. And I get why that's frustrating. I really do.

this is either a deliberate misreading of the point i was making or a failure to understand it
i do not appreciate either

I took it as a generalized indictment of the criminal justice system, and there's a lot to criticize, but I'm not certain where we can find fault with the local district attorney or the judge in this instance. They did their jobs appropriately and upheld enforcement of the laws that the state legislature had passed. I'm not certain I'm keen on those laws, but that's a different matter.

As for tazers, there's a lot to challenge regarding the narratives about their effectiveness and ability to reduce the risk of escalation during encounters between police officers and belligerent/resisting suspects. There's a lot of moving parts to these problems because, as you pointed out, there are systematic.

My focus tends to be on directly fixing problems as they arise. In part because I don't really trust sweeping changes to systems or institutions that have the capacity to backfire in serious ways. In such cases, I want to see what society is getting before we commit to it. Hence my more cautious proposals about officer training, policing procedures, and the various conventions and policies across institutions that contribute to racial inequalities and other forms of injustice.

indeed
no society thus far has
in case you did not notice, almost every society thus far has been varying degrees of terrible

And so we continuing trying to improve them where we can by gradual trial and error. However, with regard to violence and coercion, I've become convinced that all society, however decentralized, however anarchic, however kind, is predicated on them. It pops up under different names every time I hear someone's bold new theory about how we should organize society. Or else remains a lurking specter in any serious inquiry left unaddressed. I think the striving should be towards harnessing violence to justice. In this case, that's what appalls the sensibilities - that the violence, the killing, was unjust and unnecessary.

you look to the past as the limit of what we can do, not the baseline
heroes to be emulated, not humans to be surpassed

I dream of surpassing my heroes and heroines every day. I often converse with them as equals with respect to the Great Conversation, but they remain important to me as paragons, symbols, and manifestations of some good. That's not to say they aren't flawed. I know full well they are. Just as my parents are flawed, just as my professors are flawed, so are my heroes and heroines flawed. I strive to learn from the flaws as often as I learn from the virtues, but they still serve to structure my paradigm. And there's some value in that.

why did Duante Wright flee arrest? because arrest leads to prison if convicted, and quite likely destitution if not
jailed while waiting for a court date, what happens? bills pile up, you lose your job, your connections slip away
if convicted, well, we all know what happens
you become dehumanized, thrown into some of the worst experiences we as a society decide are permissible for a person to undergo
you've been thrown away, like trash
maybe you get raped while you're in there
maybe the guards beat your skull open with a meat cleaver
even if you avoid the worst case scenarios, you've been through the greatest dehumanization possible
and what happens when you get out?
all of a sudden, you're unemployable
can't find housing, because the programs won't take you, the banks won't risk giving you a loan
schooling? forget it, buddy
if you're lucky, your family will support you
and now you have to live with the knowledge that you'll always be a drain on them, because you've been barred from providing for yourself
and what if they don't?
well now you're really on your own
and there it is, the crushing weight that you lived up to the stereotypes, that you failed your parents and your community
and of course, the poverty
always there, the poverty
so what do you do?
become homeless and beg? sleep on the streets in the cold, forgotten by everyone?
is that living?
what's the other option?
ah, yes-crime
and so the cycle repeats

and that is what I call a moral failure
that, i call an injustice without peer, made only worse by the trumpeting of freedom that is blasted from every institution, television program, and radio station every day, a mocking hypocrisy of the abandonment and suffering of the people who have been, from the moment of this nation's birth, abused at every turn

so yes
perhaps we do see it differently
how clear is your vision?

There's much to be said against the criminal justice system, and it should be improved upon when and where we can improve upon it. But why would a suspect inclined to flee from the police in fear of some punishment not still flee if the punishment was less lofty and he or she reasonably believed they could escape? If the penalty for unlicensed possession of a firearm while committing another crime had been less than the maximum of $3,000 fine and a year in prison been less, would Wright still have attempted to flee?

I do not think you can perceive the actual maximum sentence in this case as an injustice or wickedness. What you call injustice are the elements of bureaucracy and absolute power over lives that creep into the discourse whenever we broach modernity, and even these, in many cases, may be preferable to the unsystematic and brutish violence that preceded them. That doesn't mean there's not work to be done, but I don't think we can simply forgo punishing criminality while we wait to reform the system and I don't think we can tear it all down either. Communal justice sounds great until we arrive back at lynchings and blood feuds.

so this is normally not how i format a reply, and it will not be the usual statistical feed
but i thought it would be more productive to do so than my typical point-by-point rebuttal, since a lot of my objections feed into one another
And so, let us begin.

Every time, when the police commit the latest atrocity-let us leave motivation aside for a moment-a multitude of calls goes up. "Body Cameras!" "Better recruitment!" "De-Escalation Techniques!" "More Training!"
These are the same things we hear, time and time again. It does not matter when the incident was, the circumstances, or how widespread the problem is in the department. It is the same things every time. And on the surface, they make sense. A death was caused by improper training, or poor use of force methods, or whatever the soup of explanations of the day was. And yet, the result is always the same: expansion of the punishment bureaucracy. We are told, death after death, beating after beating, raid after raid, that if we just give the police more resources, than surely, they will stop one day stop abusing us. This is, for what I hope is self-explanatory, unsatisfying logic. Violence intervention programs? Mental health supports? Housing initiatives? Can't do that, your police department needed a tank. There is no incentive for the police to act better, because rewards were tied to...bad behaviour.
This makes no sense whatsoever. It's one of many things responsible for the constant ballooning of police budgets since...forever, really. No politician wants to be the one to turn off the tap, that's an electoral backlash they can't risk outside of a highly liberal state. Even the supposed "expansive overhaul" of the "George Floyd Justice in Police Act" gives the police more money. As I think is apparent, I'll take the Act, but I want so much more.

It seems intuitive that "more resources, better training, better officers" would get us better policing.
But will it really? Not so much. If we use Pew data (the one where cops look good), despite an explosion in budgets, the clearance rate has mostly stayed the same for the past 20 years.
But we're not here for me to gripe about how the police are useless, I have a whole effortpost for that. Does it prevent abuse?
Noting that I'm limiting myself to avoiding a data breakdown here...not really.
But let's focus on "better training", since that seems to be the big one here.
Obviously, stuff like Kentucky state police quoting Hitler for their "warrior mentality" training-won't pass the test. But it is illustrative of something important-firstly, that these are deep seated problems. the Kentucky police had been using that since 1990. That's...30 years of people's heads and department culture being filled with what is, for all intents and purposes, terrible propaganda. But it also highlights something else-the lack of oversight. (Kentucky Republicans are already trying to strip power away from the newly created Louisville oversight board, because of course they are.)
There is-across the nation-no oversight. When there is, it is, as is normally the case, it has little power and works very closely with the police themselves. When that is not the case, the police will just outright lie to them.
Only the first part of that-the longevity of the horrible training-is relevant to the "Better Training" hypothesis, so it's what I'll elaborate on here.
The "approvingly quoting Hitler" thing has been in use for 30 years. But the Warrior Mentality predates that. It is thoroughly inculcated into the minds of the overwhelming majority of police departments, explicitly and implicitly. It will not be eradicated anytime soon. For some reason, "wait another few decades, until the next generation of recruits, who got the good training (which is different from all the other times we did this somehow), filters up through the ranks into positions of power, after having been trained by the people who had been getting decades-long doses of brain poison, and maybe they'll be better" is not an inspiring or convincing message. And I think that's for good reason. Most people...are not willing to wait another generation for the possibility that the cops will be slightly less abusive. That's...not tenable as a position, and that's before the cops start watering it down and subverting it.

It's true that I focus less on Duante's killing than I do the system. But the reason there is, I think, straightforward-this did not happen in a vacuum. It is-as you noted-a system. And systems are not changed with a small reform to a singular portion. All that does is shift the burden from one field to another. A lot of people are talking about “criminal justice reform.” Much of that talk is dangerous. The conventional wisdom is that there is an emerging consensus that the criminal legal system is “broken.” But the system is “broken” only to the extent that one believes its purpose is to promote the well-being of all members of our society. If the function of the modern punishment system is to preserve racial and economic hierarchy through brutality, profit, and control, then its bureaucracy is performing well. Duante's killing cannot and should not be separated from the injustices that are built into the system, because to do so would be a vastly dishonest discussion of the events.

What we may wish the system to be is different from what it has been designed to be. Yet do not mistake this for a conspiracy-there was, for the most part, no shadowy group meeting in smoky rooms to figure out "how best can we oppress the underclass." It was rather the result of centuries of unfolding practices, by different entities and different reasons.
I will admit that I think your fears are overblown-partially because they are addressed to the wrong place.
I do not, in fact, want "community policing"
I consider that to be just as dangerous to people as our current law enforcement paradigm.
But there are things that are part of the current criminal injustice system-primarily, the carceral-industrial complex and its aftermath-that cannot be allowed to continue. They are toxic institutions whose time ended decades ago, and even their ostensible function of restricting movement of a "criminal" for a time can be done in other ways that centre the person and lift up their dignity, rather than the dehumanization of concrete cages.
Policing is not broken, it is working as intended. It is for that very reason we must move beyond it-even as we attempt to reform it in the meantime.

[Gravlen]

Also, it's not just the police that needs to be rebuilt. It's the entire criminal justice system.

and one way the people can do that is elect new district attorneys and sheriffs. Plus mayors and city councils have a big impact on the police as do county elections.

Sure - as a first step, maybe. But the whole idea of electing DAs and sheriffs is part of the problem, and should be scrapped at the first opportunity. These positions should be filled based on merit, and there should be no campaigns in order to be elected for such positions. We've seen time and time again that it leads to a race to the bottom where each candidate is trying to be tougher on crime than the other, and that doing the right thing - like releasing people who've been exonerated - is seen as a negative.