The WOKE Thread (Merged from WTF?)

[HeloDude]

24 minutes ago, Homestar said:

Assuming he's white, he likely won't.

Since you seem to be smart on the subject, what percentage of non-white Americans find themselves on “the wrong side of a baton”?  

[FLEA]

2 hours ago, Homestar said:

Assuming he's white, he likely won't.

In every one of these cases de-escalation techniques might have prevented the need for force altogether, which I think we all agree is the desired goal.

Curious what sort of de-escalation techniques you're speaking of. Since your an expert can you discuss them a bit?

[Boomer6]

On 2/19/2021 at 12:24 AM, pawnman said:

You really think there's the same level of accountability?  That the whole "thin blue line" thing is just a liberal conspiracy theory to make police look bad?  That the incredibly low conviction rate of officers caught ON CAMERA using force on unarmed people is because all cops are doing a really great job?

And you think I'VE swallowed the propaganda. 

Who isn’t holding them accountable, their fellow police officers or the jury that acquitted them? Or are you implying the jury is made up of only cops? Or is there a conspiracy between the cops and the judge?

Edited March 3, 2021 by Boomer6
sp*

[pawnman]

30 minutes ago, Boomer6 said:

Who isn’t holding them accountable, their fellow police officers or the jury that acquitted them? Or are you implying the jury is made up of only cops? Or is their a conspiracy between the cops and the judge?

It's not even a conspiracy.  It's that judges and prosecutors are often elected positions, and the police union reminds them that union support will be key to re-election.

One thing that might improve this is if we moved to a circuit court model whenever a police officer is tried for a crime.  Remove the local prosecutors and judges that work hand-in-hand with the police in that area on a daily basis from the equation.

[Guardian]

Is that an assumption that every system that could try them is corrupt?

[pawnman]

22 minutes ago, Guardian said:

Is that an assumption that every system that could try them is corrupt?

Not at all.  That's why I think it should be a circuit deal. Remove the people with a stake in the outcome from the proceedings, bring in truly neutral parties for these cases.

[Grabby]

44 minutes ago, pawnman said:

It's not even a conspiracy.  It's that judges and prosecutors are often elected positions, and the police union reminds them that union support will be key to re-election.

One thing that might improve this is if we moved to a circuit court model whenever a police officer is tried for a crime.  Remove the local prosecutors and judges that work hand-in-hand with the police in that area on a daily basis from the equation.

Everything you are posting regarding cops is anecdotal.  Do you realize that?

 

[Homestar]

3 hours ago, HeloDude said:

Since you seem to be smart on the subject, what percentage of non-white Americans find themselves on “the wrong side of a baton”?  

Oh, I'm sorry....I was under the impression that this was the internet and not a masters class on race relations.

[Homestar]

2 hours ago, FLEA said:

Curious what sort of de-escalation techniques you're speaking of. Since your an expert can you discuss them a bit?

I'm not an expert in police de-escalation techniques because I don't work in the industry. What are your qualifications for discussing the topic?

[pawnman]

28 minutes ago, Grabby said:

Everything you are posting regarding cops is anecdotal.  Do you realize that?

 

Consistent with the reporting. 

Do you think policing is going well?  No room for improvement? 

[Lawman]

Consistent with the reporting. 
Do you think policing is going well?  No room for improvement? 

Do you think there is currently an epidemic or Racist extremism or to borrow from 10 years ago predatory sexual conduct that is a systemic part of the military? Do you think they are either consciously or subconsciously baked into our population. Now of course both those ideas are pretty absurd (and currently being peddled to the mob), but those of us that have experience in the military know better. What we see is a narrative on those topics created through cherry picking of details and a steady diet of shock and outrage media pumped into a society full of echo chamber social media circles.

Similarly the idea that police face no action for misconduct and that police unions are somehow more powerful than city legislatures and mayors is being peddled. Sorry dude, I watched cops get fired for misconduct. I know guys who never made it past the state certificate from the academy because no department would hire them (one in particular was the son of a Lt in that department).

Is there room for improvement? Sure as with any field where the median salary is in the sub 50k range, same as it is for teachers or nurses or any other field. But anybody who has spent a week in the military should know damn well empty promises to study the problem and “mandatory training” will lead to nothing but hours expended on PowerPoint briefings so leadership can tell it’s constituency “we did something.” Unless you and a whole lot of others are prepared for a full reinvestment of serious capital and time vetting, equipping, and training a Law Enforcement enterprise demands for change are nothing more than shouting to feel better about a tree in a forest of greater societal issues.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[HeloDude]

58 minutes ago, Homestar said:

Oh, I'm sorry....I was under the impression that this was the internet and not a masters class on race relations.

So you’re able to comment on the likelihood of one race being on “the wrong side of a baton”, but not others?  Why is that?

[Homestar]

39 minutes ago, HeloDude said:

So you’re able to comment on the likelihood of one race being on “the wrong side of a baton”, but not others?  Why is that?

huh?

 

Edit: Ok, I think I understand what you're asking now.....

I pretty much just Googled "Police violence by race" and read the first 4 hits/studies that popped up.

I guess I'd like to know why you think I was wrong in stating that if the previous poster was white he was not likely to be the victim of police violence?  Admittedly it was a "pop off" remark on my part.  I didn't mean for it to be inflammatory.

Edited February 19, 2021 by Homestar

[busdriver]

12 hours ago, Buddy Spike said:

This is a bit of a fallacy.  There are even fewer aviation crashes per year as a percentage of flight hours, should we therefore not have boldface and emergency procedures because the risk is small?  Of course not. Every officer should approach every interaction as if it could become a lethal encounter, because it absolutely can. Complacency kills.

It's easy to throw stones from the cheap seats, but unless you've done it, you're not really speaking from a knowledgeable position. 

 

I don't think I can make my first point in a way that you wouldn't see him as anything by a law-breaker.  So we'll have to agree to disagree.

I don't really disagree with your points about training and people in general. My point is the overstated risk without a confidence boosting level of training to deal with the risk just leaves fear and an inability to think.  It's like that IP that tells you about all the shit that can kill you but doesn't give you any tools to avoid those things.

My brother is a cop, I get the sport smashing of police in general is demoralizing.  I'm also well aware of how little time there is to process things, and quite frankly how crappy training shrinks that.

The idea that criticism can only be levied from a former or current officer to another is nothing be a recipe for authoritarianism.

So I'll pass on the ride along, I'm already well aware of how to hide to get caught up on paperwork.  It's basically what I do now.  

[HeloDude]

27 minutes ago, Homestar said:

huh?

 

Edit: Ok, I think I understand what you're asking now.....

I pretty much just Googled "Police violence by race" and read the first 4 hits/studies that popped up.

I guess I'd like to know why you think I was wrong in stating that if the previous poster was white he was not likely to be the victim of police violence?  Admittedly it was a "pop off" remark on my part.  I didn't mean for it to be inflammatory.

You made a comment that if someone is white, it’s not likely that they’ll be at the wrong side of a baton...so I would like to know what the likelihood is of someone who is non-white being at the wrong end of a baton?  Are you suggesting that the majority of non-white Americans have been engaged with any sort of physical force from law enforcement? 

[pawnman]

1 hour ago, Lawman said:

Do you think there is currently an epidemic or Racist extremism or to borrow from 10 years ago predatory sexual conduct that is a systemic part of the military? Do you think they are either consciously or subconsciously baked into our population. Now of course both those ideas are pretty absurd (and currently being peddled to the mob), but those of us that have experience in the military know better. What we see is a narrative on those topics created through cherry picking of details and a steady diet of shock and outrage media pumped into a society full of echo chamber social media circles.

Similarly the idea that police face no action for misconduct and that police unions are somehow more powerful than city legislatures and mayors is being peddled. Sorry dude, I watched cops get fired for misconduct. I know guys who never made it past the state certificate from the academy because no department would hire them (one in particular was the son of a Lt in that department).

Is there room for improvement? Sure as with any field where the median salary is in the sub 50k range, same as it is for teachers or nurses or any other field. But anybody who has spent a week in the military should know damn well empty promises to study the problem and “mandatory training” will lead to nothing but hours expended on PowerPoint briefings so leadership can tell it’s constituency “we did something.” Unless you and a whole lot of others are prepared for a full reinvestment of serious capital and time vetting, equipping, and training a Law Enforcement enterprise demands for change are nothing more than shouting to feel better about a tree in a forest of greater societal issues.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't think police are racist. I think they're assholes. They are just as happy pepper spraying whites, blacks, Jews, Asians, or Native Americans.  It's about unchecked power, not racism.

[Homestar]

15 minutes ago, HeloDude said:

You made a comment that if someone is white, it’s not likely that they’ll be at the wrong side of a baton...so I would like to know what the likelihood is of someone who is non-white being at the wrong end of a baton?  Are you suggesting that the majority of non-white Americans have been engaged with any sort of physical force from law enforcement? 

I'm simply suggesting that the evidence shows that blacks are disproportionatly more likely to die from a police encounter than whites.

NIH study here:  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6080222/

PNAS study here: https://www.pnas.org/content/116/34/16793

[Homestar]

11 minutes ago, pawnman said:

I don't think police are racist. I think they're assholes. They are just as happy pepper spraying whites, blacks, Jews, Asians, or Native Americans.  It's about unchecked power, not racism.

This seems like a pretty unfair, broad stroke of police.

I don't believe most police are racist (or assholes)  But there are ways that police forces can better train their officers to prevent unnecessary death.

Saying that de-escalation training is pointless is like telling aircrew that CRM training is worthless.

Edited February 19, 2021 by Homestar

[HeloDude]

5 minutes ago, Homestar said:

I'm simply suggesting that the evidence shows that blacks are disproportionatly more likely to die from a police encounter than whites.

NIH study here:  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6080222/

PNAS study here: https://www.pnas.org/content/116/34/16793

A simple question:  Is a non-white American more likely to be engaged with physical force with law enforcement vs a non-white American who has not been engaged with physical force with law enforcement? 

[Homestar]

6 minutes ago, HeloDude said:

A simple question:  Is a non-white American more likely to be engaged with physical force with law enforcement vs a non-white American who has not been engaged with physical force with law enforcement? 

I don't know, man. What's your point?

[Lawman]

I'm simply suggesting that the evidence shows that blacks are disproportionatly more likely to die from a police encounter than whites.
NIH study here:  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6080222/
PNAS study here: https://www.pnas.org/content/116/34/16793

Are you willing to evaluate those from the wider optic of the number of times and conditions creating/resulting in the encounters? Police encounters isn’t the leading cause of black men under 40, its Homicide in general. So are police simply so out to kill that it’s causing a massive skew in numbers do they possibly exist by disproportionate representation in an environmental condition more likely to have a negative outcomes associated with all encounters, not just the ones with law enforcement.

This is one of those arguments that quickly gets the race card played against it because encounters above certain points in the socio economic strata have a disproportionately “positive” outcome. Meanwhile below a particular point which is where the demographic population swaps you end up with a combination of higher number of violent/exigent circumstances creating the encounter as well as less tangible impact points like the fact that an officer who patrols in that environment carries more behavioral stressors than the guy patrolling in another area. Population densities in particular urban vs rural environment also means the areas of denser population involve more encounters per patrol hours from say rural areas... again skewing numbers towards minorities.


BCJS has done some pretty exhaustive peer studies into this math, and while there is a disparity, it is not supportive of the idea there is some baked in “with whites you gotta try and de-escalate, but you can just shoot the black guys,” crap being peddled by the ACAB crowd.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[HeloDude]

9 minutes ago, Homestar said:

I don't know, man. What's your point?

Well, not too long ago (see below) you were able to make a comment on the likelihood of race and physical encounter with me enforcement...and now you don’t seem to be able to do so when I ask you in my post above.

6 hours ago, Homestar said:

Assuming he's white, he likely won't.

In every one of these cases de-escalation techniques might have prevented the need for force altogether, which I think we all agree is the desired goal.

[Lawman]

Well, not too long ago (see below) you were able to make a comment on the likelihood of race and physical encounter with me enforcement...and now you don’t seem to be able to do so when I ask you in my post above.
6 hours ago, Homestar said: Assuming he's white, he likely won't.
In every one of these cases de-escalation techniques might have prevented the need for force altogether, which I think we all agree is the desired goal.

How many hours of training are you willing to fund as a taxpayer? What qualitative impact in fatalities do we need to see to call it a good ROI? These are the two immediate questions that come to mind with people screaming we have to do something about the “epidemic of improper police violence” as som have called it.

You know what would actually translate better than most to immediately alleviating fear and stressors going into an encounter which will likely result to an officer employing greater force to include deadly force? Mandatory 2 officer patrol units, and more hours spent doing hand to hand combative/retention/ground drills. Both those are dead concepts the second you suggest them because while they do have an impact, they cost way more than anybody is willing to pay for a solution.

Again, this is stuff that requires more and wider funding/Manning to achieve actual downstream results (more arrests/less fatal encounters), but that’s not what the mob is shouting for now is it.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[HeloDude]

9 minutes ago, Lawman said:

How many hours of training are you willing to fund as a taxpayer? What qualitative impact in fatalities do we need to see to call it a good ROI? These are the two immediate questions that come to mind with people screaming we have to do something about the “epidemic of improper police violence” as som have called it.

You know what would actually translate better than most to immediately alleviating fear and stressors going into an encounter which will likely result to an officer employing greater force to include deadly force? Mandatory 2 officer patrol units, and more hours spent doing hand to hand combative/retention/ground drills. Both those are dead concepts the second you suggest them because while they do have an impact, they cost way more than anybody is willing to pay for a solution.

Again, this is stuff that requires more and wider funding/Manning to achieve actual downstream results (more arrests/less fatal encounters), but that’s not what the mob is shouting for now is it.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Are you asking me these questions or Homestar?

[Homestar]

27 minutes ago, Lawman said:

Are you willing to evaluate those from the wider optic of the number of times and conditions creating/resulting in the encounters? Police encounters isn’t the leading cause of black men under 40, its Homicide in general.

Sure, if I were writing a masters thesis on the topic.