Quote:
Originally Posted by PepsiFree
I agree that it's unacceptable, and I think most would agree with that. But we've had this conversation before, and it's been pointed out that failure will happen. So given that failure will happen and it will be unacceptable, the more important question is how you would make clear that it's unacceptable.
You could remove the risk almost entirely, by disarming most officers of lethal weapons, taking wellness checks off the list of duties the police are primarily responsible for and making it the responsibility of another department, etc. You could minimize the risk by increasing the education requirements of the job (formal education, training, etc) or by making the punishments for crossing whatever line you see out so severe that it would reduce any careless action that contributes to the risk.
But just saying "it should be unacceptable" isn't enough to go on. I agree with that, but you have to have a plan to reflect it. What does "unacceptable" look like to you?
|
I've always been interested in what people think 'wellness' checks are. I think to have an honest discussion of downloading that on another agency, we need to know what exactly that is.
What is your (in a general sense) perception of that?
Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk