US police kills twice as many people as reported

[Bill Bumface]

Yeah, I don't think Lanny's post is gross hyperbole or misinformation when referring to US police forces. They round up a bunch of military vets, and train them to treat every interaction as a confrontation, then put them in crime ridden environments where it's a fair assumption that everyone they encounter will be armed.

My understanding of the CPS is that some Americanization of our policing has happened in certain areas, but many of the pillars of it, including recruiting/hiring are VERY different still (thankfully).

[Captain Otto]

Originally Posted by Galakanokis

Not to jump into this whole debate but this is an American cop thread and I think there is a vast difference between Canadian and US police training. Hell, in some counties you can be a sheriff with little to no training. I am sure somebody here knows or has access to the videos but for decades US police forces around the country were literally taught how to kill. There was one guy that did thousands of seminars around the country that was very specific in how to kill people. Grossman I believe? It wasn't just methods but a way of thinking. They were taught to view interactions with certain types of people as life of death on first approach.

I think I read somewhere that there are 1800 police services/forces in the US. That's a crazy number and as you said, likely the reason why there are so many issues down there.

I think you've mischaracterized Grossman's books. I think you need to read them before you can pass judgement because they are far from a handbook teaching cops to kill. While he has faced criticism, his books are well researched and well written.

Sent from my Pixel 6 Pro using Tapatalk

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Bill Bumface

Yeah, I don't think Lanny's post is gross hyperbole or misinformation when referring to US police forces. They round up a bunch of military vets, and train them to treat every interaction as a confrontation, then put them in crime ridden environments where it's a fair assumption that everyone they encounter will be armed.

My understanding of the CPS is that some Americanization of our policing has happened in certain areas, but many of the pillars of it, including recruiting/hiring are VERY different still (thankfully).

This entire discussion started with a New York Times article indicating that Police killings (in the US) were drastically understated.

So that starts with the fact that there are Police killings, which is a problem in and of itself which the past few years has proven.

They just murdered Tyre Nichols at a routine traffic stop. On camera.

Its not like "we don't tell you about 50% of them" is some sort of minor rounding error.

[Captain Otto]

Originally Posted by Locke

This entire discussion started with a New York Times article indicating that Police killings (in the US) were drastically understated.



So that starts with the fact that there are Police killings, which is a problem in and of itself which the past few years has proven.



They just murdered Tyre Nichols at a routine traffic stop. On camera.



Its not like "we don't tell you about 50% of them" is some sort of minor rounding error.

That article is behind a pay wall. Do you have another link?

Edit - disregard, not hard to find.

Sent from my Pixel 6 Pro using Tapatalk

[SebC]

Originally Posted by Zulu29

Thanks Seb I appreciate it. I guess the point I was trying to make is that we are simply an arm of the crown, things get criminalized, things get decriminalized or legalized and we go with the flow. Policing adapts to the laws of the land. Our investigative strategies changed when hard caps were set on the time from arrest to trial in R vs Jordan for example. Case law is constantly changing the way we do business. I’ve never heard of anyone being against the legalization of marihuana, the decriminalization of 2.5 grams of hard drugs is another story. Most officers I work with realize that simply jail is not the way to solve the opioid crisis, homelessness, uptick in violent crime etc, however rehab is. I don’t think it’s going to make a difference to overdoses or violent crime in its current form but that’s just my opinion which doesn’t matter so I follow what the law says.

My point is that your opinion does matter and I think your profession needs to embrace that. Of course you still need to apply what the legislators decide regardless of whether it coincides with your personal beliefs, but you are the experts in your field and should embrace leadership. You would know more than most when a law creates injustice. If the law determines how well you can protect and serve, then you could propose modifications to the law to improve it. When you know that jail isn't the solution, scream it from the rooftops.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Captain Otto

Do you mind sourcing some of this? Specifically:

Okay, a ton to unpack. So please bear with me.

Sourcing it from working in law enforcement for almost 12 years, doing compliance, and internal investigation. The information is consistent with data from CALEA and IACP, AZPOST certification, ALEA standards, and the various academies around the state of Arizona. I had opportunity to participate in academy evals in California, Texas, Louisiana, and at the federal level. This is strictly how it is in the United States. Not referencing Canada in any way. The cops I knew up there were good eggs, but that was a long time ago. But since this is about US cops killing people I think the professional experience is very relevant.

1) (recruit) personalities who have authoritarian tendencies, give them training which relies on violence for problem resolution.

Officers are recruited based on their backgrounds, with preference given to those who have military/paramilitary training and experience. Prospective officers go through psych evals to determine if they are a fit for the stresses of the job. The preference is given to those who fit with the mindset of the "brotherhood." Organizations such as LEXIPOL promote hiring directly from the military for the benefits of the people know how to take a give orders.

Even in the academy the vast majority of training is focused on paramilitary tactics and using violence as a means of control. The typical academy in the United States is 21 weeks or less (ALEA is 585 hours!) and the majority of that is focused on physical preparation for the job. As IACP put it, most academies spend the bulk of their time training students in use of firearms, criminal and constitutional law, patrol procedures and defensive tactics. More time is spent in academy doing grapple and weapons training than how to properly manage an interaction with a distressed individual, and zero time is spent on how to handle an individual with mental illness or diminished capacity.

CALEA is trying to resolve this issue but when you have no consistent requirements codified in a standard, it becomes the wild west. It's why Michigan created a commission on law enforcement and they focused in on developing a training curriculum, a curriculum very short on teaching officers how to relate to people.

2) give them qualified immunity for their actions.

Qualified immunity is all but guaranteed for law enforcement in all but the most egregious of incidents. Clearly outlined by the FBI and respected around the country.

3) If they would hire people who have empathy and understand how to communicate - actually listen and speak to find resolution - rather than relying on their gun or taser to enforce their will.

This is the difference between the professional policing model and the community-oriented policing model. The professional model is very much authoritarian in its approach and relies on paramilitary tactics and training. The community-oriented policing model relies on community involvement and a participative approach. The former looks for type A personalities and the latter looks for type B personalities, both prevalent in psychological screen practices.

It's an acknowledged problem which is why you see articles like this come out after every shooting.

4) The larger percentage of them are obnoxious alpha types who scare the public rather than being approachable and affable to deal with.

Perceptions of the police come from the interactions police have with the public. As NIJ put it, "People tend to focus on how police treat them — the process and interactions — rather than the final outcome of those interactions." Confidence in the police in the United States is at an all time low, according to Gallup and other researchers, especially for minority groups. It is who they are.

5) training them to be use force at the first sign of conflict.

You can't have a police force without "force."

It is part and parcel of the continued militarization of law enforcement. CALEA and LEXIPOL are still firmly in the learn from the military camp.

From everything I have read, most of this is the exact opposite, specifically regarding recruiting and training. I think there has been a substantial shift in both those areas and rightfully so.

Please feel free to post some of your research, because it isn't consistent with reality. If officers training were anything like you are painting we wouldn't see police killing citizens like the plague and departments being sued daily for civil rights violations. Cops are perceived the way they are because of displays of their inherent behaviors. The shift you speak of my be happening in Canada, but in the United States the attitudes toward the police continue to become more and more negative, especially with the on-going acts of violence and oppression against communities.

Maybe it is different in the US and I certainly don't disagree that such a profession could certainly attract a certain personality but I don't think "larger percentage" is justified by ANY research I have seen.

It is very different in the United States. It's why the United States every recruiting poster or app references "veterans preference."

I am interested in "peacekeeper" idea. Can you define that? What does that look like in the real world? At a domestic for example. How does applying criminal law (or any other law/bylaw) work with a peacekeeper?

Peacekeeping or being a peace officer is very much in line with the community-oriented policing model. Some great work is being done here by making the police more approachable and more engrained in the community. SROs are a great example of this practice as are bike and horse patrols. Get the cops out of the battle dress and get them into garb that makes them more approachable.

Contrast the feeling you have in Mexico versus the United States versus Canada when you see cops. Mexican cops have AR-15s strapped to their chests, which makes most people nervous. In the US the battle vest is now the most popular method of carrying duty equipment, but is still very intimidating. A duty belt with limited hardware makes someone much less "scary" and more open to an interaction. Peacekeepers are the latter. It's they only way to win back the hearts and minds of the public who have grown so distrustful of the police "force."

[Lanny_McDonald]

Very timely article in the NYT and related to the murder of Tyre Nichols. I've seen similar behavior in the metro-Phoenix area.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/04/u...2cf20044942d84

"Since its formation in November 2021, the specialized squad of some 40 officers that was deployed to deter violence in some of the city’s most troubled neighborhoods was responsible for repeated acts of intimidation, harassment and violence by some of its officers, according to interviews with dozens of people in the community, including several arrested by the unit’s officers."

"The Scorpion unit was “terrorizing this city,” Ms. Ray said, and Mr. Nichols’s death was “not the first time that they be beating on people — it was the first time that they messed up.""

This is not to say they were not effective.

"To city officials, the arrests and seizures that the Scorpions tallied on a near-daily basis signaled that the unit was achieving its mission in a city that had endured more than 300 homicides in 2021, a record. The city soon began touting the Scorpions’ hundreds of arrests, its seizures of scores of drugs, guns, vehicles and cash — with Memphis police noting on Facebook the unit’s role in high-profile cases, often posting photos of items that officers had confiscated."

The problem here is they act no differently than the thugs they are supposedly protecting the public from. Cops have a tough job, but they must remember they are there to protect and serve, not terrorize their communities by out thugging the criminals they are investigating.

[Bill Bumface]

The solution to gangs isn't new gangs that collect W-2 slips.

[Bill Bumface]

Originally Posted by Locke

This entire discussion started with a New York Times article indicating that Police killings (in the US) were drastically understated.

So that starts with the fact that there are Police killings, which is a problem in and of itself which the past few years has proven.

They just murdered Tyre Nichols at a routine traffic stop. On camera.

Its not like "we don't tell you about 50% of them" is some sort of minor rounding error.

I'm confused by the bolding/your statement. It seems that you agree with me, but the wording comes across as a counterpoint.

[afc wimbledon]

I really cannot imagine a worse place to recruit cops than from ex military

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Bill Bumface

I'm confused by the bolding/your statement. It seems that you agree with me, but the wording comes across as a counterpoint.

I was agreeing with you, I just wanted to expand a little. Sorry for the confusion.

[Bill Bumface]

Originally Posted by Locke

Sorry for the confusion.

Don't be. It's a familiar state for me.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

I really cannot imagine a worse place to recruit cops than from ex military

The US goes for this to an absurd degree. I get why - They're a nation that is funded on the business of war, it's keeps them afloat and on top of the world.

So when hundreds of thousands come home from duty and have nothing to fall back on they just push them into policing because it "makes the most sense" as their next step in life. But I agree, it's a horrendous pool to draw from in terms of creating and maintain trust between citizens and law enforcement.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by jayswin

The US goes for this to an absurd degree. I get why - They're a nation that is funded on the business of war, it's keeps them afloat and on top of the world.

So when hundreds of thousands come home from duty and have nothing to fall back on they just push them into policing because it "makes the most sense" as their next step in life. But I agree, it's a horrendous pool to draw from in terms of creating and maintain trust between citizens and law enforcement.

I've spoken to people about this in the past, and the general consensus seems to be that, despite appearances, the Military and Policing operate at cross purposes.

In the Military you point your assets (be they guns, tanks, missiles or people) at the enemy, you give those assets an objective and a plan and they execute it.

That is not the role of Police officers. Their job is not to terminate conflicts by any means necessary...it tends to require a lot more empathy and nuance.

Nobody else seems to think the 'Us vs. Them' attitude has to come from somewhere? What does that sound like?

Sounds a little...I dunno...Militant?

And like with all things ex-Military, you also get all of the baggage that comes with it.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Captain Otto

I think I read somewhere that there are 1800 police services/forces in the US. That's a crazy number and as you said, likely the reason why there are so many issues down there.

Agreed. The lack of standards is what makes it impossible to compare the two LEO communities. While you firmly believe you are the same because of the brotherhood of the thin blue line, the reality is you have no idea how the system works and how ugly it is. I applaud Canada for maintaining a high standard and properly training their cops on how to perform their duties, especially with the community in mind. Police work in the United States is very adversarial and at times antagonistic. I don't think that has seeped into the Canadian system yet, but as I said earlier, I can't speak to that because I have not had contact with the LEOs up there in a very long time.

I think you've mischaracterized Grossman's books. I think you need to read them before you can pass judgement because they are far from a handbook teaching cops to kill. While he has faced criticism, his books are well researched and well written.

There is a lot of disagreement in this area. Grossman's research has been considered shoddy and biased. Slate did a report on police training and focused on Grossman's tactics and research. Grossman believes in something called killology and has founded a Killology Research Group.

From the Slate article.

"Grossman travels the country offering continuing-education seminars to cops and cop-adjacents. He musters scientific research, anecdotal evidence, and a boatload of presuppositions in order to prepare his students for the realities of combat, while valorizing the notion that the thin blue line is humanity’s last bulwark against total societal collapse."

"When people talk about military-style policing, they are often referring to the militarized gear and weaponry that many police departments prefer these days: the body armor, the semi-automatic rifles, the armored SWAT Humvees equipped to recapture Fallujah. But the gear is just a symptom of these departments’ gradual adoption of the premise that the world is now a theater of war and that battles are most easily won through the liberal use of shock and awe. “You’ve probably heard of the Big Bang Theory,” Grossman says in Unit 2. “I call this the Bigger Bang Theory, which states that, all other things being equal, in combat, whoever makes the bigger bang wins.” Combat has clear military connotations, and Grossman’s frequent use of the term undergirds the course’s martial framing."

"Take it from me, a proud holder of a certificate of completion from Grossman Academy: “On Combat” teaches its students to fear and resent the people they serve, to willfully mistake this contempt for bravery, and to believe that heroism is conferred by the barrel of a smoking gun. This philosophy, as manifested by the countless police officers and officials who subscribe to it, is and will continue to be one of the foremost impediments to meaningful efforts at police reform in towns across America."

You have to be somewhat concerned when the three training modules available on Grossman's website are "The Bullet Proof Mind", On Combat", and "On Killing". Grossman believes in developing and maintaining a warrior mindset, which is counter to what law enforcement (peace officers) should maintain when they hit the streets.

Our agency brought Grossman to do a series of sessions for our officers and it is as described. The warrior mentality is a real thing and the officers who took those training sessions were of a different mindset, more comfortable or willing to engage in the use of force.

From the Peters article, "Many have argued that “warrior cop”–style training seminars teach law enforcement officers to start from a place of fear, which can lead them to quickly turn peaceful situations violent. The officer who shot and killed Philando Castile during a 2016 traffic stop in Falcon Heights, Minnesota, had attended a “Bulletproof Warrior” course co-taught by Grossman and a colleague, Jim Glennon, two years earlier. Over his career, according to the Minneapolis Star Tribune, that officer had clocked more than 100 hours of trainings on topics such as firearms usage, street survival, and the use of force—but had only attended two hours of de-escalation training."

Grossman himself is a closeted Chirstian Nationalist, although that becomes abundantly clear on his "truth" site where he includes content such as "On Spiritual Combat" and "Prayers and Promises for First Responders". He learned his lessons well in the military and has taken that message to the marketplace after his retirement. His message is very much everything that is wrong in law enforcement and why we are where we are. The militarization of law enforcement has brought the tactics and attitudes of war to the streets of America.

[afc wimbledon]

The other problem with hiring ex military, presupposing a military background is good experience for law enforcement is that it doesn't really seem to show any understanding of what being a policemen or a soldier consists of, about the only similarity is they both wear uniforms, other than that nothing about being a soldier, operating with a large group, having a routine day obeying commands in a hierarchical structure that requires you to use ordered known responses to a known predictable situation, has any similarity to being a cop where you spend your day alone or with maybe a partner having to rely on your common sense and social skills to deal with endlessly unpredictable and unknown situations that have no real trainable steps to solve.

That isnt to say ex military couldnt be a good cop but it is no more likely than ex McDonalds staff or any other background

[metallicat]

Here’s another timely article:

https://globalnews.ca/news/9469970/c...-officers/amp/

Maybe stop pointing guns at cops?

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by metallicat

Maybe stop pointing guns at cops?

Always great advice. I think responsible gun ownership is a big contributor to the problems in the US as well, which is still a strange contradiction, because police don't support controls on guns or limitations on the 2nd amendment. Another weird stance the police take.

It's strange but you would think anyone with a gun would know you do NOT point it at anything you do not intend to kill or destroy, but it is common practice for this to happen because so few gun owners have done proper weapons training for the guns they own. I wish there was an education and proficiency requirement for basic gun ownership like there is for a concealed carry permit. Might let potential owners how much responsibility they have in their hands and how bad things can get for just pointing their weapon in someone's direction (assault with a deadly weapon in some jurisdictions). Too restrictive on people's constitutional rights and all.

[afc wimbledon]

I think it's important to point out they took 90 minutes before they shot him, if US cops showed that kind of restraint it would solve almost all their issues

[metallicat]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

I think it's important to point out they took 90 minutes before they shot him, if US cops showed that kind of restraint it would solve almost all their issues

I got the sense that the shooting happened upon initial contact, and then the standoff with the barricaded man lasted a further 90 minutes. But yes, I think the tactics police in Canada use are far better than those of their American counterparts.