0
29

[–] kurfu 0 points 29 points (+29|-0) ago 

“Policing policies must be left to the police management who understand the intricacies and difficulties of complex legal issues and the appropriate use of crime-fighting tactics.”

NO.

Someone needs to watch the watchers.

5
-2

[–] jeegte12 5 points -2 points (+3|-5) ago 

well yes and no. who would make the rules? ignorant bureaucrats?

0
7

[–] Subvert-Thoughts 0 points 7 points (+7|-0) ago 

As a bureaucrat and ignorant person I find that statement triple offensive!

0
3

[–] escapefromredditbay 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

far better then the bloody NYPD.

0
24

[–] Shammyhealz 0 points 24 points (+24|-0) ago 

The fact that anyone is upset over these measures is very suspect. The three the news article mentions are:

Requiring that uniformed cops provide their full name, rank and precinct, as well as the CCRB number, during any traffic stop or property search.

Obviously a good idea. Accountability is important when you're given the legal authority to kill or essentially kidnap (arrest) someone.

A measure that would allow police to use “injurious physical force” only “as is proportionally necessary,” but that does not define how proportionality will be determined.

Hold on, was proportionality not required before? That's always important in civilian cases. It's not phrased that way, but in most states you are only allowed to use lethal force in the face of a force that would reasonably also be called lethal. You cannot shoot someone for throwing sticks at you, but you could shoot someone for trying to stab you. That should always be a requirement in the event that they use lethal force. Let's not forget that they should be trained and armed to use non-lethal force. Pepper spray, tasers and batons are things that police carry that the average citizen would not. Use those unless you fear for your life.

Making the NYPD report the precincts of the 200 cops with the most CCRB complaints filed against them.

Again, I'm surprised this wasn't done before. It's not a good idea to release the names of specific officers, but for statistics purposes it would be a great idea to be able to figure out where most of these violations are occurring. I wish they would release more like the time of the incident, the area of the incident, and age/gender/race of the complainer.

The only ones who oppose this are opposing transparency in their authority, which is concerning to say the least.

0
11

[–] 1Q84 0 points 11 points (+11|-0) ago 

I'm all for stricter, more non-partisan regulation of police, but this headline is from the New York Post and, as it follows, is quite sensationalized.

Nothing in the article suggests anyone is "livid" or "fuming", which I guess should be expected in a NYPost article.

0
5

[–] carlip 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago 

“Policing policies must be left to the police management who understand the intricacies and difficulties of complex legal issues and the appropriate use of crime-fighting tactics.”

Is this the same group that came up with the idea just after the 2 policemen were shot and killed, to stop ticketing for minor violations? Is that what they mean by appropriate crime fighting tactics?

0
5

[–] Quawonk 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago 

Cops are pissed off? Good. That means someone is doing right.

1
2

[–] o_V_o 1 point 2 points (+3|-1) ago  (edited ago)

Unpopular opinion thought experiment

Why didn't anyone complain that Stop & Frisk overwhelmingly targeted men over women regardless of race?


EDIT: For the uninitiated: Because men commit the vast majority of street crime (violent or otherwise). I doubt many people are going to dispute that targeting the group that causes most of the crime is comment sense, not the result of some "institutionalized" bias toward men.

Most of the street crime in NYC is committed by one group...

(2 groups, really, but... we seem to only care about one of those groups, because if you include the other group you might end up accidentally defending an illegal immigrant and that could get tricky...)

0
2

[–] sng-ign 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

NYPD should have just taken the stance Baltimore PD did - do a non-vocal slow down without making it look like a slowdown. Instead of making it obvious by being all loud-mouth Jersey about "We're gonna call in sick - watchoo gonna do 'bout it?" NYPD should have just said, "Sure. We'll go along with the new proposed policies." and spent time going over the rules to rules rape reality.

Baltimore PD at least has Anthony Batts to be their scape-goat while they go on "seek and evade" patrols (just like 'Nam in the late 60s, early 70s!).

0
0

[–] alatewizard ago 

Could you elaborate on what you mean by the Baltimore PD's 'seek and evade' patrols?

0
0

[–] reshp1 ago 

Sounds like we're going in the right direction then.

load more comments ▼ (3 remaining)