I GOT A FUCKING RAISE THE POTATO WORKED WTF
This potato works. Every. Fucking. Time.
Always ❤
how the fuvk do people make friends online bitch im too awkward to make friends on or offline, like, whst do i do
also how do i use tags i have been here since 2016 n have no idea what im doing
im struggling
Am I the only one why though Lin was/is hot🥵
I love angry/strong women
Why We’re Here
Tamir Rice. Micheal Brown. Eric Garner. Breonna Taylor. George Floyd. Each of these people died at the hands of police officers for no good reason. Despite social media coverage and protests following these deaths, police violence in America has not decreased. Nothing has changed.
More than 1,100 people are killed due to police violence each year, making America one of the worst nations for police brutality in the western world. And the risk is 2.5 times more likely for an African-American man to be killed by the police than a white person.
We are seeing a needless amount of casualties- and it’s not just because of a few bad apples. The entire American policing system contributes to the problems that we see today. We need not just to protest, but to push for specific legislative changes. In a series of posts, we hope to inform you about the reformable problems in the police system.
Specifically, we will focus on:
- The problems of fear-based training
- The abuse of power by police unions
- The Law Enforcement Officers’ Bill of Rights
- The dangers of prosecutor relationships
- And the injustice in qualified immunity
First, through an emphasis on fear-based training, officers are primed to see the community that they are supposed to serve as a threat- no wonder they find enemies where there are none.
This is in contrast to other nations, such as the U.K, where most police officers aren’t even armed with guns. They are trained instead in conflict de-escalation to talk down an armed suspect to eliminate the threat, without the need for force. The UK reported 55 fatal shootings between 1990 and 2014, which in over two decades is 20 times less than the amount of deaths in a single year in America, even though their population is only 6 times less than ours.
And because the investigation and trial process is biased towards officers, they are often not even held accountable for any misconduct.
In the past 15 years, only 35 officers were convicted of crimes related to on-duty fatal shootings. Only 3 of those officers were convicted of murder. This means that an officer has less than .02% chance of being convicted of a crime after killing someone.
Why?
We have the problem of the abuse of power of police unions, who have taken their role of protecting employees too far. For example, some make sure officers receive desk-duty or paid leave while being investigated, and even after being charged for a felony. Provisions like these in police union contracts deliberately make it difficult to punish officers, and allow them to get off easy.
Unions are also responsible for the Law Enforcement Officers’ Bill of Rights, a set of rules that make it more difficult to investigate an officer and give them an unfair advantage. For example, officers are entitled to a “cooling off” period of a couple of days before they can be interrogated. During this period, officers have ample time and ability to access the plaintiffs’ testimonies before they even have to give their statement- an opportunity that a member of the general public does not have..
The corruption does not end with the investigation.
Local prosecutors rely on the police to produce witnesses and gather evidence to prosecute criminals, and develop a working relationship. When they are then expected to prosecute these same cops, it creates a conflict of interest. Because of this, prosecutors will often choose not to press charges, or be less harsh on the police officers who they are supposed to be holding accountable.
In April 2015, Norman Cooper, a 33 year-old African American man drove to his brother’s house while having a mental health episode. Concerned for Norman’s health, his brother called 911. He expected officers to be able to talk Norman down, or take him to the hospital. Instead, officers Flaig and Sanchez quickly lost patience with Cooper’s delirium. Within 5 minutes of arriving at the scene, the officers began shouting at Cooper. After 11 minutes, Sanchez began to tase Cooper. Over the next three minutes, Flaig and Sanchez shocked Cooper
“a total of nine times, shooting a 50,000-volt current through his body for nearly a minute total.”
Cooper’s heart stopped beating 4 minutes later, leaving his wife without a husband and his 2 children without a father.
Cooper’s family sued the officers at fault, but Flaig and Sanchez were still given something called “qualified immunity.” This immunity is granted when a grand jury determines that an officer should not have been expected to know that their actions were an abuse of power. For immunity to be rejected, the accused crime must be “clearly established” by a previous case that took place in a similar situation. This allows ‘unique’ cases where charges are dropped even though an officer is clearly at fault.
Flaig and Sanchez are not the only ones-the fact that offenses must be “clearly established” is why
in 2019 more than half of police use of force cases were thrown out,
as the defendants were granted qualified immunity.
This lack of accountability only reinforces the violence used by cops- it increases distrust between the cop and their community and sends the message that they will get away with whatever force is used.
It is not enough to protest for individual officers to be held accountable- we need true reform, and we need your help. Find your local representatives and senators, and use this information to push them to take action. Help end unnecessary police violence one and for all.
Please read and repost
Primed to Kill: The Problems With Fear-Based Training (Part 1)
“Are you prepared to kill somebody? If you cannot answer that question, you should not be carrying a gun.”
In a room full of police officers, this is not a rhetorical question or a matter of philosophy. It is a very real possibility that needs to be considered. And if you cannot reconcile with the answer, you are told to change your career. Meet Dave Grossman, professor of “killology,” or the psychology of killing. And for just $79, you, a budding police officer, can attend one of his courses- if one isn’t provided to you.
Grossman has been hired by local police departments for more than two decades to give cops courses in so-called “Warrior Training.” In his sessions, he teaches cops to perceive every member of their community as a potential enemy, and to always be on guard- as the “first rule” of law enforcement states, “complacency kills.” He tells them not to go out “looking for people to kill,” because the “gangbangers, mass murderers, and terrorists” will come to them. Grossman paints the world as unbelievably dangerous, but this view is in fact what is most dangerous.
While cops do face a very real risk on-duty, the world is not as dangerous as the dystopia painted by Grossman. In actuality, the Department of Justice reported that
in police officers’ 63 million annual encounters with the public, officers were only assaulted in .09% of interactions, most of which did not even cause any physical injuries. Officers were killed in .00008% of civilian interactions.
Grossman is exaggerating the true risk posed to cops, thereby increasing an officers’ distrust of their community, with tragic consequences.
Grossman’s courses are booked 200 days a year, and his clients include the Los Angeles Police Department, the California Highway Patrol, and hundreds of other jurisdictions.
Even if a budding officer does not receive training from Grossman or another “Warrior” trainer, the same “us-versus-them” ideology is promoted in many police academies. It begins on the first day, when officers are shown gripping images of other officers beaten and killed for the slightest hesitation. They are jarred, and left with a strong conviction not to ever let themselves become the victim shown in a future class’ lesson. The solution? Stay on guard. Treat everyone as an enemy until they have proven you wrong.
But there is a fine line between training an officer to keep themselves safe and training them to do so at the expense of innocents. Former police officer Seth Stoughton told NPR that,
on average, police academies give over 120 hours of combat and force training, compared to an average of 8 hours of training in de-escalation and conflict avoidance.
Some departments don’t teach conflict avoidance at all, and this disparity means that whatever training is given is likely to be forgotten in lieu of force training.
When cops are taught to fear the community that they are supposed to serve, unconscious biases are revealed. Although sadly unconscious bias is not unique to police officers, their training amplifies the consequences by causing an officer to react more strongly to the perceived threat of a black man than to that of a white man in otherwise identical situations. In fact, the officer who shot and killed Philando Castile in 2016 took 56 hours of fear-based training prior to Castile’s death, in addition to taking one of Grossman’s courses two years prior. And the restraint used by Derek Chauvin in the killing of George Floyd this past May was taught at Hennepin Technical College until 2016, when it was banned.
Hennepin Technical College trains half of all Minnesota police officers.
The killing of Philando Castile prompted the St. Paul and Minneapolis police departments to put a ban on all fear-based training, but it is not enough.
More counties must ban fear-based training, but they must also re-train their officers according to a program emphasizing de-escalatory training.
In our next post, we will discuss these policies in greater detail.
Please read and repost
Primed to Kill: The Solutions to Fear-Based Training (Part 2)
De-escalatory Training
Research has shown that de-escalatory training can be used to reduce police use of force without an increase in officer fatalities.. In de-escalatory training, emphasis is placed on so-called “tactical withdrawals” instead of “full frontal assault tactics”- a direct, full-force attack. This means that instead of promoting a direct, full-force attack on the “enemy,” officers momentarily back off and regroup when threatened with a weapon; these tactical withdrawals tend to get better results than direct force.
When police departments such as that of Richmond, California focused more on de-escalation, they found officers significantly less likely to use both lethal and “less lethal” force, thereby potentially saving lives.
“The Dallas Police Department, for example, saw an 18 percent drop in use of force the year after it instituted de-escalation training. In addition, since 2010, excessive force complaints there have dropped by 83 percent. Las Vegas, also, has reported a reduction in use of force and officer-involved shootings, which fell by more than half between 2012 and 2016, to just 10.”
Here, instead of impulsively trying to confront someone, officers are trained to take an indirect approach to protect themselves while they make contact with an individual at a safe distance.
While guns and “less lethal” forms of force such as pepper spray and tasers can be useful in certain scenarios, there are multiple non-violent approaches that can be just as effective. By changing an officer’s training, we can shift an officer’s “warrior” mindset to that of a guardian- one that recognizes the importance of preserving the lives of those in their community.
In 2014, Michigan officers began to focus on tactics and communication rather than full frontal attacks. In one case in Kalamazoo, when faced with an aggressive man carrying a knife, these techniques were used. After a 40 min standoff, the ordeal ended with a handshake instead of a funeral.
Unfortunately, 34 states, including New York and Minnesota, do not require any de-escalatory training, and some states where it is required teach as little as one hour of de-escalatory training per year. On average, to maintain a certification, de-escalatory training in states where it is required will be about 5% of mandatory yearly training- most of the program is focused on combat. This is not enough to affect a change in an officer’s mindset.
Procedural Justice
Officers should also be required to undergo training in procedural justice. These programs emphasize the importance of voice, neutrality, respect, and trustworthiness in policing actions. Officers are encouraged to provide opportunities for civilians to state and explain their case before making a decision, apply consistent and rules-based decision-making, treat civilians with dignity and respect their status as community members. Most importantly, they are taught how to specifically demonstrate willingness to act in the interests of the community and with responsiveness to civilians’ concerns.
Officers who undergo training in procedural justice are less likely to use force, and even less likely to make arrests.
Force-Limiting Policies
There are additional policies that can be put into legislation to prevent excessive use of force, and to ensure that officers ultimately use the conflict-avoidant techniques outlined above.
When all 8 of these policies are enacted, they can reduce police violence by 72%.
Contrary to popular belief, officers in police departments that have more restrictive policies in place are actually less likely to be killed in the line of duty, less likely to be assaulted, and have similar likelihood of sustaining an injury during an assault. Policies that need to be enacted (from Campaign Zero) include:
- Requiring officers to de-escalate situations, when possible, before using force.
- Requiring the use of a Force Continuum or Matrix that define/limit the types of force and/or weapons that can be used to respond to specific types of resistance.
- Restricting chokeholds and strangleholds (including carotid restraints) to situations where deadly force is authorized or prohibiting them altogether.
- Requiring officers to give a verbal warning, when possible, before using deadly force.
- Prohibiting officers from shooting at people in moving vehicles unless the person poses a deadly threat by means other than the vehicle (for example, shooting at people from the vehicle).
- Requiring officers to exhaust all other reasonable alternatives before resorting to using deadly force.
- Requiring officers to intervene to stop another officer from using excessive force.
- Requiring comprehensive reporting that includes both uses of force and threats of force (for example, reporting instances where an officer threatens a civilian with a firearm).
We need to push for state-mandated legislation that allows for training de-escalatory and procedural justice training to improve relationships between cops and their community. .Call and email your local and state representatives and ask them to pass legislation requiring at least five hours of yearly conflict avoidance training, or to implement any of the force-limiting policies discussed above. In doing so, we will be saving lives.
Click here to find out the training requirements in your state, and here to find out how to contact your elected officials.
Please read and repost
Please share
