DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Cleveland Police short more than 200 officers amid rise in violent crime

A few bad cops make all cops look bad. Just saying. Like any other group or race. Bad apples spoil the bunch.

Cops have this "Blue Wall" thing.. And I know they really gotta have that. But when a cop is obviously bad, the good ones have to step up.

Only a snowflake would say that.

What is white noise?

It contains all frequencies found in the spectrum of sounds you can hear in equal parts. It's often called “broadband noise.” White noise uses a mix of sound frequencies to create a static-like sound. It can be intense and high-pitched, like a fan, air conditioner, or a vacuum.Jul 12, 2022

But being a snowflake is becoming more and more common among people such as yourself.

From what we’ve seen in the past, the good cops step up to protect the bad cops. And the bad cop insurance pays for their legal fees to stay out of jail, and keep their bad cop jobs. Rinse and repeat.

What I think you're missing here is that the initial event itself is the beginning of the story and not the story in and of itself. The events are horrific in and of themselves, but far beyond that is the aftermath of the event. That's why we see so much attention brought to things such as these.

Often times what we have seen are police departments refusing to put out the body cam videos of officers until they are forced to. Then when they do, they often attempt to only show the most favorable footage in support of the officer. Afterwords they refuse to fire the officer. Many times the officer just moves on to another police force. Such actions which were very common place and still are in many areas of the country is what the attention is for. People are tired of watching things like this dismissed, covered up and left unpunished. I'm not sure why people don't get that.

In this case, at least to this point, we've seen the very opposite from the Circleville police. They released the body cam footage right away. They fired the officer in very short order. They have given an example of the right way to handle a situation such as this after we've seen it handled the wrong way so many times before.

Some people may not like the media coverage of such events. But without it we would never see or know how the police, police themselves. And as much as it seems to offend some of you, everyone needs to know that.

NO. CRAP. It was a joke. Didn't think I needed purple for that one. I'll make a mental note.

Sometimes people say things that cause you to never know if they're joking or not. That one certainly qualifies.

Fair enough. That's my bad.

This article seems pretty straight-forward and fair-minded without seeming biased...


Why Nobody Wants To Be A Police Officer In America

1. Police officers are often portrayed as corrupt and racist in the media.

2. The average starting salary for a police officer is $40000 per year, less than what many people make at their first job.

3. There's an increased risk of being shot or killed on duty.

4. Defund the police movement.

5. The hours can be long and unpredictable, making it challenging to find time for family life and home maintenance.

6. Officers have to deal with the public, all day every day. Which means they're always dealing with angry people who think they're not doing enough.


https://www.universitymagazine.ca/why-nobody-wants-to-be-a-police-officer-in-america/

Nah, it's okay. It's hard to know someone's intent with the written word. There's no facial expressions or the inflection of the voice to help you make that determination. It's not uncommon at all for that to happen and I don't really consider it the fault of either side.

I'm not so sure I agree with #1 and #4.

As for #1 I don't think most who enter the police force care about "what the left has to say".

As for #4 I guess if they're buying into the rhetoric that may be true but if one looks at the facts it's false......

Despite 'defunding' claims, police funding has increased in many U.S. cities

Leaders across the country have blamed the rise in crime on the "defund the police" movement. In most places, it never happened.

In Los Angeles, the county sheriff says local residents are in danger because "defunding has consequences," even though his agency's budget is up more than $250 million.

Sheriff Alex Villanueva is not alone in suggesting to voters that crime is up because Democrats defunded police agencies after nationwide protests of the 2020 murder of George Floyd by a Minneapolis police officer.

Politicians, pundits and police leaders across the country are repeating the idea as they address concerns about crime heading toward Election Day.

The truth is, in many communities, defunding never happened.

ABC Owned Television Stations examined the budgets of more than 100 cities and counties and found 83% are spending at least 2% more on police in 2022 than in 2019.

https://abc7ny.com/where-police-dep...mpact-crime-defund-the-budgets/12324846/

I certainly agree with all of the others however. But I will say a lot of those candidates may actually believe the "defund the police" rhetoric because they believe what they hear rather than looking at the facts. So to that degree it may very well have an impact.

This was a timely drop into my podcatcher.
It's an exploration of police/public dynamics.

The lecturer is author Malcolm Gladwell, always good for a novel, unique p.o.v. on everyday subjects.
Informative and educational


I think this lecture could spark some lively discussion, should other Dawgs decide to listen.

Click here/click the teal-colored playa, center of the page.

Good listening,
clem

I've got a busy weekend but I'll definitely check it out Monday.

I think your last statement says it all. People do buy into the rhetoric. Part of the reason your nuts and bolts explanation of "defund" doesn't always pierce the narrative that's being sold.

This, along with a lot of things over the past few years, are the result of a perfect storm. Boomers retiring, COVID accelerating that mass exodus, low moral, not great pay, public scrutiny, the ACAB narrative, etc, etc... they all play a role. And let's be blunt -- it's always a dangerous job and many times pretty much thankless.

Looking forward to Clem's podcast. Y'all have a great weekend.

I hear ya, but that has got to stop.. Not sure that's even possible....

It is often times a thankless job. I certainly don't envy them. As we've seen, as sad as it is, some of the things we have witnessed make public scrutiny needed sometimes. But just like anything else that's often overdone. As a public servant accountability is part of the job but I would hate being held under the public microscope. The risk verses reward factor isn't balanced and risking your life deserves more rewards.

Good stuff, Dawg.

I love a speaker that can cover that much ground without making your head spin. One point to the next in a flowchart-like fashion, always coming back to the framework of the conversation. Really makes you think. This confirms a lot of what I've been preaching for well over a decade now... the way narratives are formed, given more and more 'credence', and perpetuated as some absolute be all/end all to the conversation at hand.

What I never considered was the four categories that police have always fallen into...
Excellence
Absence
Incompetence
Corruptness

Crazy that those were basically all rooted in 'entertainment'. Also crazy that they all had regions (north, south, east and west).

I think he makes a lot of sense with the statement about a bad teacher... When we find one, we general make the rather easy and quick judgment that the teacher needs to be removed and replaced with one that is competent. With a cop, we immediately resort to our preordained categories and scream to defund the police.

"Cultural narratives don't just reflect those groups, they also start to define those groups." The dangerous part of human psychology is how quick we are to embrace these narratives.

At the end of the day, we need to start to repair the relationship between police and public. It may never reach his recital of the phrase "the public are the police and the police are the public" (can't remember to whom that was attributed), but it needs to move back towards the center in the worst way... before it's too late.

Saw this on my twitter feed the other day:




If I knew I'd be faced with the moral quandary of what to do about a group of kids with molotov cocktails, I probably wouldn't sign up to be a cop, either.

Considering how the public school system is sorely underfunded and you basically need to have millionaire parents to attend college or go into debt for life if you qualify for a school loan. What could possibly go wrong? Life is for the rich and the rest can eat cake. The fix is ignored because it costs money. And you know how the rich hate paying their fair share of taxes.

Care to go into more detail about "the fix?" I'm genuinely curious about what you have in mind.

I don't think simply throwing money at the problems is enough. (And I don't think you believe that, either, if you stop to think about it.) I think we need systemic changes at fundamental levels of our educational, economic, and governmental systems.

Sadly, those that have money (and/or are being siphoned/"contributed" money) are the ones "writing the rules." Furthermore, the systems in place are benefitting them.

Unfortunately, as the (political/corporate) elite hoard more assets, they are able to "share" more of their scraps and "appease" the masses. But, it's never more than scraps and never anything that noticeably affects the lifestyle of the elite.

Fair share of taxes sounds great, but the corrupt system would still be "distributing" (more like using the taxes in ways that allegedly help the people, but ultimately always entrench their own power) that money.

We need to figure out how to more equitably distribute wealth before it gets to the government. When even two parent households have both adults working (more than) full-time jobs to barely scrape by financially, parenting is nigh impossible.

Man! What a fantastic synopsis of the situation!

The fixes are funding. Funding the schools by paying teachers more to teach our future generations. Teacher and professor wages should be inline with a doctors wage. And really the same goes for Police, Firefighters and first responders. They all protect and teach our future.

How to fund them ….federal taxes plain and simple. You want to make American great again we better start investing in our future.

And is our richest millionaires and billionaires making millions upon billions and not paying a dime of taxes while moving those funds overseas, is that the corruption you’re talking about? Or are you suggesting federal funds are presently being redirected illegally by a particular state’s government? Nevertheless both are fixable.

I don't think a change in how much we pay someone to teach will have that great of an effect unless we also change what/how we "teach".

For example, I'm not sure that "teaching" students that they should give away their money to someone else to solve their problems is a good idea. Especially when those people receiving the money have repeatedly shown their inability to solve said problems.

We need to somehow change the focus of our educational system from telling kids what to think to rather teaching them ways of thinking and the associated pros and cons or maybe focusing more on encouraging them to simply think about the future they want to have and developing plans (/helping them develop plans) to get them there. As is, we're basically wiring kids' brains (reinforcing patterns) to accept what they're told. Then we're wondering why they accept the "loudest" voices they hear.

The actions of billionaires with their money are a facet of the problem, but I'm more concerned with the system that allows their billions to influence policy, or at the least influence the people that set said policy. I'm also concerned with an economic system that allows them to amass said billions in the first place.

Capitalism is great in theory. But due to economies of scale, it is effectively impossible for individuals to compete with existing entities in a multitude of (practically every) areas. Figuring out how to transition from individual (/"corporate") to employee-owned "infrastructure" might be a start to leveling the playing field. Or perhaps requiring corporations to give employees equity in said corporation and setting caps and minimums on the percentages of that equity.

I think the perception that our education system is somehow programming our children what to think as described below is pretty much just that, a misguided perception.

We can ponder these issues forever or tackle them head on. It all comes down to funding and the only way out is federal taxes. Teachers making less than 100k and being forced to buy their students supply’s and worries about a mass shooter, who wants that job? Just like a cop making a pittance of a salary to be shot at. You said it yourself..no thanks. Where do you suggest the funds will come from? You know, since the police, and public school systems alike are extremely underfunded.

Hmmmmmmm... Let me put it a different way. I believe the current system places too much emphasis on the what, and not enough on the how and why. I'm not a fan of the multiple choice approach to education. It gets people accustomed to the idea that these are your choices and you have to pick one. It stifles creativity and innovation. It may get you to the right answer in a specific context, but it doesn't really do much of anything to help you solve other problems in other contexts. It conditions you to expect to be given the right answer by someone else and then to simply be able to give it back in many instances, particularly in lower levels of education when children's brains are most malleable and are establishing patterns.

I certainly would agree that our current educations system as it stands does not promote enough critical thinking.

...I don't see throwing more money without addressing underlying issues as tackling them head on.

I'd like to see more money staying in communities in the first place, and those communities then being able to invest in there own local systems in both time and money because they can actually afford to.

More levels of bureaucracy and separation rarely lead to better results at a far removed point of interest.

But that in and of itself creates yet another issue we are already seeing. What keeping those funds in the community and basing school spending on "what they can actually afford to" creates a huge discrepancy in educational funding from district to district. To make education for our children fair and give the next generation a great education across the board, you can't have some upper middle class district whose tax base is huge such a huge advantage in funding over poorer neighborhoods with far less revenue to fund their education system.

Well I suppose you can but.....

j/c

Police officer Ricky Anderson charged with murder for shooting Black man in his bed

Ricky Anderson has been charged for the fatal shooting of Donovan Lewis.

Former Columbus, Ohio, police officer Ricky Anderson has been indicted on charges of murder and reckless homicide for the shooting of a Black man last year.

Anderson shot and killed 20-year-old Donovan Lewis in August 2022 during a search warrant while he was unarmed and in bed.

Body camera footage was released of the encounter last September and Anderson, a 30-year veteran of the Columbus Police Department, appears to open fire almost immediately after police open the bedroom door to where Lewis was sleeping. He later died at a hospital.

Anderson retired in bad standing months after the shooting.

"We are relieved that a grand jury concluded what we've known all along: Officer Ricky Anderson broke the law when he shot and killed an unarmed Donovan Lewis as he laid in his bed," the attorneys for Rebecca Duran, Lewis' mother, said in a statement Friday. "CPD bodycam video showed this clearly and nothing has changed in almost a year. Although Mr. Lewis' family is pleased that his killer will soon face a jury of his peers, they are incredibly disappointed that it took so long to come to this conclusion in the first place."

Police officers were executing a warrant on Lewis' home to arrest him on three separate charges: domestic violence, assault and improper handling of a firearm.

Mark Collins, the attorney for Anderson, said in a statement last September, "When we analyze police-involved shootings, we must look to the totality of the circumstances, and we are expressly forbidden from using 20/20 hindsight, because unlike all of us, officers are not afforded the luxury of armchair reflection when they are faced with rapidly evolving, volatile encounters in dangerous situations."

Lewis' mother said she was "grateful" for the indictment but that she is trying to trust the process.

"I'm doing my best to keep it together day by day," Duran said at a press event on Friday with her attorneys and Tariq Stewart, Lewis' brother. "Bottom line is he should still be here and I'm going to be grieving that for the rest of my life."

Rex Elliott, one of her attorneys, said he was also grateful for the charges but criticized what he called an "unreasonable" amount of time to get to them.

"The reality is that there is a different justice system for citizens and there's a different justice system for police officers," Elliott said at the press event. "This never should have taken this long."

"They want people to become numb to what happened, and we are not numb to what happened," he continued, adding that he is "confident" Anderson will be convicted and "held accountable for what he did."

Lewis' family filed a civil suit against Anderson, as well as four other officers involved in the raid, in February.

According to the complaint, Anderson had a total of 58 complaints against him over the years, including use of force complaints, and has also been reprimanded for sexual harassment while on the job.

"As prosecutors pursue Mr. Anderson in the criminal case, we will continue to fight for justice and accountability in our civil case," the lawyers for Duran said Friday. "Our hope is that no other parent has to bury their child as the result of a reckless act by a member of law enforcement."

https://abcnews.go.com/US/police-of...ZuCwxI44OCD_sDIpIK-12lCYvx3D3dbJsRTG9lvM

That's definitely a consideration, and I wouldn't want the locals being the sole source of funding. I just want them more involved and invested in the process or at least able to be. Throwing money at the system wouldn't do that.

I certainly agree with you that money alone isn't the answer. The problem with them being "more involved" otherwise leads to what I think we're seeing now which I don't think is good. I'm all for giving states and local government more power to govern themselves but when it comes to education, it seems in order for every child to get a good education we need to remove the ability of people within the community to dictate policies in education that involve their religious or political views dictate the curriculum. It's getting to the point that depending on where you go to school determines which version of history is being taught. I find that to be at least somewhat disturbing.

So you’re not going to answer my questions. Got it. You’ll never be able to tackle these issues without substantial funding. The problem is nobody is throwing money at teachers or the police as you say. So we don’t know what would happen do we?

You are correct that we don't know. But what I think we can be pretty certain of is that if the education process itself is flawed it will take more than money to fix it. And I certainly do not believe that there is nearly enough attention paid to developing students critical thinking ability. And if in the future we expect future generations to solve problems, that should be a foundational point of our education system.

I'm not disagreeing with you that both teachers and police need higher pay. But in both cases a foundational change in both systems is needed before they can ever be fixed. It's not a one or the other proposition. It's culmination of both.

Well let’s get to it. Lol. Everything is fixable. It’s always a push back to just say “Just throwing money” at this or that doesn't help. Because in many cases it has. Remember the stimulus checks we all got?

If you call putting a band aid on a bullet wound "fixing it". The stimulus checks as a band aid helped, but there were economic consequences from it later. It was needed at the time and I wasn't against them. Many American families needed them badly. But if you don't think the bill came due and that it was one of the reasons that helped lead to an economic downturn later I think you might be mistaken.

Just like the rent abatement program. Now the rent is coming due and many of those who used the program have no way of making up for it. The band aid worked..... for a minute. Now the bullet wound is bleeding so badly they can't stop the flow of blood.

The real problem is the party of no won’t even let us put a band aid on any issue.

Actually it was both the trump and Biden administrations that helped put the band aids I mentioned in place.

I get where you're coming from, but religious and political views are "whats." Obviously, there would have to be some kind of standards, and as I said before, ideally the "curricular" focus would be on hows and whys rather than whats.

It's not that I want parents setting curriculum as that I want them to more easily be able to be engaged with their kids' academic lives. To have the time (to be able to afford the time) to volunteer to help out, that sort of thing.

Which question?

Who wants to be teachers? You couldn't pay me enough to work within the current constraints. The people who would teach if they were paid exorbitantly, if they had to operate within the current system, probably aren't people that I would want teaching my hypothetical kids.

Where do I suggest the funds come from? I suggest that it doesn't matter where they come from if what they're buying with it is wrong.