Showing posts with label garner. Show all posts
Showing posts with label garner. Show all posts

Thursday, December 25, 2014

The psychology of police bias and violence

These were some interesting stories about detrimental police psychology and practices.

Phillip Goff from UCLA studied a sampling of police deadly force incidents (not sure the date range and selection criteria), and over 80% of those incidents involved the shooting victim making direct "threats to the officer's masculinity." So it wasn't just a disrespect for his authority ("F you, pig!"), but a challenge to his manhood. In the case of Ferguson, it was alleged that Brown told Wilson, "You're too much of a [pansy/fag/etc.] to shoot me." If true, obviously that was a bad move on Brown's part, but also reveals the dangerous attitude that some officers feel the need to demonstrate their toughness/masculinity/etc. to the public (like Marty McFly when he's called "chicken"). This is not Tombstone where gunfighters call each other out to defend their names and settle scores in the street. The bigger man is sometime the one who doesn't respond, and cooler heads need to prevail (not to mention cops are legally bound by certain restraints, though it's very hard to prosecute excessive force). Cadets and officers who display this inferiority complex, insecurity, and prideful behavior should never be permitted to have a badge and gun.

This part is a little fluffy - but this behavior could reflect the stereotypical white-black male tensions of more racist eras: white men may feel especially threatened by black strength, black genitalia, black revenge for slavery, black men taking their white women away, etc. Again, this is not evidence-based and mostly the domain of racial humor, but I think these fearful undercurrents may still be alive in the American psyche. How much of an effect they have on police actions is unclear.

Also, incidents of police-on-police violence were also studied. In cases where an on-duty officer shoots an off-duty plain-clothed officer, the victims are overwhelmingly black/brown and the shooters are overwhelmingly white. Sorry that is so vague; Reuters got the data from a police internal study, but did not provide the #s. So it's not just a cops vs. civilians thing - cops are killing each other and it seems that race is a major factor associated with the decision to shoot. Much more numerous than shootings are of course the racial profiling for routing traffic stops, stop-and-frisk, harassment, etc. Again, this is much more of a problem for plain-clothed minority officers than white officers. And these incidents may lead to tempers flaring and a violent incident.

Tuesday, December 23, 2014

The Horne case with Buffalo PD

Sorry to keep harping on this, but there's a lot of material out there. I guess this was going on all the time, but it's only reaching our eyeballs now due to the media attention and high-profile cases.

https://news.vice.com/article/buffalo-cop-loses-job-and-pension-after-she-intervenes-with-fellow-officer-choking-a-suspect?utm_source=vicenewsfb
I think this episode summarizes what is wrong with police accountability (or lack thereof). According to this Vice report, Cariol Horne, a female black officer with the Buffalo PD (19 years tenure) saw another white male officer striking and choking a suspect who was already in handcuffs. She told him to stop, and may have put her hands on the other officer. The other officer punched her in the face in the presence of 9 other officers. Sounds open and shut, right? She was charged with obstructing an arrest, was fired, and got her pension annulled. Meanwhile, the alleged abusive officer was unpunished.
He later was implicated in 2 violent incidents with other officers (which led to his "forced retirement"), and was recently indicted for past civil rights violations relation to treatment of black youths. Horne is still trying to recover her pension.
So let me get this straight, a violence-prone racist cop gets no discipline and full pension from his department, but the "whistleblower" cop who tried to look out for the rights of a suspect gets fired with no pension? Cops and crooks both seem to espouse the philosophy that "snitches get stitches." Some PDs seem more interested to root out disloyalty/threats rather than actual misconduct. It's a cop's "duty" to look out for each other and cover up crimes if necessary. If they don't, and if they dare go against the blue line, then their career is finished. For the benefit of doubt, there could be more to this story. But still, Horne must not have been that bad if she was on the job for 19 years. As a black female cop, she had a much smaller margin for error on the job. So I don't think this is a case of her just crying wolf.
Obviously, this is not how a public agency (or any org) should function.

Saturday, December 20, 2014

2 NYPD officers "executed" by black man, possibly for revenge

This is terrible news: 2 NYPD officers "executed" by black man (motive possibly revenge for Brown, Garner, etc.).

http://news.yahoo.com/two-nypd-officers-shot-in-patrol-car-in-brooklyn-212637751.html

It won't help the "Black lives matter" movement (may turn off the centrist public to their plight), and will probably make the cops even more angry, fearful, and aggressive. The alleged killer (a younger black man) seemed to be a desperate, distressed person who was wanted in connection with another shooting. What he did was abominable. For all we know, those 2 officers were excellent public servants, and totally nonviolent and nonracist (one Asian, one Latino, both with wives and one with kids).

Sadly, it reminds me of the even more terrible recent Pakistan school massacre. Let me repeat - both attacks were totally unjustifiable and barbaric. But for background, the Pakistani Army had been heavy-handedly raiding and bombing Taliban-held villages as part of a crack-down. Women and children were killed without hesitation. The Taliban fighters were obviously upset and wanted to strike back at a soft target, to make the Army "hurt like they were hurt". When a powerful force shows contempt for you and treats you like a subhuman, and you have no channels for peaceful redress and no one seems to care about your pain, there's only so much a human can take. Eventually some unstable members of that community (with training and weapons) will lash out and strike back to try to get even, because they have nothing to lose. Would they rather just die a slow death and fade away in silence? Or would they rather get some satisfaction that they struck fear and suffering in the hearts of their enemy? Oppression breeds desperation, which could be a catalyst for atrocity.

So for urban black America, day in and day out many deal with prejudice, mistreatment, and in some cases violence (murder rate for US blacks is over 4X that of whites). Obama even said that every successful black professional like him has been mistaken for the help at a fancy event. I can't imagine what it feels like to be constantly surrounded by that negativity, disrespect, and hostility - even though you just want to live and let live, and didn't cross anyone. It's just because you exist. Maybe the media inflamed the racially-sensitive situation, but with unpunished killing and beating after unpunished killing and beating, everyone has a breaking point. To be honest, I'm in awe of the restraint that black America has shown this year. But there are just so many guns in America, and so many temporarily or clinically unstable people going through hard times, and so many soft targets, that an incident was bound to happen unless the gov't and law enforcement made a serious effort to empathize, be contrite, communicate honestly, and reform (which they didn't).

This is the first time a NYPD cop has been killed on duty since 2011, which is pretty amazing considering they have a staff of 49K (not sure how many of those are beat cops). I think the # of civilian killings the NYPD has committed over that time span is far greater (at least 19). There will be national coverage, life insurance payouts, and full dress funerals for the slain officers. Far less respect was given to the victims of NYPD violence. It's obviously wrong to kill cops, but America mourns deaths differently and values life differently, which is also wrong. It's wrong to keep your boot on the throats of people and expect them to just take it forever, like dogs. It's a tragedy for all sides. Look, being a cop can be a damn hard job. Being black in America can be a damn hard life too. I wish both sides could understand that and show compassion, to make things easier on each other instead of more and more negativity. Otherwise the cycle of revenge and distrust will just go on forever, with more innocents suffering along the way. Sadly, it's the same for most protracted conflicts like Israel-Palestine, India-Pakistan, etc. But if the Northern Ireland factions could forgive and achieve peace, it's possible elsewhere. But it has to start with the two sides giving a shit about each other's plight. 

---

This is a pretty sobering and effective analysis by The Economist on America's violent law enforcement practices. Actually the NYPD, LAPD, and police from larger cities are not the biggest problem (misconduct per capita is lower). They have made huge reforms since Rodney King, although they still have a way to go (Stop and Frisk, though it was recently suspended). It's the small police forces like Ferguson and Albuquerque that are the problem, where the officers are often far less diverse, less competent, having worse leadership, and under far less public/media scrutiny.

http://www.economist.com/news/united-states/21636044-americas-police-kill-too-many-people-some-forces-are-showing-how-smarter-less?fsrc=scn/fb/ed/pe/DontShoot

# of killings by cops last year in Japan, Germany, and the UK combined (pop. ~270MM): 8
# in the US (pop. ~316MM): 458

---



Some major sources, like police unions and former NY governor Pataki, are literally blaming Mayor DeBlasio and Al Sharpton for Brinsley's attack on the 2 officers ("Blood is on your hands" - pretty disrespectful stuff). Probably the NYPD have marked DeBlasio as an enemy, and will do what they can to unseat him. While I haven't been following every single statement DeBlasio and Sharpton have made on police violence, I am fairly sure that they did not say anything remotely resembling race-baiting and a call for revenge. And in all of Brinsley's social media posts, I don't believe he mentioned that his actions were motivated by a public figure. But I suppose if you don't declare that you support everything the cops do 100%, and they are always in the right, then you are "anti-cop". That is how Tel Aviv and AIPAC respond to any sort of criticism of Israeli actions and policies (no matter how reasonable and fact-driven). If you're not fully supportive, then you're a vile anti-Semite. There's no place for that rubbish in intelligent conversation.

I suppose that some people want a simple, clear explanation for traumatic events that disturb them. Muslims hate us for our freedom, Marilyn Manson caused Columbine, etc. But that approach is often too reductive, inaccurate, and unhelpful. People are understandably upset and what to focus their anger on someone. But to irresponsibly blame public figures, whose only sins were to show some compassion for the families of police violence and dare to suggest a review of police policies, is not that different from Brinsley lashing out at 2 random beat cops over the Garner and Brown cases. And heaven forbid, but what if an angry, disturbed ex-cop decides to take a shot at DeBlasio or Sharpton over this uproar? Would we be justified to blame the people who called out DeBlasio and Sharpton for inciting violence against them?

Tuesday, December 9, 2014

What some ex-cops think about police violence

Some perspectives on this issue from ex-cops.

A black man from StLPD who basically felt that most of his peers were racist and quick to violence:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2014/12/06/i-was-a-st-louis-cop-my-peers-were-racist-and-violent-and-theres-only-one-fix/

His thesis is basically that training won't fix things; there is already a ton of training that officers don't take seriously - because they know there are above punishment (leave with pay is the worst it gets). There has to be independent oversight and real accountability. DAs won't really represent the best interests of the public to investigate and punish police misconduct, as we've seen from the Eric Garner grand jury. Same how the military won't really look into sexual assault within its ranks (so the Senate is trying to pass a law and create an independent investigation office).

A South Asian man from LAPD (who also has a PhD) on why it's the public's job to prevent police use of force:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2014/08/19/im-a-cop-if-you-dont-want-to-get-hurt-dont-challenge-me/

Heck, the title of his op-ed is "I'm a cop. If you don't want to get hurt, don't challenge me." That demonstrates the power trip, confrontational attitude pervasive in their ranks. I agree with a lot of what he was saying, but not his expectations for the public. Yes, it's true that people will be safer if they just do everything that the cop tells them to do. But what does that make us, slaves? Cops are not our overlords. And what if the cop asks us to take our clothes off, or steals our property (which has happened before in the US)? If we value our lives, we just let it happen and then seek redress later? Well that might work in theory, but the people most likely to be abused by the cops can't afford legal representation and likely don't have the ability to go through these protracted channels of justice (with no guarantee of success at the end). And frankly, "just do everything he says or you'll get hurt" sounds like terrorism to me. We have to be submissive and not provoke a guy with his finger literally on the trigger. And of course the author expects the communities that have the worst history of prejudice and injustice against them to behave like Gandhis through humiliation and aggression, right?
Yes, it's true that cops have to deal with a lot of hate, threats, and other crap too. It's not right, but they knew that coming into the job. If they have thin skins and short tempers, maybe they should have joined a monastery? And statistically these days, being a cop has less chance of death on the job than the average American worker (as we discussed in a previous email). So why are they freaking out? If the anxiety over bodily harm (from minorities) is making them unable to do their jobs and fulfill their obligations to society, then they should be deemed unfit for duty. I wonder if this is like the military - the job sucks so much that they need to relax hiring standards to fill the slots. Is it hard to become a cop? Well it should be a lot harder, obviously. Clearly we need more psych and behavioral exams. And maybe police need higher pay also to attract better candidates.

But all the shootings and beatings can't be just the public's fault.

----

I'm pretty tired of these police unions demanding apologies after pro athletes have made pregame statements about the wave of high profile police killing incidents. If you have such thin skins, don't become cops.

Do you want everyone to love you all the time? Then maybe treat people with respect. And what about all the victims of police misconduct? Apologize to and compensate them first, and then I am sure these athletes will say sorry a hundred times if you like. What's worse: hospitalizations and funerals, or getting your fragile feelings hurt over a t-shirt? These people have no clue, and yet we've given them guns, pensions, and the full power of the justice system behind them.

http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2014/12/15/7397201/andrew-hawkins-browns-statement-shirt-police-demand-apology
http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-shutdown-corner/rams-exec-denies-apology-to-police-chief-over--hands-up--gesture-044001777.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/10/sports/basketball/i-cant-breathe-tshirts-in-the-nba-how-jayz-lebron-james-and-others-made-them-happen.html

Wednesday, December 3, 2014

No indictment for Eric Garner's killer either

Unfortunately the NYC grand jury will not indict the white officer (and his accomplices) who choked the unarmed, nonthreatening Eric Garner to death. And they have video! "I can't breathe, I can't breathe!" What was his crime - being big and black and male and upset in NYC? Did he "deserve" it too, like Brown? Did the officer have no choice?

The officer probably didn't have intent to kill, but he was using a prohibited tactic (chokehold) and I have trouble believing that this was all by the book. No manslaughter, no negligence, nothing? Would the ruling be the same if the deceased was famous? And they wonder why people are upset - totally tone deaf and living in their bubble.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/04/nyregion/grand-jury-said-to-bring-no-charges-in-staten-island-chokehold-death-of-eric-garner.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j1ka4oKu1jo

---

Why Commonwealth nations have done away with grand juries - they are ineffective for justice and too easily manipulated by the prosecutor

http://www.pri.org/stories/2014-12-04/england-abolished-grand-juries-decades-ago-because-they-didnt-work
The NY grand jury may have failed to indict the chokehold cop (because he got to defend himself for 2 hours in court and professed that it was an accident), but they have indicted the man who filmed the incident (on an unrelated weapons charge), plus his wife. Coincidence or petty cop retribution?

http://ringoffireradio.com/2014/12/grand-jury-indicted-the-man-who-filmed-eric-garners-killing/
The fascinating psychology behind bias, how it sometimes still gets the better of people who are actively trying to not be biased. This is good material for another thread, so let me know if you'd like to discuss.

http://billmoyers.com/2014/12/02/science-cops-shoot-young-black-men/

Saturday, August 16, 2014

Vets react to Ferguson police

This story is so idiotic and some of us discussed it already on FB, so I will try to be brief. I just thank heavens that the Ferguson cops didn't gravely injure and kill a lot of people in their frenzy. Apart from the actual shooting incident (details of which are still indeterminate), the police's "peacekeeping effort"s have been so off the deep end - almost rivaling Kent State territory, or the Occupied Territories.

This is similar to the gun issue, I think. some Americans may believe that tech/weapons/stuff can suffice as solutions to threats and problems (obviously the arms industry wants us to believe that). Maybe it's true that overwhelming force helps when you are trying to wipe out an enemy batallion or seize territory. But obviously the iron fist approach breaks down in occupations/insurgencies (too many examples to list), and should never be the goal of a police operation. Because unlike an army that can withdraw and go home after a victory (and the aftermath of their violence is not really a top concern), the next day the cops have to still live with the people they scared/harassed/hurt - and likely for many more days afterward. That's why managing relationships and de-escalating conflicts are better than "crushing your enemy", and no advanced weapons system can do that better than an intelligent, compassionate, well-trained peace officer (even if they're unarmed, like the UK and Norwegian cops). What happened to having a conversation, especially when many of the protesters were nonviolent and within their Constitutional rights?

As the vets who tweeted in that article said, a show of force can be counter-productive if the objective is to manage an angry population. Clearly the gear by itself is not enough to maintain order long-term, but such weaponry in the hands of undisciplined, untrained, and probably prejudiced/beligerent morons is even worse. "Petty force" by petty bullies, as David Brooks said recently. All that gear makes them feel like Rambo, and Rambo doesn't take no shit from no one (the whole SYG convo we had). If our occupying soldiers (with less gear and employing less heavy-handed tactics) could often coexist with Iraqis and Afghans, who were bigger threats and hated them more than black people may (justifiably) hate US cops, then what are police forces like Ferguson trying to achieve?

I thought the crackdowns on the WTO and OWS protesters were bad, but they look like Boy Scouts in comparison. I fear that episodes like Ferguson are going to happen again and again, because the underlying forces are unchanged or getting worse (us vs. them style policing, surplus wargear that someone wants to find a use for, community inequality/segregation, culture of fear/violence in America). What concerns me is who can/will step in if amateurish police depts like Ferguson go too far? Even with the media everywhere, they didn't care. The police were acting like fascists, as one vet said. I am pretty sure no one is going to lose their job over this though, which adds to the tragedy.

So in the future, if a dept. displays even worse judgment, who will step in to protect the citizenry? That is supposed to be the cops' job, but what happens when they become the threat? Will the governor deploy the National Guard in a timely manner? Courts and investigations happen after the dust has settled, but who will stand up to the cops in the moment? Unfortunately this may make citizens feel like they need to take matters into hands (a la Cliven Bundy and right-wing militias), which will only perpetuate the cycle of distrust/violence and feed the police's mania.

Other links:
Eric Garner case
Police misconduct costs communities hundreds of millions in lawsuits a year
Bill Maher even before Ferguson and Garner happened
Military compared to cops