http://www.thenation.com/blog/
Resurfacing this thread again, after dozens more questionable police killings since Ferguson. FBI Director Comey recently called out the lack of police accountability in deadly force incidents, as well as the undeniable racial element in policing. That seems to be a big deal, and Obama/Holder have not been that explicit. Most high ranking police leaders have failed to acknowledge public concerns/anger over alleged misconduct, preferring to look foolish pretending that the boys in blue can do no wrong.
As D said earlier, it's unacceptable (and likely deliberate) that there is very little data on police killings - especially on a national level. That has to change - data access in the hands of capable, ethical people never hurt a society, but the lack of it has. Only people who stand to lose or get punished are opposing transparency. This isn't about censorship of controversial information, this is hard data - a set of facts and testimonials as the historical record (or the closest we can get to it). So anyone who claims to be on the side of right can't justifiably argue against the sharing of data to enable analysis and insights that will likely lead to improvements. And what do we have to lose - it can't get any worse, right? Anyone who has reasons to oppose access by other people evaluate his/her performance on the job probably shouldn't hold that job.
Comey also
raised the issue that law enforcement policies and actions can result in
unjust and racially biased outcomes, yet the agents of those policies
and actions (the officers) may not actually be "racists with a capital
R". Some of them clearly are, but for the majority of officers, I doubt
that they would be classified as virulent racists (people who actually
hate another group and work toward their marginalization/persecution).
It's more like unconscious bias and heuristics. Officers assigned to
at-risk neighborhoods may not have much sensitivity, context, and
psychology training. Week-in, week-out they get dirty looks (or worse)
from mostly minority residents. The suspects they interact with (and in
some cases physically confront) are all "stereotypical" black and brown
young men, possibly engaged in the stereotypical bad behaviors. After a
while, even a non-racist will start to associate black/brown man with
negativity/crime/violence/Resurfacing this thread again, after dozens more questionable police killings since Ferguson. FBI Director Comey recently called out the lack of police accountability in deadly force incidents, as well as the undeniable racial element in policing. That seems to be a big deal, and Obama/Holder have not been that explicit. Most high ranking police leaders have failed to acknowledge public concerns/anger over alleged misconduct, preferring to look foolish pretending that the boys in blue can do no wrong.
As D said earlier, it's unacceptable (and likely deliberate) that there is very little data on police killings - especially on a national level. That has to change - data access in the hands of capable, ethical people never hurt a society, but the lack of it has. Only people who stand to lose or get punished are opposing transparency. This isn't about censorship of controversial information, this is hard data - a set of facts and testimonials as the historical record (or the closest we can get to it). So anyone who claims to be on the side of right can't justifiably argue against the sharing of data to enable analysis and insights that will likely lead to improvements. And what do we have to lose - it can't get any worse, right? Anyone who has reasons to oppose access by other people evaluate his/her performance on the job probably shouldn't hold that job.
No comments:
Post a Comment