Baltimore Riots

[Jenksismyhero]

Because when I push you to apply the same word to a police department that murdered a guy and has paid out millions of dollars in settlements for police brutality you slither away.

 

Is the Baltimore police department full of thugs?

 

Yes, i'm sure there are thugs in the Baltimore PD. No question.

[Balta1701]

I'm assuming that there aren't union rules authorizing police abuse but instead provide some sort of due process protection for disciplinary action up to and including firing.

 

The rules protecting the officers only matter here if they're preventing police management from making changes that they would otherwise like to make. I'm asking why we're assuming that police management isn't perfectly fine with these "rough rides." Because if they approve or at least turn a blind eye to it because they don't care, then union rules are irrelevant.

 

edit: maybe I'm misunderstanding here. can you lay out what rules (generic reference is fine) were standing in the way of reforming BPD culture?

One thing that has shown up in multiple cases is that the Union doesn't just make sure that their people have representation, they're actively opposed to reform. The example you'd be most familiar with recently is the NY City police Union, where the Union waged a public campaign in favor of continuing the targeted police methods of the sort that drove the issue there. Although we haven't had a blowup, we had a very similar situation in Pittsburgh with the police union coming out and criticizing a new police chief publicly just after he arrived to make sure that they made their very public point as well.

[StrangeSox]

But that seems more like a problem with what the rank-and-file cops actually think, not a problem over rules.

[NorthSideSox72]

But that seems more like a problem with what the rank-and-file cops actually think, not a problem over rules.

Rules that allow the behavior.

 

[StrangeSox]

What rules allow police to engage in criminal violence against citizens?

[NorthSideSox72]

What rules allow police to engage in criminal violence against citizens?

Stop playing dumb. You know no one means that. It is the rules that come into play when someone does act badly, after the fact to protect them.

 

[illinilaw08]

There are lots of ways to address that problem - of the right people wanting to become cops.

 

Let's tell a story of two departments I happen to know some things about: New Orleans and Denver.

 

Even before Katrina, New Orleans was generally recoginized as the most poorly-run and corrupt large city department in the country (or among them anyway). Now let's look at their hiring and training practices. Their qualifications are (or at least were, haven't checked lately) basically 21 years old, high school diploma, no felony or serious misdemeanor convictions, and physically able to do the job. And their pay? Just above minimum wage. Officers usually make more money working private security off duty with no controls to speak of.

 

Now look at Denver, generally considered one of the best departments in the country and with among the highest rates of citizen happiness with their performance. They require a degree (2 or 4 year, or 2 years' worth towards one if former military), no criminal convictions whatsoever (traffic violations are OK to a limited extent). They also are known for doing more in-service training than most departments. And they are paid better than almost all their cohort cities, with cops starting (last I checked) somewhere in the 50's per year or maybe 60k. They offer tuition reimbursement for graduate school or finishing bachelors, and they only allow outside contract work via their own internal agency. Now that's expensive of course - their approach is to have fewer officers per capita than other departments, but better ones. They get much better candidates that way. And by being business-smart and internalizing overtime and outside private work, they get more revenue too.

 

That's just one parallel example. You can make things better if you want to. When you talk to Denver cops about why they like that department, the union doesn't even come up.

 

I live in Denver - while I won't opine on the quality of the police force here (no complaints from my end), or its reputation nationally, I do know that they only require a high school diploma or GED to get on the force. http://denvergov.org/Portals/590/documents...203%20Final.pdf

 

 

 

 

 

[StrangeSox]

Stop playing dumb. You know no one means that. It is the rules that come into play when someone does act badly, after the fact to protect them.

 

 

But that goes back to what I was saying--why are we assuming that BPD management would view these "rough rides" or similar behavior as acting badly? Because if management didn't have a problem with those sorts of thing, the rules aren't protecting anyone from anything. And further, we'd need evidence that union employment protection rules would actually prevent police management from disciplining or firing police officers for committing criminal acts and violating official department policy.

Edited April 28, 2015 by StrangeSox

[ILMOU]

I live in Denver - while I won't opine on the quality of the police force here (no complaints from my end), or its reputation nationally, I do know that they only require a high school diploma or GED to get on the force. http://denvergov.org/Portals/590/documents...203%20Final.pdf

And this is part of the grim reality of the situation. You simply aren't going to get the "best and brightest" risking their lives on a daily basis for $35K a year. Paying more means raising taxes locally - good luck with that.

[Dick Allen]

And this is part of the grim reality of the situation. You simply aren't going to get the "best and brightest" risking their lives on a daily basis for $35K a year. Paying more means raising taxes locally - good luck with that.

I think one thing that is being lost is there are plenty of good cops out there., even in Baltimore. There were guys that certainly didn't deserve having rocks and bricks thrown at them last night.

[ILMOU]

I think one thing that is being lost is there are plenty of good cops out there., even in Baltimore. There were guys that certainly didn't deserve having rocks and bricks thrown at them last night.

Absolutely. But the relatively low bar of entry into the profession is going to allow more bad apples in the bunch.

Edited April 28, 2015 by Stan Bahnsen

[Balta1701]

I think one thing that is being lost is there are plenty of good cops out there., even in Baltimore. There were guys that certainly didn't deserve having rocks and bricks thrown at them last night.

And equally notable there are plenty of good people in Baltimore who are justifiably angry with situations there who did not want things to devolve into a riot or contribute to that riot.

[Dick Allen]

And equally notable there are plenty of good people in Baltimore who are justifiably angry with situations there who did not want things to devolve into a riot or contribute to that riot.

Right. I think most realize most of the people weren't contributing to the chaos, and many were trying to stop it. But the people who were throwing the rocks, who were looting the stores, who were setting things on fire, are not part of that group.

 

We saw the footage. The people running into the mall and running out with items are criminals. The people busting into a liquor store and CVS, and throwing rocks and bricks, are criminals. All of them. There were several criminal cops in the footage we have seen, but the difference is, it isn't all of them.

 

When there is video of people committing crimes, I don't think it's wrong to call them criminals.

Edited April 28, 2015 by Dick Allen

[Texsox]

And to be fair there are a lot, the vast, vast, majority of citizens staying home and not contributing to the riots. This is a battle between a tiny population of both groups.

[NorthSideSox72]

I live in Denver - while I won't opine on the quality of the police force here (no complaints from my end), or its reputation nationally, I do know that they only require a high school diploma or GED to get on the force. http://denvergov.org/Portals/590/documents...203%20Final.pdf

Whoa - they must have had a hard time hiring, because that has changed since the late 90s (OK so I'm old). They were also paying a starting salary back then in the low 40s, and it hit 50s at some point - not sure where it is now.

 

Its an interesting discussion itself. Lots of affluent suburban departments require degrees, some cities, but it does make it harder to recruit.

 

 

[Texsox]

I see the same thing in teaching. The proposed changes in salary and performance reviews will basically drive any good teacher out of poor areas with a history of low test scores and into areas where the kids are already achieving.

[NorthSideSox72]

And this is part of the grim reality of the situation. You simply aren't going to get the "best and brightest" risking their lives on a daily basis for $35K a year. Paying more means raising taxes locally - good luck with that.

That's why I said before, I think the model of fewer officers you pay and train more is better than just pouring more blue on the street.

 

Let me illustrate another way...

 

Chicago: 2.8M people, 12k sworn officers (1 per 233), pay once on force is 43,100/year

New Orleans: 365k people, 1300 sworn officers (1 per 281), pay once on force is 39,000/year (higher than I thought - new push maybe)

Denver: 650k people, 1500 sworn officers (1 per 433), pay once on force is 51,600/year

 

Now of course, there is more to that than just a choice along the continuum of number of officers vs quality of said officers. But it gives you an idea what I am talking about. And the salaries need to be conditioned to cost of living, which is higher in Chicago than the others - so effectively the Denver rate is much higher than the others. Plus the departmental contract work in Denver might (not sure) provide them better extra money opportunities.

 

[NorthSideSox72]

What I didn't get into there either is, some departments use a points system for military and/or college time, effectively putting people with either or both of those at a major advantage in hiring.

 

[Texsox]

What I didn't get into there either is, some departments use a points system for military and/or college time, effectively putting people with either or both of those at a major advantage in hiring.

Philosophically I am opposed to government entities competing with private businesses for for-profit work. However, I do like the idea of a PD based "private" security firm.

[NorthSideSox72]

Philosophically I am opposed to government entities competing with private businesses for for-profit work. However, I do like the idea of a PD based "private" security firm.

Its not done so much to compete. Here's what it is - they don't want their officers wearing a badge working outside gigs. Way too much risk of putting the department in a bad light, and officers in harm's way. Plus by bringing it in house, not only can they control the gigs they get, and give the officers all the protection of being effectively on duty, they also get some extra coin to plow back into the department. I'm honestly surprised more departments don't do the same.

 

[Texsox]

I understand that is why they do it. Now look at it from a competitor's POV, they may lose business to the government.

 

The example that really hit with me was when a customer of mine back in the electronics days, an assembly shop, lost a long time customer to a shop that was basically set up to job train prisoners in Wisconsin. The prisoners got the work, my customer got to lay off workers. There were great reasons to train prisoners for real jobs, etc. but the consequences were innocent people losing their jobs.

[LDF]

Absolutely. But the relatively low bar of entry into the profession is going to allow more bad apples in the bunch.

 

i disagree, there are some people who always wanted to be a police officer. the safety of corruption and following the leader. the being in the kool club, even among the PD is still the problem. they, the PD should make the individual officer responsible for their actions.

[ptatc]

Who in their right mind would want to be a cop in this environment? Now take away any job protections. What mythical person are we left with to take the job?

 

And that IS a problem. By making the job attractive for a quality candidate, you also leave open the poor candidate to stay. I'm not certain there is an easy solution. But making the job less appealing to quality candidates doesn't seem like a step in the correct direction.

 

Also, have we now set a pattern that any event like this must must be met with a violent protest bigger than the previous? This is not a good path either. It's dangerous for everyone.

 

There was a great point that I think was kind of tossed aside earlier in the thread. When we think that the protesters are protesting white power we tend to over simplify. This also points to people who do have power versus the powerless. Money = power in America. When there are no legitimate and useful means for average citizens to see results they take to methods outside the "system". So we have looting and violence. There are lots of problems here that all need to be addressed.

Maybe I'm far too naive but I refuse to believe that the average US citizen is going to revert to violence and looting if the don't see results.

[farmteam]

Yeah I agree with a lot in there, but here's my one issue: He's asking why we're not as outraged about police brutality as we are about the riots. And I think the answer is pretty simple: we're watching it live, as it happens. We can see the smoldering cars and buildings. We can see the kids hurling brick and bottles. With police brutality we don't, or rarely do, and when we do, generally there is a fair bit of outrage.

Don't you think the fact that the police brutality is less visible, more insidious, makes it inherently part of the overall problem we're talking about here?

 

And while I we're both coming at this anecdotally, while there can be a "fair bit of outrage" about police brutality, I don't think it even comes near the level of outrage at rioting such as Baltimore.

[farmteam]

Whoa - they must have had a hard time hiring, because that has changed since the late 90s (OK so I'm old). They were also paying a starting salary back then in the low 40s, and it hit 50s at some point - not sure where it is now.

 

Its an interesting discussion itself. Lots of affluent suburban departments require degrees, some cities, but it does make it harder to recruit.

I don't have any good comparison studies (that I'm aware of) for you to look at, but an interesting comparison for you to abstractly think about would be Minneapolis and St. Paul. Obviously comparable for many reasons. Minneapolis is typically seen as the force that only hires ex-military. Interestingly, 94% of Minneapolis officers and 78% of St. Paul cops don't live in their respective cities.

 

The tension between the Minneapolis PD and North Minneapolis (yes, this is the typically poorer and mostly black part of town) is pretty well known. Not sure if it's as blatant or widespread in St. Paul.