- Requiring that uniformed cops provide their full name, rank and precinct, as well as the CCRB number, during any traffic stop or property search.
- A measure that would allow police to use “injurious physical force” only “as is proportionally necessary,” but that does not define how proportionality will be determined.
- Making the NYPD report the precincts of the 200 cops with the most CCRB complaints filed against them.
“Policing policies must be left to the police management who understand the intricacies and difficulties of complex legal issues and the appropriate use of crime-fighting tactics.”
8 comments:
Those reforms are worthless. The primary problem is the policy objectives that put the safety of cops paramount to all other things. It's a dangerous job if it's done right, and that means putting citizens lives first. Every attempt should be made to end confrontations with the least damage to citizens. The job is to protect and serve citizens not to get through the day with the minimum risk possible. How can we justify often innocent citizens being riddled with dozens of bullets, or an old woman with a screw driver being shot dead by a group of cops, because they "feared for their lives". There was a time when that was considered cowardly and wrong. I blame unions, because they always screw up any good institution eventually.
I had a friend who was a cop. His job was to clear the vagrants out of one of the terminals before the morning rush hour. Not all of the drunks and paranoid schizophrenics went gently. Occasionally there were violent confrontations. It's very easy to lose your temper and go overboard during a violent encounter and, of course, sometimes sufficient force looks brutish to an unengaged spectator. It's a no win situation. My friend retired the first year he was eligible for a pension.......It's good to see that the City Council has the backs of gang bangers like Freddie Gray. A city prospers when men like Freddie Gray feel free to go about their business without undue interference from the cops.
How can anybody be against uniformed police being required to identify themselves and the agency they work for?
The fact that the unions are fighting against this shows that transparency and accountability are sorely needed, and it is not going to come from inside the blue line.
Why not make them give their addresses and the names of all their family members for easy retribution?
President-Mom-Jeans said...
How can anybody be against uniformed police being required to identify themselves and the agency they work for?
Each one has a badge with a number on it, and most, if not all, have a name plate.
All wear a patch identifying their organization.
If nd is out there, he can correct me, but it seems any cop has enough on him/her to ID them.
Patches may not be recognizable to the average civilian and badge numbers may be difficult to see and name plates obstructed even when worn.
Your straw man about names of family members is unpersuasive both because public records exist for all citizens as well as your next sentence stating that the information is already available anyways.
This is a simple common sense measure that literally costs nothing.
President-Mom-Jeans said...
Your straw man about names of family members is unpersuasive both because public records exist for all citizens as well as your next sentence stating that the information is already available anyways.
The /sarc tag was implicit on the family names.
I'll spell it out next time.
As for the rest, I've never had trouble reading a patch and I'm betting if you're close enough to a cop for him to talk about arresting you, you're close enough to see badge number and name.
If you can read.
PS As I say, nd is the authority on this.
I'm against the theater of cops acting like prisoners of war, because that is all there is. Then again, I don't really know how NY works. In Texas, everything requested to identify the cop (name, badge, precinct, jurisidiction) is provided on any citation they give you, and if not, that citation is dismissed by the judge. So the information is available. Otherwise, I think it is demeaning to officers to have them walk up to you and say, "hello, my name is John Doe, beat officer, badge number 007, of precinct 2." prior to handling the situation at hand.
The primary problem is the policy objectives
You mean like the DA identifying an area as high crime, then prosecuting the officers for targetting the area on racial grounds.
Post a Comment