PDA

View Full Version : "Ferguson Effect"?



Nephrology
10-26-2015, 05:23 PM
As discussed by the director of the FBI and referenced in this article :

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/oct/26/fbi-director-ferguson-effect-crime-policing-james-comey


"FBI director James Comey conceded on Monday that he had little evidence to support his theory that a recent increase in crime was caused by heightened scrutiny of the police, as the White House appeared to distance itself from his remarks.

Addressing police chiefs at a conference in Chicago, Comey said he could not be certain that the so-called “Ferguson effect”, following unrest in the Missouri city after the fatal police shooting of an unarmed black 18-year-old last year, had led to a retreat by officers, but said this was “common sense”.

“The question is, are these kinds of things changing police behavior around the country?” said Comey. “The honest answer is I don’t know for sure whether that’s the case … but I do have a strong sense.”

Barack Obama’s press secretary, however, said at a White House briefing on Monday that available evidence “does not support the notion that law enforcement officers around the country are shying away from fulfilling their responsibilities”.

Law enforcement leaders were “on the contrary” reporting that officers were “dedicated public servants, who on a daily basis are putting their lives on the line to serve and protect the communities that they’re assigned to”, said Josh Earnest."

So, with that as the background... what do you all think? Is this a real phenomenon? Curious to hear what you all as LEOs have to say. Thanks again for the work you all do - looking forward to your comments.

gtmtnbiker98
10-26-2015, 05:28 PM
I can tell you one thing, we aren't working any harder. Those discretionary stops are a lot more scarce.

Glenn E. Meyer
10-26-2015, 05:31 PM
1. Depending on your world view, you will be predisposed to see it as real or not. Cops do as does the FBI head. Well known black activists have fits that it is not true. The latter is a double edged sword as how do explain it without discussing failings in your population. That is done by saying that social forces and discrimination have removed free will from them and they are unable to act in a different manner.

2. We really don't have quality and unbiased research into the effect. The discontinuity in the murder rates seem to indicate some sharp new causal event.

3. The truth will be combo of factors and interactions. However, I would think that there is a Ferguson effect. I've heard that police recruiting has taken a massive hit (if it is true).

It will take some more time. I do think the FBI head is headed for directing security for a big company fairly soon. DOJ can't accept his viewpoint.

JHC
10-26-2015, 06:00 PM
Do you (the collective) think this effect is more pronounced in urban centers than rural?

Glenn E. Meyer
10-26-2015, 06:05 PM
Is urban vs. rural confounded by race? That's a factor to be considered.

jnc36rcpd
10-26-2015, 06:09 PM
I would think it depends on the perceived level of support for law enforcement in the community rather than a strictly urban/rural or racial breakdown.

Glenn E. Meyer
10-26-2015, 06:10 PM
That's hard to disentangle. Anyway, good night. Going to watch Supergirl as Jeb Bush says she is 'hot'. Dirty old man!

JHC
10-26-2015, 06:21 PM
I would think it depends on the perceived level of support for law enforcement in the community rather than a strictly urban/rural or racial breakdown.

Is there a major urban area that is for real supportive of LE when some feces hits the fan? I think you are correct about "support" being key.

TGS
10-26-2015, 06:32 PM
mmmmm.

A cop I knew from a neighboring town back home said his PD pretty much stopped working proactively, directly related to the national issues with police. They had a very, very active narc program....the entire department was basically one big narc squad. They didn't even do traffic, to put it into perspective.

GardoneVT
10-26-2015, 06:33 PM
Addressing police chiefs at a conference in Chicago, Comey said he could not be certain that the so-called “Ferguson effect”, following unrest in the Missouri city after the fatal police shooting of an unarmed black 18-year-old last year, had led to a retreat by officers, but said this was “common sense”.

Therein lies the problem. Sounds like the conference basically went like this:

"So, bosses. Do you feel your superiors and your own short sighted, arrogant, and piss poor PC management philosophies are responsible for the low people on the totem pole not being proactive? No?

Yeah, sounds good enough for me too. We are bosses ,anyways. There is no problem, for if there was one it would be someone else's fault anyways. Meeting adjourned.

TGS
10-26-2015, 06:36 PM
Addressing police chiefs at a conference in Chicago, Comey said he could not be certain that the so-called “Ferguson effect”, following unrest in the Missouri city after the fatal police shooting of an unarmed black 18-year-old last year, had led to a retreat by officers, but said this was “common sense”.

Therein lies the problem. Sounds like the conference basically went like this:

"So, bosses. Do you feel your superiors and your own short sighted, arrogant, and piss poor PC management philosophies are responsible for the low people on the totem pole not being proactive? No?

Yeah, sounds good enough for me too. We are bosses ,anyways. There is no problem, for if there was one it would be someone else's fault anyways. Meeting adjourned.

It sounded very opposite to me. Comey basically said, "Yeah, I think so.....but I don't have any concrete data to make a supported argument with; so don't quote me."

GardoneVT
10-26-2015, 07:34 PM
It sounded very opposite to me. Comey basically said, "Yeah, I think so.....but I don't have any concrete data to make a supported argument with; so don't quote me."

Unfortunately, there is one concrete piece of data Comey must confront: Barrack H. Obama is on the same org chart he is. Stating citeable proof of Obama's race baiting in a symposium at his hometown may not be the fastest way to achieve forced reassignment to the Benghazi field office, but its gotta be up there.

voodoo_man
10-26-2015, 08:44 PM
I could say the slowing ive seen is in part because of some randomly named effect, but its been a pretty steady decline and it hasnt had anything to do with protestors ans everything to do with the way the top brass conduct themselves.

Personally I can care less what anyone has to say about what I did or didnt do, I am going to work because thats what I signed up for.

Sammy1
10-26-2015, 08:45 PM
Observed a B/M run a red light, thought about the potential hassle and turned left and went on my way.

Dagga Boy
10-26-2015, 09:54 PM
I still have very good contact with LE across the country. What is going on is a perfect storm of several issues. All of them are essentially right out of the liberal progressive idea of "fixing things". Decriminalization of crime. Essentially, they are letting tons of criminals out of jail who are bad folks based on an idea that they were in jail for some minor crime or a "disease" (drug addiction). Reality, they were plea bargained in most cases to those "minor crimes" and they are stone cold bad guys. Anyone doing years in prison for a minor marijuana possession was there because of a plea bargain from likely something with little relevance to personal use Marijuana. In California, nothing is really a crime anymore. If it isn't worth the time, most cops will not take the risk if they are smart. I have said publicly and I will repeat it now....as a police officer, if you are working any kind of narcotics enforcement in a low income urban community, you are an idiot. Juice isn't worth the squeeze. Job risk with no backing is also an issue. When the new sport in many areas is videoing LE officers constantly the second they exit the car.......they aren't getting out of the car, especially for bosses who won't back them and a community that won't support them. What I call the "Who takes black lives matter" effect. As long as police are not killing black folks, all is good. This means cops stay disengaged from the black community, so they are turning into war zones, and honestly....most people could give a crap. Cops used to work those communities to save those poor kids in those places who always seemed to be the victims of stray bullets and spill over violence. They worked those neighborhoods for the elderly who were constantly victimized. Now, they are racist if you arrest anyone who is a special victim class, so they simply come and clean up the mess. You have a community where "no snitching" is now the standard of cooperation, and robbery, intimidation, theft, and drug use are "cultural crimes".....the cops are done trying to do the right thing for the kids and elderly....again, the juice isn't worth the squeeze. You can try to stop a drive by or gang shooting by pro-active stops before they happen and risk your life, career, and family, or take a report on the kid who was shot by a "stray" bullet with no risk at all........you don't have to be a genius to figure this out. By the way, the same ones screaming about "racial profiling"(often in places where everyone is the same race) are the same ones screaming when their child is severely injured or dead about the cops "not doing nothing".
Then we have stats. The world revolves around these and politicians cook them (at a certain rank in police management, they are politicians as well). Two things they cannot cook-homicides (as much as they may try to make the questionable deaths go away, it is hard to make a majority go away). The other is auto theft, because of how stolen cars are often entered into the system. Now, the folks that steal cars will have those cases plea bargained to something else, so you cannot look at arrests. The actual number of vehicles stolen is a very good crime indicator.
Until the community really revolts, nothing is going to change, and it will likely get worse. The other issue will also be the recruiting of high quality candidates for police officers....it will be interesting in the future to see what ends up patrolling our streets.

cclaxton
10-26-2015, 10:00 PM
Aren't these all different for each city/jurisdiction? When Comey speaks in generalities about policing across the entire nation, doesn't that miss the point?
I doubt any LE are slowing down in Fairfax, but facts show they are in Baltimore. I know many people who live in downtown Baltimore, some in Baltimore City Gov't. The stories the tell me are very much like The Wire. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wire
Cody

Dagga Boy
10-26-2015, 10:10 PM
Aren't these all different for each city/jurisdiction? When Comey speaks in generalities about policing across the entire nation, doesn't that miss the point?
I doubt any LE are slowing down in Fairfax, but facts show they are in Baltimore. I know many people who live in downtown Baltimore, some in Baltimore City Gov't. The stories the tell me are very much like The Wire. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wire
Cody

Let me give you a "link" to all these different areas that are seeing these issues..........look at the political leaning of the city government. The harder left, the worse the issue.

jondoe297
10-27-2015, 07:47 AM
I can tell you with certainty that in my AOR, things are much less proactive post-Ferguson. The atmosphere has also emboldened the average street shitbird as well.
Our jail has +/- 240 people in it. A year ago that number was over 400.

As nyeti astutely noted, which way on the political pendulum the city swings has a lot to do with it. My city is no exception to that.

DpdG
10-27-2015, 07:50 AM
..... they aren't getting out of the car, especially for bosses who won't back them and a community that won't support them.


I think this is likely the most crucial element. Video in itself is not scary- I'm proud of the work I do and the way I conduct myself. I do care about my community and its welfare, even those within who may not like us most days. What scares me is the possibility of being a sacrificial pawn to the political gods, even if I were doing the right thing.

Fortunately my bosses are pretty good, and I'm comfortable enough to stay out there and be proactive, but I'm in a small community.

hufnagel
10-27-2015, 08:52 AM
I'd expect there to be some differential based on the size of the community and police force for said. For example, I'm on a first-name basis with the (acting) 1st. LT at my local PD. Maybe it's because he's the guy that handles all the firearms paperwork (which he hates.) I'm a 6.266 miČ town of 13,000 though so I see our guys all the time though.

Erick Gelhaus
10-27-2015, 12:53 PM
Its happening all over, small towns & big cities, suburban counties, you name it. It wasn't just caused by the aftermath of Brown's felonious assault on Wilson but how that has been allowed to play out is no small part of it. Look Chicago's mayor, Rahm Emanuel who was also an Obama chief of staff. When he's telling people that cops aren't working because they don't want to be the next viral video, its a clue.

Across the profession, management has abdicated its responsibility educate the community. Nyeti's right, DpdG is sooooo right, gawd is he correct.

There's this one agency ... where a few years ago cops could barely get on the air on weekends a few years back, now it's quiet the vast majority of the night. Contacts are way down, arrests ... wut? If one considers the risk of being the next sacrificial lamb and nothing, nothing all at coming from the courts to the crook, why would you?
That one agency always got really solid laterals and could count on the fingers of one hand the number of people who left - nearly always for family reasons. Now? Its hemorrhaging BADLY, supervisors, guys with multiple specialties, new guys off training, they are all leaving.

Yeah, this is an issue. Some places worse than others.

DocGKR
10-27-2015, 01:08 PM
Angus McFee--Well said and 100% accurate.

cclaxton
10-27-2015, 01:12 PM
Its happening all over, small towns & big cities, suburban counties, you name it. It wasn't just caused by the aftermath of Brown's felonious assault on Wilson but how that has been allowed to play out is no small part of it. Look Chicago's mayor, Rahm Emanuel who was also an Obama chief of staff. When he's telling people that cops aren't working because they don't want to be the next viral video, its a clue.

Across the profession, management has abdicated its responsibility educate the community. Nyeti's right, DpdG is sooooo right, gawd is he correct.

There's this one agency ... where a few years ago cops could barely get on the air on weekends a few years back, now it's quiet the vast majority of the night. Contacts are way down, arrests ... wut? If one considers the risk of being the next sacrificial lamb and nothing, nothing all at coming from the courts to the crook, why would you?
That one agency always got really solid laterals and could count on the fingers of one hand the number of people who left - nearly always for family reasons. Now? Its hemorrhaging BADLY, supervisors, guys with multiple specialties, new guys off training, they are all leaving.

Yeah, this is an issue. Some places worse than others.
I just saw a news report that new recruiting is down. 18-28%.
Cody

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

41magfan
10-27-2015, 02:05 PM
This may very well be a turning point for domestic law enforcement in America if people's attitudes about law and order don't change. But honestly, I don't see that happening as what we're seeing is a natural manifestation of the leftist ideology which show no signs of being curtailed.

hufnagel
10-27-2015, 02:18 PM
I thought the effect was cyclical, and we're in a downward trend currently.

Dagga Boy
10-27-2015, 02:22 PM
Just look at the incident in Richland S.C. The video shows this terrible deputy trying to extract a female student from a desk. Looks bad.........however; everybody leaves out the part the she was told to get up and leave the classroom by the teacher, various school administrators, and likely given multiple commands by the officer to get up from the desk and leave the room, and she refused all of them. At some point somebody needs to make her. In the future, I doubt an officer will. I am in a school regularly and the amount of disrespect for teachers, security officers and SRO's is literally disturbing......and I am in a not horrible Middle School. There are zero consequences of any worth. These kids are learning now what comes into play later....there is no consequences and the LEO's are now always assumed to be wrong, and especially if you are of some special victim class group. Folks are now shocked that LEO's simply do not give a crap any longer.

The President is talking now to police about Us and Them and in some negative way........and he is the Instigator in Chief. It is unbelievable how oblivious folks are.

JHC
10-27-2015, 04:22 PM
By rep this FBI Director cannot be intimidated. His comments were strong enough that the WH mouthpiece thought it worth trying to contradict him.

okie john
10-27-2015, 04:22 PM
We are headed for some dark and bloody years, and it will get worse, probably much worse, before it gets better.

A massive Thank You to all of the LEOs out there who have to put up with this shit.


Okie John

41magfan
10-27-2015, 06:08 PM
Just look at the incident in Richland S.C. The video shows this terrible deputy trying to extract a female student from a desk. Looks bad.........however; everybody leaves out the part the she was told to get up and leave the classroom by the teacher, various school administrators, and likely given multiple commands by the officer to get up from the desk and leave the room, and she refused all of them. At some point somebody needs to make her. In the future, I doubt an officer will. I am in a school regularly and the amount of disrespect for teachers, security officers and SRO's is literally disturbing......and I am in a not horrible Middle School. There are zero consequences of any worth. These kids are learning now what comes into play later....there is no consequences and the LEO's are now always assumed to be wrong, and especially if you are of some special victim class group. Folks are now shocked that LEO's simply do not give a crap any longer.

The President is talking now to police about Us and Them and in some negative way........and he is the Instigator in Chief. It is unbelievable how oblivious folks are.

This case perfectly highlights several underlying issues that are relevant to the discussion;

1. If Teacher's hadn't incrementally abrogated their authority in the classroom over the years, the need for an SRO to handle classroom discipline would be a moot point.

2. If LEO's don't force a correction in an apparent path to incrementally abrogate their authority in the streets, the results will most likely be same.

hufnagel
10-27-2015, 06:13 PM
nyeti: as the father of a 2nd grader, that type of thing scares the ever living crap out of me.

JAD
10-27-2015, 06:18 PM
nyeti: as the father of a 2nd grader, that type of thing scares the ever living crap out of me.

Would me too, if I had a kid in secular school.

hufnagel
10-27-2015, 06:34 PM
I wish I had the ability, discipline, and the temperment to home school my child. sadly I lack all 3 on a consistent and methodical basis.

GardoneVT
10-27-2015, 06:51 PM
It seems "Professional Criminal" might make Forbes' Top 100 Careers list. After all, there's lots of future potential for expansion in unlicensed pharmaceutical distribution , since proactive policing is about to become a museum exhibit. Best part ,no taxes or student loans.Though the health benefits suck.

John Hearne
10-27-2015, 08:17 PM
Speaking of S.C. This is a bit of a different take:
http://louderwithcrowder.com/spring-valley-latest-racist-police-brutality-story-changes-with-new-video/

JodyH
10-28-2015, 07:06 AM
Speaking of S.C. This is a bit of a different take:
http://louderwithcrowder.com/spring-valley-latest-racist-police-brutality-story-changes-with-new-video/
Won't matter.
The leftist narrative has been established, the truth will be buried for the common good comrade.

Btw: I love my city. 5 officer involved shootings this year in a remote, rural city of 30k. All shutout, walk off homerun wins for the good guys.
The Chief has backed his guys completely and the community backs the Chief and the Department.
The leftist in Santa Fe are freaking out, but the roughnecks and cowboys down here are good with it.

UNK
10-28-2015, 07:25 AM
Mine are 12 and 16. Number one..while they are young get them in contact sports. Wrestling and boxing for boys boxing for girls. Look hard at local martial arts that will teach grappling. REAL grappling not some feel good crap. Greco Roman school based wrestling is excellent. Football. They have to be taught to be able to not be afraid at the earliest age. Contact sports will do this especially boxing wrestling martial arts that are real. Don't let them be bored. Get some .22's and teach them to shoot.
Make sure you point out things as you are aware of them. Teach them right from wrong as soon as they can comprehend. Put them in a super modern church based youth group. One that engages and is fun that they will want to go to. Their best friends will come from there not school.
My kids are super squared away. All the above has worked so far.
.



nyeti: as the father of a 2nd grader, that type of thing scares the ever living crap out of me.

Dagga Boy
10-28-2015, 07:25 AM
Won't matter.
The leftist narrative has been established, the truth will be buried for the common good comrade.

Btw: I love my city. 5 officer involved shootings this year in a remote, rural city of 30k. All shutout, walk off homerun wins for the good guys.
The Chief has backed his guys completely and the community backs the Chief and the Department.
The leftist in Santa Fe are freaking out, but the roughnecks and cowboys down here are good with it.

And keep your voices louder. Cop hating, crook loving apologists have always been in communities and always will be. The LEO's know that. It is when it gets to the point that they seem to be the majority that you get the policing that mirrors your community (and you deserve).

The more I see the video run of the S.C. Incident the more I am of the belief the officer did a good job. Watch where his hands are when the table tips over. He has a hold on a arm (and he was struck in the head) to control the arm and a pant leg. He moves her quickly from the entanglement of the chair to prone on a clear area of the floor and cuff's her while she is still resisting. Simple hand grasp and movement and no punches, kicks or force tools. Everyone who has no idea about use of force needs to shut their oxygen theft holes. I would love to watch all these TV experts try to get my 13 year old daughter out of one of those desks if she didn't want to go. Just trying to get her up for school in the morning is like dealing with an angry wild animal. Even kids in the class are coming out in he officer's favor.

I guess we are now going to turn classrooms over to the students. Just yap on your phone during class and just ignore everyone of authority. Should make education a bigger joke than it is now.

LSP552
10-28-2015, 07:38 AM
And keep your voices louder. Cop hating, crook loving apologists have always been in communities and always will be. The LEO's know that. It is when it gets to the point that they seem to be the majority that you get the policing that mirrors your community (and you deserve).

The more I see the video run of the S.C. Incident the more I am of the belief the officer did a good job. Watch where his hands are when the table tips over. He has a hold on a arm (and he was struck in the head) to control the arm and a pant leg. He moves her quickly from the entanglement of the chair to prone on a clear area of the floor and cuff's her while she is still resisting. Simple hand grasp and movement and no punches, kicks or force tools. Everyone who has no idea about use of force needs to shut their oxygen theft holes. I would love to watch all these TV experts try to get my 13 year old daughter out of one of those desks if she didn't want to go. Just trying to get her up for school in the morning is like dealing with an angry wild animal. Even kids in the class are coming out in he officer's favor.

I guess we are now going to turn classrooms over to the students. Just yap on your phone during class and just ignore everyone of authority. Should make education a bigger joke than it is now.

Dude, logic, experience and expertise don't apply when dealing with a racist agenda.

psalms144.1
10-28-2015, 10:02 AM
WRT the SRO in SC, I had this EXACT discussion with my lovely bride this AM. Lucky for me, she was the one who said: "The teacher told her to do something and she refused. The principals told her to do something and she refused. The Police Officer told her to do something and she refused. Now people are upset that the Policeman MADE her comply? That's what he gets paid to do. What's the issue?"

If only this aspect would get air time. There are CONSEQUENCES for failing to comply to directions from authority figures.

hufnagel
10-28-2015, 10:42 AM
Mine are 12 and 16. Number one..while they are young get them in contact sports. Wrestling and boxing for boys boxing for girls. Look hard at local martial arts that will teach grappling. REAL grappling not some feel good crap. Greco Roman school based wrestling is excellent. Football. They have to be taught to be able to not be afraid at the earliest age. Contact sports will do this especially boxing wrestling martial arts that are real. Don't let them be bored. Get some .22's and teach them to shoot.
Make sure you point out things as you are aware of them. Teach them right from wrong as soon as they can comprehend. Put them in a super modern church based youth group. One that engages and is fun that they will want to go to. Their best friends will come from there not school.
My kids are super squared away. All the above has worked so far.
.

Taekowndo, and of the 3 (rifle, pistol, shotgun) he prefers his henry youth lever action. :D
He and I had a talk about how to behave in school when his classmates aren't. So far he seems to get that daddy won't be to accomodating to him misbehaving (respect was the exact word I used.) We also talked about how he doesn't have to answer a teacher's or principal's questions if he doesn't feel comfortable, and to request myself or his mother to come to the school... but how to make that request RESPECTFULLY, and also as a requirement. Or as my daddy used to say, learn to sell the bible to the devil himself and make him look forward to reading it.

Glenn E. Meyer
10-28-2015, 10:48 AM
There will be a slew of quick studies demonstrating no Ferguson effect as that is the 'correct answer'. I've seen some already based on quick surveys of officers. As I said before, it will take time to really pull this apart.

voodoo_man
10-28-2015, 11:30 AM
http://news.yahoo.com/sheriffs-deputy-fired-south-carolina-classroom-altercation-msnbc-142715613.html

He got fired.

Mitch
10-28-2015, 11:55 AM
Sheriff Lott has no balls, I really hope he doesn't get re-elected. Hopefully the deputy finds a way to land on his feet. I had a feeling he was going to get screwed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

JHC
10-28-2015, 12:55 PM
http://news.yahoo.com/sheriffs-deputy-fired-south-carolina-classroom-altercation-msnbc-142715613.html

He got fired.

I'm not very pro-union in general but LEO are the exception. I can't think of any job that needs one more.

psalms144.1
10-28-2015, 01:10 PM
He got fired.What a travesty. I wish I had discretionary income to contribute to a "Fund Me" for that officer...

voodoo_man
10-28-2015, 01:46 PM
What a travesty. I wish I had discretionary income to contribute to a "Fund Me" for that officer...

Travesty is an understatement.

If I was working in that PD, I'd wholeheartedly tell my coworkers and boss I ain't doin a damn thing.

Coyotesfan97
10-28-2015, 01:57 PM
Every SRO on that Department needs to quit and go back to the road. My memo would already be in. Nothing like working at an at will Sheriffs Department when the boss has no spine.

Mitch
10-28-2015, 02:36 PM
Every SRO on that Department needs to quit and go back to the road. My memo would already be in. Nothing like working at an at will Sheriffs Department when the boss has no spine.

That would be great. Let the sheriff deal with that shit if he won't support his guys.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

cclaxton
10-28-2015, 02:58 PM
Interesting alternative view of a SRO Role:
https://nasro.org/news/in-the-media/nasro-tells-cnn-police-stay-school-discipline/
Cody

JodyH
10-28-2015, 03:05 PM
It may already be this way but...
The SRO should refuse to get involved in any capacity unless a law has been broken.
And in situations like removing a student from class, only after an administrator swears out a trespassing complaint.
Using the SRO to enforce school rules is bullshit.
If the school wants a security officer, hire one as a school employee.

When I work event security for concerts the SO's are there as well.
It's up to security to stop people from breaking the event center rules, it's up to the SO's to enforce the law.
They don't address people cutting in line or climbing on stage, we don't try to detain people smoking pot.

runcible
10-28-2015, 03:05 PM
Interesting alternative view of a SRO Role:
https://nasro.org/news/in-the-media/nasro-tells-cnn-police-stay-school-discipline/
Cody

Could you tell us what you find interesting about the content there, and what do you think about it?

cclaxton
10-28-2015, 03:58 PM
Could you tell us what you find interesting about the content there, and what do you think about it?
It does seem that the SRO should not be involved in school discipline issues unless they rise to the level requiring an arrest...drug possession, assault, etc. The NASRO view seems like a good approach: School Safety/Security, teaching kids the role of police, student relations, etc. I would like to see them teaching kids HOW to respond to police and doing some role-playing so they understand what to do and what to say when they are being questioned or given an order by police.

Proper training on how to talk to kids about discipline issues seems to be a missing part of SC schools. Let's be honest here...we are talking South Carolina...they are 14th from the bottom in average salaries for teachers, SC is the fifth lowest State for police officer salaries. You get what you pay for.
Cody

JodyH
10-28-2015, 04:09 PM
You get what you pay for.
You pay for shitty parenting?

The "discipline talk" should have been taken care of by the parents looooong before the child ever steps into elementary school, much less high school.

Glenn E. Meyer
10-28-2015, 04:27 PM
You assume that children have functioning parents. We always hear - get the parents involved. However, that assumes Ward and June Cleaver are home and will come a running when the Beaver messes up. That is not the case. For example, in upscale parent households a child will have heard 43 million words before the age of 5 and a poor child hears around 14 million. This impacts strongly on language development. Reading time to children is much reduced in the lower SES and single parent households. This is not to blame allas many have economic demands that preclude 'Beaver' level quality time but we also have parents that are not really involved.

I once did volunteer work with early high school girls who were pregnant in NY. Since they were pregnant they were excluded from the regular high schools. They were supposed to be studying for the Math Regents exam (Algebra and Trig, etc.). However, they didn't even have arithmetic skills. Then we expect them to be 'parents'. I've had female college students who have had to fight their uneducated parents who want them to work and get married at 16.

There are parents and kids who do fight through this to achieve. They are great to work.

One might argue that we don't demands kids go to high school to let the good ones have an uninterrupted education.

secondstoryguy
10-28-2015, 04:30 PM
I have heard from several sourced that police recruiting has taken a hit. We are having trouble filling our ranks and our department is a really nice place to work. This could be bad as less qualified subjects are likely to get hired resulting in even more incidents spawned by poor judgment of people who never should have been hired in the first place.

41magfan
10-28-2015, 04:33 PM
It does seem that the SRO should not be involved in school discipline issues unless they rise to the level requiring an arrest...drug possession, assault, etc. The NASRO view seems like a good approach: School Safety/Security, teaching kids the role of police, student relations, etc. I would like to see them teaching kids HOW to respond to police and doing some role-playing so they understand what to do and what to say when they are being questioned or given an order by police.

Proper training on how to talk to kids about discipline issues seems to be a missing part of SC schools. Let's be honest here...we are talking South Carolina...they are 14th from the bottom in average salaries for teachers, SC is the fifth lowest State for police officer salaries. You get what you pay for.
Cody

That gal's behavior should be viewed as intolerable in all 50 states. This sort of thing has squat to do with the geography.

ETA: In my State, that behavior satisfies the elements of Disorderly Conduct and his actions were not unreasonable in light of her total non-compliance leading up to him putting his hands on her. She could have been compliant and nullified the need for physical contact by anyone.

scw2
10-28-2015, 04:41 PM
It does seem that the SRO should not be involved in school discipline issues unless they rise to the level requiring an arrest...drug possession, assault, etc. The NASRO view seems like a good approach: School Safety/Security, teaching kids the role of police, student relations, etc. I would like to see them teaching kids HOW to respond to police and doing some role-playing so they understand what to do and what to say when they are being questioned or given an order by police.

Proper training on how to talk to kids about discipline issues seems to be a missing part of SC schools. Let's be honest here...we are talking South Carolina...they are 14th from the bottom in average salaries for teachers, SC is the fifth lowest State for police officer salaries. You get what you pay for.
Cody

My buddy sent me this comment from a SRO, aligns with what you said:

I wanted to address this specifically because it brings up one of my largest complaints, and a constant uphill battle I fight. In a microcosm, here is the disconnect between schools and SRO's:
Situation: A kid does something goofy in class, maybe he talks out of turn, throws something at another kid, mouths off to the teacher, and gets sent to the principals office. Nothing criminal has occurred. Kid refuses to go, won't leave class, so teacher calls principal, principals sends me to pull the kid out.
This is a gigantic fucking problem. The situation can only play out a handful of ways. If the kid comes willingly, crisis averted. But what if he doesn't?
Now you have two options. You could try to talk him out, but if that fails, then what? If you don't succeed, that whole class is watching you. As a cop, you'll neuter yourself. That kid must come out of that class or you will lose a massive amount of authority in the eyes of the kids.
So you have one more option. Force him out. Do it gently, sure, but if he struggles or fights back, then what? Now you're fighting a kid.
But here's the motherfucker: You're fighting a kid for a non-criminal school infraction. You, a 200 lbs certified police officer, are fighting a fucking kid for a goddamn school infraction. If I sound mad, it's because I am.
I have gone to bat so many times to the principals and told them, stop calling me for that. If you don't want a kid arrested, if he didn't do something criminal, call the disciplinarian and leave me out of it. But they won't, and they haven't, and one day it's going to be a problem and I'll end up the guy from the fucking news.

Dagga Boy
10-28-2015, 04:48 PM
That gal's behavior should be viewed as intolerable in all 50 states. This sort of thing has squat to do with the geography.

Yep.. I do not give a rat's ass what school you are in anywhere in the US. Talking on your cell phone during class is not something that needs a special sit down talk to discuss the socio-economic issues that may cause this to be a problem. When the teacher tells you to leave and go to the office is not an "option". When the "office" has to come to the class instead to tell you to get up and go to the office and you refuse is not something that needs in-depth special classes to properly communicate to not offend the little special snow flake. And firing a cop who was struck in the face and only grasped this little savage's wrist and pant leg (watch the video) and used only physical strength to move her to a free area for cuffing (which she resisted) without any outlandish language, fists, kicks, strikes or any higher level force tools is the ultimate insult to society, to the other kids in that class who were denied a day of education by a single special victim class female, and the community lost an asset of a cop and gained a new entitled savage.

Also, the guy from the NASRO thing is a blithering idiot. I would like to talk to anyone he worked with about what kind of cop he was.

SRO's not doing a thing in school will now be the new norm, just like leaving the ghetto to eat itself.....yea America, you will get the policing you deserve.

jondoe297
10-28-2015, 04:50 PM
The "discipline talk" should have been taken care of by the parents looooong before the child ever steps into elementary school, much less high school.

Should have been, but with increasing frequency it isn't. I work a lot of school events, and so much of what I see wrong with the kids could have been preemptively dealt with by active parents who taught the concept of consequences.
I see, particularly with "urban youth", a complete lack of impulse control. They want what they want, and do what they want, with no second thought as to the consequences of their actions. When their actions get them in trouble, it's the system's fault and the officer's fault. Then the parents get involved, and take the same position as the kids.
When you've got a 16 year old kid hemmed up and his 28 year old mother shows up, you know it's going to go south.

TCinVA
10-28-2015, 04:59 PM
SRO's not doing a thing in school will now be the new norm, just like leaving the ghetto to eat itself.....yea America, you will get the policing you deserve.

The only way to win is not to play.

JodyH
10-28-2015, 05:08 PM
Some children should be left behind.

texasaggie2005
10-28-2015, 05:17 PM
My buddy sent me this comment from a SRO, aligns with what you said:

I wanted to address this specifically because it brings up one of my largest complaints, and a constant uphill battle I fight. In a microcosm, here is the disconnect between schools and SRO's:
Situation: A kid does something goofy in class, maybe he talks out of turn, throws something at another kid, mouths off to the teacher, and gets sent to the principals office. Nothing criminal has occurred. Kid refuses to go, won't leave class, so teacher calls principal, principals sends me to pull the kid out.
This is a gigantic fucking problem. The situation can only play out a handful of ways. If the kid comes willingly, crisis averted. But what if he doesn't?
Now you have two options. You could try to talk him out, but if that fails, then what? If you don't succeed, that whole class is watching you. As a cop, you'll neuter yourself. That kid must come out of that class or you will lose a massive amount of authority in the eyes of the kids.
So you have one more option. Force him out. Do it gently, sure, but if he struggles or fights back, then what? Now you're fighting a kid.
But here's the motherfucker: You're fighting a kid for a non-criminal school infraction. You, a 200 lbs certified police officer, are fighting a fucking kid for a goddamn school infraction. If I sound mad, it's because I am.
I have gone to bat so many times to the principals and told them, stop calling me for that. If you don't want a kid arrested, if he didn't do something criminal, call the disciplinarian and leave me out of it. But they won't, and they haven't, and one day it's going to be a problem and I'll end up the guy from the fucking news.

FYI; that quote came from a Reddit comment (https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/3qk8wr/im_not_the_guy_from_the_news_but_i_am_a_school/cwg0qfn) I saw earlier today.

hufnagel
10-28-2015, 05:20 PM
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/sheriff-%e2%80%98wanted-to-throw-up%e2%80%99-over-spring-valley-video-of-his-officer/ar-BBmt9jX


RICHLAND COUNTY, SC -- The FBI and the U.S. Justice Department will investigate an incident between a school resource officer and a female student at Spring Valley High School that was caught on video Monday and posted online.

“The Columbia FBI Field Office, the Civil Rights Division, and the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of South Carolina have opened a civil rights investigation into the circumstances surrounding the arrest of a student at Spring Valley High School,” a Department of Justice spokesperson wrote in an email.

“The FBI will collect all available facts and evidence in order to determine whether a federal law was violated. As this is an ongoing investigation, per Department of Justice policy we are unable to comment further at this time.”


What was that about SRO's not doing jack shit anymore or quitting? Should do the latter en mass. I really feel sorry for them and the turns their careers are taking.

KeeFus
10-28-2015, 05:33 PM
ETA: In my State, that behavior satisfies the elements of Disorderly Conduct and his actions were not unreasonable in light of her total non-compliance leading up to him putting his hands on her. She could have been compliant and nullified the need for physical contact by anyone.

Same State. And yes she would have gone to jail.

okie john
10-28-2015, 06:49 PM
Some children should be left behind.

Sig line material, sir.


Okie John

KeeFus
10-28-2015, 07:59 PM
Shamelessly stolen from Survive the Streets on FB

http://i.imgur.com/R8Sq0tQ.jpg

Hizzie
10-28-2015, 08:10 PM
Every time I consider returning to LE another incident hits the national news and another cop is crucified.

GardoneVT
10-28-2015, 08:21 PM
Some CHEIFS should be left behind.

FIFY

cclaxton
10-28-2015, 09:00 PM
IMO High Schools need to be more like boot camps. I have raised three, and teenagers needs lots of regimentation and controls, especially in these modern times. They are too distracted and tempted by drugs, sex, videogames, and violence. High Schools are already festering with appeasement and undisciplined behavior. I am not suggesting it take the place of parenting...but it needs to be a place of strict discipline where teens learn manners, civility, self-discipline, resisting temptation, along with the academics.
Cody

Dagga Boy
10-28-2015, 09:08 PM
IMO High Schools need to be more like boot camps. I have raised three, and teenagers needs lots of regimentation and controls, especially in these modern times. They are too distracted and tempted by drugs, sex, videogames, and violence. High Schools are already festering with appeasement and undisciplined behavior. I am not suggesting it take the place of parenting...but it needs to be a place of strict discipline where teens learn manners, civility, self-discipline, resisting temptation, along with the academics.
Cody

Well.....that went further down the road to not happening today. Like when America sided with a violent felon like Michael Brown instead of a victim officer, enforcement on violent felon is going away. Today America sided with a teen who can break every rule and level of discipline in a school environment, and the last line of defense in that disciplinary process was fired and tomorrow everyone will wonder what happened with discipline at school that will be non-existent. This started with Achmed the IED Timer maker going to the White House while we spit on teachers and officers working in schools, and culminated with little miss "my right to use my cell phone shall not be infringed" and she is made into the Rosa Parks of the fight against any level of discipline and rules at school. Boot camp.....not a fricking chance.

cclaxton
10-28-2015, 09:22 PM
Well.....that went further down the road to not happening today. Like when America sided with a violent felon like Michael Brown instead of a victim officer, enforcement on violent felon is going away. Today America sided with a teen who can break every rule and level of discipline in a school environment, and the last line of defense in that disciplinary process was fired and tomorrow everyone will wonder what happened with discipline at school that will be non-existent. This started with Achmed the IED Timer maker going to the White House while we spit on teachers and officers working in schools, and culminated with little miss "my right to use my cell phone shall not be infringed" and she is made into the Rosa Parks of the fight against any level of discipline and rules at school. Boot camp.....not a fricking chance.
I didn't say it was likely...just what it needs to be.
Cody

stingray
10-29-2015, 06:24 AM
Let me give you a "link" to all these different areas that are seeing these issues..........look at the political leaning of the city government. The harder left, the worse the issue.

THIS statement could NOT be any more accurate. Anyone who says otherwise is at best, intellectually dishonest.

stingray
10-29-2015, 06:29 AM
Just look at the incident in Richland S.C. The video shows this terrible deputy trying to extract a female student from a desk. Looks bad.........however; everybody leaves out the part the she was told to get up and leave the classroom by the teacher, various school administrators, and likely given multiple commands by the officer to get up from the desk and leave the room, and she refused all of them. At some point somebody needs to make her. In the future, I doubt an officer will. I am in a school regularly and the amount of disrespect for teachers, security officers and SRO's is literally disturbing......and I am in a not horrible Middle School. There are zero consequences of any worth. These kids are learning now what comes into play later....there is no consequences and the LEO's are now always assumed to be wrong, and especially if you are of some special victim class group. Folks are now shocked that LEO's simply do not give a crap any longer.

The President is talking now to police about Us and Them and in some negative way........and he is the Instigator in Chief. It is unbelievable how oblivious folks are.



I'm coming into this thread late. I was just about to write about this very same thing. Dude, back in the day, you and I would have had a LOT of FUN working the streets together!!!

stingray
10-29-2015, 06:39 AM
Speaking of S.C. This is a bit of a different take:
http://louderwithcrowder.com/spring-valley-latest-racist-police-brutality-story-changes-with-new-video/

This does not matter. The "leader" and "good" sheriff Leon Lott fired the SRO for having followed South Carolina Criminal Justice Academy teachings in the use of force. I am quite certain the use of force continuum is part of the Richland County SO policy, for which the SRO was terminated for following. Leon Lott is a coward. Using force never looks good-it is not suppost to as you are forcing one person to do something against their will. Leon Lott IS ok with one of his employees being violently assaulted by criminal.

Dagga Boy
10-29-2015, 07:27 AM
Sheriff Lott is not a leader, no matter how many of his vast number of classes have "leadership" in the title. He is a spineless politician-period. He is an example of everything wrong with LE today. When I do my presentations and discuss with officers that their administrators would much rather deal with them getting killed in the line of duty than have to deal with defending them using lethal force.....Sheriff Lott is EXACTLY the kind of pogue I am talking about. He needs to take his uniform off, piss all over that badge that is the same that his deputies wear and quit pretending to be an LEO and put a suit on to wear to the office so everyone knows he is not really one of them. As a plus, it will hide that big yellow streak that is running down his back.

stingray
10-29-2015, 08:11 AM
Sheriff Lott is not a leader, no matter how many of his vast number of classes have "leadership" in the title. He is a spineless politician-period. He is an example of everything wrong with LE today. When I do my presentations and discuss with officers that their administrators would much rather deal with them getting killed in the line of duty than have to deal with defending them using lethal force.....Sheriff Lott is EXACTLY the kind of pogue I am talking about. He needs to take his uniform off, piss all over that badge that is the same that his deputies wear and quit pretending to be an LEO and put a suit on to wear to the office so everyone knows he is not really one of them. As a plus, it will hide that big yellow streak that is running down his back.

Yeah, "you'd do to ride the river with"..........

runcible
10-29-2015, 02:38 PM
IMO High Schools need to be more like boot camps. I have raised three, and teenagers needs lots of regimentation and controls, especially in these modern times. They are too distracted and tempted by drugs, sex, videogames, and violence. High Schools are already festering with appeasement and undisciplined behavior. I am not suggesting it take the place of parenting...but it needs to be a place of strict discipline where teens learn manners, civility, self-discipline, resisting temptation, along with the academics.
Cody

If one is not of the opinion that adults can be held accountable or to standards of reasonable behavior without consequence, then how can you ask that of children?

cclaxton
10-29-2015, 03:17 PM
If one is not of the opinion that adults can be held accountable or to standards of reasonable behavior without consequence, then how can you ask that of children?
Got me there.
Children grow up to become adults, responsible or not. Better that they learn self-discipline before the consequences can get them in more serious trouble.
Cody

BaiHu
10-29-2015, 05:25 PM
Yep.. I do not give a rat's ass what school you are in anywhere in the US. Talking on your cell phone during class is not something that needs a special sit down talk to discuss the socio-economic issues that may cause this to be a problem. When the teacher tells you to leave and go to the office is not an "option". When the "office" has to come to the class instead to tell you to get up and go to the office and you refuse is not something that needs in-depth special classes to properly communicate to not offend the little special snow flake. And firing a cop who was struck in the face and only grasped this little savage's wrist and pant leg (watch the video) and used only physical strength to move her to a free area for cuffing (which she resisted) without any outlandish language, fists, kicks, strikes or any higher level force tools is the ultimate insult to society, to the other kids in that class who were denied a day of education by a single special victim class female, and the community lost an asset of a cop and gained a new entitled savage.

Also, the guy from the NASRO thing is a blithering idiot. I would like to talk to anyone he worked with about what kind of cop he was.

SRO's not doing a thing in school will now be the new norm, just like leaving the ghetto to eat itself.....yea America, you will get the policing you deserve.

Agreed. I see this happen in upper-middle-class suburbia with 4-6 year old kids. Once I tell them something, I repeat that it's not an option and then I make them do what I want. Kid's reaction: Surprised--holy shit! there are consequences here. Parent's reaction: Well, shit, that really works? I'm sold, we're bringing our kids here every chance we get. My reaction: facepalm. Seriously, parents of ALL SES can forget how they were parented correctly. Another SJW and MSM victory over the body of good citizens.


Should have been, but with increasing frequency it isn't. I work a lot of school events, and so much of what I see wrong with the kids could have been preemptively dealt with by active parents who taught the concept of consequences.
I see, particularly with "urban youth", a complete lack of impulse control. They want what they want, and do what they want, with no second thought as to the consequences of their actions. When their actions get them in trouble, it's the system's fault and the officer's fault. Then the parents get involved, and take the same position as the kids.
When you've got a 16 year old kid hemmed up and his 28 year old mother shows up, you know it's going to go south.

Emphasis for my enjoyment/delight.




Well.....that went further down the road to not happening today. Like when America sided with a violent felon like Michael Brown instead of a victim officer, enforcement on violent felon is going away. Today America sided with a teen who can break every rule and level of discipline in a school environment, and the last line of defense in that disciplinary process was fired and tomorrow everyone will wonder what happened with discipline at school that will be non-existent. This started with Achmed the IED Timer maker going to the White House while we spit on teachers and officers working in schools, and culminated with little miss "my right to use my cell phone shall not be infringed" and she is made into the Rosa Parks of the fight against any level of discipline and rules at school. Boot camp.....not a fricking chance.

QFT!!


If one is not of the opinion that adults can be held accountable or to standards of reasonable behavior without consequence, then how can you ask that of children?

Amen! Endeth the thread. Great to hear all of your voice about this poor SRO. Even my conservative/gun-toting friends just don't get it. Mainly b/c they've never really been in a scuffle or tried to control someone.

Dagga Boy
10-29-2015, 08:09 PM
This just got posted to the Sheriff's "teen" Facebook page. I thought it sums things up well...;)

Sheriff Leon Lott....are you teaching teens how to be a Blue Falcon? You may need to ask a real police officer what that is, as you haven't a clue about police work or leadership. You are a politician who has disgraced the badge you share with your deputies. Leadership is not shopping at the store at the FBI National Academy. Leadership means you take the hard road for your troops. As a recognized use of force expert, I did a frame by frame dissection of Ben Fields actions. He simply held the belligerent female's wrist and pant leg and attempted to remove her from a difficult position in a student desk after giving good verbal advisement prior. He was struck in the head with a closed fist. During the resistance of the female the desk flipped over, which appeared unintentional. Deputy Fields immediately freed the combative female from the desk to avoid significant hazard to both him and her. It was nice to see an officer in good enough physical shape to remove her to a clear area where he gave further verbal advisement and cuffed her while still resisting. No strikes, kicks, escalated force tools, offensive language, or excessive force. He held a wrist and a pant leg and had enough strength to move her to an area free of hazards. That is excellent work in a difficult situation and while alone. Shame on you for throwing him under the bus rather than risk actually being a leader. Please stop wearing a uniform to work like real officer's. A nice suit is better suited to your style of supervision and should hide the gigantic yellow streak running down your back. Thanks for letting the lawless win and ruining the career of an officer who appears to be a true example to young people, with the exception of gang members who seem to dislike him. Hopefully,the people of your community will elect someone that really is a leader rather than an empty uniform with a ring from the FBI.

41magfan
10-29-2015, 08:37 PM
This just got posted to the Sheriff's "teen" Facebook page. I thought it sums things up well...;)

Sheriff Leon Lott....are you teaching teens how to be a Blue Falcon? You may need to ask a real police officer what that is, as you haven't a clue about police work or leadership. You are a politician who has disgraced the badge you share with your deputies. Leadership is not shopping at the store at the FBI National Academy. Leadership means you take the hard road for your troops. As a recognized use of force expert, I did a frame by frame dissection of Ben Fields actions. He simply held the belligerent female's wrist and pant leg and attempted to remove her from a difficult position in a student desk after giving good verbal advisement prior. He was struck in the head with a closed fist. During the resistance of the female the desk flipped over, which appeared unintentional. Deputy Fields immediately freed the combative female from the desk to avoid significant hazard to both him and her. It was nice to see an officer in good enough physical shape to remove her to a clear area where he gave further verbal advisement and cuffed her while still resisting. No strikes, kicks, escalated force tools, offensive language, or excessive force. He held a wrist and a pant leg and had enough strength to move her to an area free of hazards. That is excellent work in a difficult situation and while alone. Shame on you for throwing him under the bus rather than risk actually being a leader. Please stop wearing a uniform to work like real officer's. A nice suit is better suited to your style of supervision and should hide the gigantic yellow streak running down your back. Thanks for letting the lawless win and ruining the career of an officer who appears to be a true example to young people, with the exception of gang members who seem to dislike him. Hopefully,the people of your community will elect someone that really is a leader rather than an empty uniform with a ring from the FBI.

That verbiage has a familiar ring to it ........ :^)

My gut tells me there's a future Sheriff in that agency that will have the overwhelming support of its members when re-election time comes around and his sorry ass gets ousted. Let's hope so.

Mitch
10-29-2015, 09:19 PM
That verbiage has a familiar ring to it ........ :^)

My gut tells me there's a future Sheriff in that agency that will have the overwhelming support of its members when re-election time comes around and his sorry ass gets ousted. Let's hope so.

I hope so. Otherwise that community deserves what it gets afterwards.

Drang
10-30-2015, 11:25 AM
Sheriff Lott is EXACTLY the kind of pogue I am talking about. He needs to... piss all over that badge that is the same that his deputies wear

He's already done that.

Wondering Beard
10-30-2015, 12:21 PM
More on the SC High School incident:

http://progunfighter.com/south_carolina_aar/

Not being LEO, I don't know if this is a good analysis or not.

UNK
10-30-2015, 01:00 PM
The apple doesn't fall far from the tree.


Some children should be left behind.

TAZ
10-30-2015, 01:16 PM
You pay for shitty parenting?.

Every April 15, every time you buy something @ the store, pay your property taxes, pay your utility bills (Universal Access Fee anyone)... So yes, we constantly pay for shitty parenting because we feel the need to support habitual fuck ups. I'm OK with offering a helping hand to those who come upon hard times, even if they have made the bed themselves; once or twice. When you become a career fuck up its time to allow you to circle the drain and leave.

I am not certain why a Police Officer was called to a scene of no crime. School district policy is not law. Those incidents need to be handled by school administrators. They are the ones who enable the dipshit behavior so they need to deal with it. Unless someone from the school district is filing a complaint against a student for LAW violations the LEO need not get involved. In this instance is there a law on the books making it illegal for minors to talk on the phone. If not the guy shouldn't have been there or in he least should have explained that no law has been broken and as such he can't get involved. I'm guessing that more LEO will take that approach from here on out.

As far as texting, surfing the web, bookfacing, twattering and what not in class. As a parent, so long as those idiots aren't disturbing my child who is there to learn: let them at it. The jackasses have been led to water; if they choose to not drink and die of thirst so be it. I'd couple that with no FSA benefits without an HS degree.

Is it illegal for teachers to have air horns. Maybe a carry around a device that causes interference with cellphones. Nothing more annoying than a little feedback introduced into the conversation. But them in sure another victim class will be created to address the issue.

Dagga Boy
10-30-2015, 01:52 PM
More on the SC High School incident:

http://progunfighter.com/south_carolina_aar/

Not being LEO, I don't know if this is a good analysis or not.

It is very good as an analysis.

coldcase1984
10-30-2015, 03:30 PM
Things started going bad the summer of '08, with the anointment of the freshman Senator from Illinois as the Democrat presidential candidate.

The push back, the "we run this" narrative and assaults on officers started picking up before that fall. It's only accelerated in the looong seven years since. The big guy at 1600 has openly spat on the Constitution, verbally attacked police and demonized us on every occasion available and well before His Justice Department failed in every attempt to make justifiable shootings look otherwise.

We got the government and society we deserve, it seems. I'm 56 and got seven years left til 30. I only get excited by major felonies in progress anymore. Things I'd have made stops for which I'd have at least given verbal warnings have been placed on ignore for quite awhile. Since I'm a detective I can quietly work at finessing very bad people into jail for extended periods with very little drama and still feel effective.

As a result I've not been sued in a number of years and only appear on TV for good reasons these days... So far, so good.

P.S. I was one of the first five SROs in Tennessee in fall '93. Things were very bad in classrooms here 20+ years ago, and that's why we brought the program to the state. I was the first to jump ship (because of shitbag school management and a worse hired in supervisor) after two years and went to a very active narcotics unit. It was fun then but wouldn't want any part of it now...

cclaxton
10-30-2015, 03:52 PM
To what extent does use of force vary by jurisdiction?
And, as a follow-up to that...from a Law Enforcement perspective, can States and Cities make different decisions on what force is appropriate for a given situation?
I don't care about the political environment. I am more interested in the community standards that may apply in different locations because...well different locations are different.
Here are some jurisdictions that may set different standards. I am not making a judgement, just pointing out they are dramatically different from an enforcement perspective:
- South Carolina Suburban Schools versus Chicago City Schools
- South LA versus Marin County, CA
- Baltimore City Drug-Infested Area versus Rural Maryland
- Virginia versus Maryland
- Etc.

It just seems to me that the media is making a judgement about how LEOs do their jobs using a standard that the media is applying universally, rather than considering the local and regional differences. My view is that local and regional differences should be tolerated, and we should not be trying to apply a universal policy...especially one created by the media.
Cody

stingray
10-30-2015, 07:29 PM
To what extent does use of force vary by jurisdiction?
And, as a follow-up to that...from a Law Enforcement perspective, can States and Cities make different decisions on what force is appropriate for a given situation?
I don't care about the political environment. I am more interested in the community standards that may apply in different locations because...well different locations are different.
Here are some jurisdictions that may set different standards. I am not making a judgement, just pointing out they are dramatically different from an enforcement perspective:
- South Carolina Suburban Schools versus Chicago City Schools
- South LA versus Marin County, CA
- Baltimore City Drug-Infested Area versus Rural Maryland
- Virginia versus Maryland
- Etc.

It just seems to me that the media is making a judgement about how LEOs do their jobs using a standard that the media is applying universally, rather than considering the local and regional differences. My view is that local and regional differences should be tolerated, and we should not be trying to apply a universal policy...especially one created by the media.
Cody

The concept in use of force varies very little. The use of force continuum is standard. Where difference come in, is in the use of intermediate force options. What may be different is which order do I use spray, tazer of impact weapon. Beyond that, things are the same.

Dagga Boy
10-30-2015, 07:58 PM
To what extent does use of force vary by jurisdiction?
And, as a follow-up to that...from a Law Enforcement perspective, can States and Cities make different decisions on what force is appropriate for a given situation?
I don't care about the political environment. I am more interested in the community standards that may apply in different locations because...well different locations are different.
Here are some jurisdictions that may set different standards. I am not making a judgement, just pointing out they are dramatically different from an enforcement perspective:
- South Carolina Suburban Schools versus Chicago City Schools
- South LA versus Marin County, CA
- Baltimore City Drug-Infested Area versus Rural Maryland
- Virginia versus Maryland
- Etc.

It just seems to me that the media is making a judgement about how LEOs do their jobs using a standard that the media is applying universally, rather than considering the local and regional differences. My view is that local and regional differences should be tolerated, and we should not be trying to apply a universal policy...especially one created by the media.
Cody


Nope.....Graham vs. Connor...period. The problem is that Graham specifically does not look from a 20/20 hindsight, and the media and politicians do because they have no concept of use of force standards and how it works. It is not supposed to be excessive, which the media and politicians, and uneducated commenters from the peanut gallery confuse with it being fair or even. The police are supposed to win. The idea is to win decisively without anymore force after full compliance and control has been made......FULL compliance and control. Officers tend to get into trouble by not using enough force early enough to dominate the encounter, and then it turns into a mess. South Carolina is an exceptional case of people not understanding how it really works. The only problem would have been if the officer continued using force once the handcuffs went on. By the same standard, the officer who shot the fleeing non-felon in the back who he could not articulate was a threat to society based on his knowledge at the time was clearly excessive. It really does not matter where it happens.

41magfan
10-30-2015, 08:43 PM
The problem with incidents like this SC case (and so many others) is that they are not being examined in light of what's lawful, they're being judged by what some collective group thinks is arbitrarily acceptable based on their own subjective notions. I would like to think the pitfalls in trying to operate under such an asinine level of scrutiny is self-evident.

BaiHu
10-30-2015, 09:31 PM
I think the shorter and larger problem is that an SRO shouldn't be needed to have a kid sit the eff down and take a math class without disturbing it. I'm only 41 and this behavior would never fly when I was in high school.

Gadfly
10-30-2015, 09:44 PM
Nope.....Graham vs. Connor...period. The problem is that Graham specifically does not look from a 20/20 hindsight, and the media and politicians do because they have no concept of use of force standards and how it works. It is not supposed to be excessive, which the media and politicians, and uneducated commenters from the peanut gallery confuse with it being fair or even. The police are supposed to win. The idea is to win decisively without anymore force after full compliance and control has been made......FULL compliance and control. Officers tend to get into trouble by not using enough force early enough to dominate the encounter, and then it turns into a mess. South Carolina is an exceptional case of people not understanding how it really works. The only problem would have been if the officer continued using force once the handcuffs went on. By the same standard, the officer who shot the fleeing non-felon in the back who he could not articulate was a threat to society based on his knowledge at the time was clearly excessive. It really does not matter where it happens.


The problem with incidents like this SC case (and so many others) is that they are not being examined in light of what's lawful, they're being judged by what some collective group thinks is arbitrarily acceptable based on their own subjective notions. I would like to think the pitfalls of trying to operate under such an asinine level of scrutiny is self-evident.

Great answers. As mentioned Graham v Connor established that officers are not judged in 20/20 hindsight, but are judged based on the totality of circumstances and the information available to the officer at the time the force was applied. The court also noted the officers do not have to be "right", there actions and force simply must be "reasonable" given the limited information the officer has in the split second he decided to use force.

A quick breakdown for those not in LE. In Connor, the officer was actually "wrong". He thought, based on the actions of Graham, the time of day, the crime rate of the area, and the rapid speed at which Graham exited a convenience store, that the store may have just been robbed. The officer gave chase. Once stopped, the passenger in the vehicle seemed intoxicated and was not following lawful commands. No one was shot, but the driver and passenger were bounced around a little for not following commands.

In the end, the store had not been robbed. The passenger of the car was having a diabetic episode and the driver had run into the store to buy orange juice. When he saw how long the line was, he ran out and sped off to find another store up the street.

The court said that while the officer was wrong in 20/20 hindsight, at the time he applied the force, he was operating under his observation that he was dealing with a possible armed robber who was not cooperating. The passenger was not responsive, not because he was drunk or resisting, he was in a diabetic shock. The officer can't sort out the problem until everyone is secured... So his actions were reasonable, given the information he had when he initiated the stop.

Cops don't always know what situation they are walking in on. But they can use force that is reasonable to overcome resistance and secure the scene. Then they can sort out the players and figure out who is who. He does not always have to be right, but his action have to be reasonable based on the totality of circumstance known at the time.

Tamara
10-30-2015, 10:30 PM
Things started going bad the summer of '08...

We're reaping a harvest that started being sown long before then. If anything, the winning candidate of '08 was a product of '68.

1slow
10-30-2015, 11:44 PM
We're reaping a harvest that started being sown long before then. If anything, the winning candidate of '08 was a product of '68.

Yes !
Johnson's ill named "great society" programs and leftists dodging Vietnam burrowing into education have left us a mess.

Bigguy
10-31-2015, 10:07 AM
We're reaping a harvest that started being sown long before then. If anything, the winning candidate of '08 was a product of '68.

So much truth in so few words.

Glenn E. Meyer
10-31-2015, 10:43 AM
http://www.wistv.com/story/30393934/spring-valley-students-stage-walkout-in-support-of-ben-fields

Students support Officer.

Now how about that. Let's see if the networks report it.

Drang
10-31-2015, 12:47 PM
We're reaping a harvest that started being sown long before then. If anything, the winning candidate of '08 was a product of '68.

Started decades earlier. Remember that such well-known humanists as Mussolini, Stalin, and Hitler all admired "American Progressivism (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressivism_in_the_United_States)."

According to historian William Leuchtenburg:

The Progressives believed in the Hamiltonian concept of positive government, of a national government directing the destinies of the nation at home and abroad. They had little but contempt for the strict construction of the Constitution by conservative judges, who would restrict the power of the national government to act against social evils and to extend the blessings of democracy to less favored lands. The real enemy was particularism, state rights, limited government.

cclaxton
10-31-2015, 02:28 PM
Nope.....Graham vs. Connor...period. The problem is that Graham specifically does not look from a 20/20 hindsight, and the media and politicians do because they have no concept of use of force standards and how it works. It is not supposed to be excessive, which the media and politicians, and uneducated commenters from the peanut gallery confuse with it being fair or even. The police are supposed to win. The idea is to win decisively without anymore force after full compliance and control has been made......FULL compliance and control. Officers tend to get into trouble by not using enough force early enough to dominate the encounter, and then it turns into a mess. South Carolina is an exceptional case of people not understanding how it really works. The only problem would have been if the officer continued using force once the handcuffs went on. By the same standard, the officer who shot the fleeing non-felon in the back who he could not articulate was a threat to society based on his knowledge at the time was clearly excessive. It really does not matter where it happens.

So here is a quote from the decision in Graham v. Connor:
Determining whether the force used to effect a particular seizure is "reasonable" under the Fourth Amendment requires a careful balancing of "`the nature and quality of the intrusion on the individual's Fourth Amendment interests'" against the countervailing governmental interests at stake. Id., at 8, quoting United States v. Place, 462 U.S. 696, 703 (http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/462/696.html#703)(1983). Our Fourth Amendment jurisprudence has long recognized that the right to make an arrest or investigatory stop necessarily carries with it the right to use some degree of physical coercion or threat thereof to effect it. See Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S., at 22 (http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/392/1.html#22)-27. Because "[t]he test of reasonableness under the Fourth Amendment is not capable of precise definition or mechanical application," Bell v. Wolfish, 441 U.S. 520, 559 (http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/441/520.html#559)(1979), however, its proper application requires careful attention to the facts and circumstances of each particular case, including the severity of the crime at issue, whether the suspect poses an immediate threat to the safety of the officers or others, and whether he is actively resisting arrest or attempting to evade arrest by flight. See Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S., at 8 (http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/471/1.html#8)-9 (the question is "whether the totality of the circumstances justifie[s] a particular sort of . . . seizure"). -

So this answers my question about whether jurisdictions can vary in how they apply force in law enforcement since this is established by the SCOTUS nationally. But I still have a question about this: SCOTUS set what the threshold establishing that it must be reasonable given the circumstances, so it is essentially saying there is a maximum amount of force that could be used for a given situation. In other words, if a suspect is drunk and he is trying to punch you and has no weapons and there is no lethal threat, you can't just shoot him...that would exceed the threshold of being "reasonable," right? (Sure, there is always a possible situation when there may be a lethal threat, but normally a drunk guy throwing a punch is not one.) So since there is a maximum lawful level of force that can be used in a given situation, that must mean there is a minimum level of force that could be used in a given situation, right?

Also, since Graham v Connor states that the severity of the crime and the threat to safety and whether a person is resisting arrest are factors that must be used to determine the reasonable amount of force. I think we would all agree that the SC High School situation would mean much less force would be reasonable than if the student was guilty of an assault or was presenting a threat to the class, right? Let's say the girl had earlier in the day punched another student, and the LEO was there to arrest her. How much more force would the officer use based on the fact that the crime was more serious?

And, while I am not suggesting that the level of force used exceeded Graham, was there a lower level of force that could have been applied to get the girl to comply?

I am just trying to understand the application of Graham under the reasonableness standard.
Thanks,
Cody

41magfan
10-31-2015, 03:10 PM
Some agencies may tweak this chart a bit to clarify or address their particular SOP's, but this is pretty standard stuff.

To someone who's never had to force compliance on someone, what COPS do sometimes may look excessive. The fact that this involved a HS student is fairly irrelevant and the force used to remove her from the classroom was reasonable IMO. This officer (like so many others) is simply a victim of political correctness and an ignorant public.

Using this chart as a guideline, I'd like to hear from anyone who may think they have a better option than the soft empty hand level of force used by the SRO in this case.


From the NIJ website : http://www.nij.gov/topics/law-enforcement/officer-safety/use-of-force/pages/continuum.aspx

The Use-of-Force Continuum

Most law enforcement agencies have policies that guide their use of force. These policies describe a escalating series of actions an officer may take to resolve a situation. This continuum generally has many levels, and officers are instructed to respond with a level of force appropriate to the situation at hand, acknowledging that the officer may move from one part of the continuum to another in a matter of seconds.

An example of a use-of-force continuum follows:
•Officer Presence — No force is used. Considered the best way to resolve a situation. ◦The mere presence of a law enforcement officer works to deter crime or diffuse a situation.
◦Officers' attitudes are professional and nonthreatening.

•Verbalization — Force is not-physical. ◦Officers issue calm, nonthreatening commands, such as "Let me see your identification and registration."
◦Officers may increase their volume and shorten commands in an attempt to gain compliance. Short commands might include "Stop," or "Don't move."

•Empty-Hand Control — Officers use bodily force to gain control of a situation. ◦Soft technique. Officers use grabs, holds and joint locks to restrain an individual.
◦Hard technique. Officers use punches and kicks to restrain an individual.

•Less-Lethal Methods — Officers use less-lethal technologies to gain control of a situation.
(See Deciding When and How to Use Less-Lethal Devices. ) ◦Blunt impact. Officers may use a baton or projectile to immobilize a combative person.
◦Chemical. Officers may use chemical sprays or projectiles embedded with chemicals to restrain an individual (e.g., pepper spray).
◦Conducted Energy Devices (CEDs). Officers may use CEDs to immobilize an individual. CEDs discharge a high-voltage, low-amperage jolt of electricity at a distance.

•Lethal Force — Officers use lethal weapons to gain control of a situation. Should only be used if a suspect poses a serious threat to the officer or another individual. ◦Officers use deadly weapons such as firearms to stop an individual's actions.

ETA: A typical continuum graphic .....

http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/640x480q90/633/LehpTh.jpg (https://imageshack.com/i/hlLehpThj)

Hambo
10-31-2015, 04:05 PM
And, while I am not suggesting that the level of force used exceeded Graham, was there a lower level of force that could have been applied to get the girl to comply?


Such as?

You show up to deal with a student who will not leave the room. You ask politely. She tells you to go fuck yourself. You get more forceful and tell her she will be removed. She tells you to go fuck yourself again. At this point it's either you go fuck yourself or put your hands on her.

Where and when I went to school the teachers would have handled this, or in the case of a female teacher and a feisty male student, she would have gotten a male teacher or the principal to handle it. In my rural school district I saw a guy in my class get intentionally dumped exactly like this girl basically because he was being a dick. It chilled him right out. I also saw a male teacher try to break up a fight and take a punch to the face, at which point he face punched his assailant for the win. That no longer flies, so teachers get to be impotent and SRO's end up on YouTube.

KeeFus
10-31-2015, 04:33 PM
And, while I am not suggesting that the level of force used exceeded Graham, was there a lower level of force that could have been applied to get the girl to comply?
Cody

Well, lets look at what the deputy did and didnt do while using the use of force continuum someone else supplied.

1) Physical presence. Didnt work;
2) Verbal commands. Didnt work;
3) Empty hand techniques. WORKED.
4) Intermediate weapons (OC/Taser/Baton) Not needed.
5) Deadly Force. Not needed.

Seems pretty simple to me.

Dagga Boy
10-31-2015, 09:50 PM
Cody, usually by the typical use of force continuum (many are kind of going away from the rigid force ladder) you can go up a couple levels without too much issue. Again, what many people fail to understand is it is not supposed to be fair or even. The police are not supposed to lose or get hurt. You can use the force necessary to OVERCOME resistance, not meet resistance. Those who meet resistance with equal or lesser force often get hurt, lose, end up in an escalation of violence on the part of the resistive subject, flight, or a combination of the above.

In my experience officers get in a ton of trouble when they do not do this and merely try to meet resistance. A overwhelming trend I saw with one scenario that usually ended with officers being injured was dealing with females. In all actuality the guy in South Carolina did a good job not getting himself hurt....which nobody seems to give a crap about. Had he been passive with the female like the uneducated and inexperienced think he should have been, I can about guarantee those closed fist punches from the female would start turning into wild clawing, kicking and often biting as many females do not resist with any level of restraint. My rule with females was pretty much "fight like a man, get hit like a man". It isn't pretty and goes against everything I stand for, but it is necessary if you do not want to wind up bleeding or injured.

Law enforcement generally uses less force than they should FAR more often than too much. Cases like the officer who shot the fleeing suspect in the back are total anomalies. Much of what is believed to be excessive by those who do not understand application of force necessary to overcome resistance to effect an arrest is in fact well within what is reasonable including the current SC situation where the only actual force used by the officer was grasping a wrist and pant leg, and physically moving a resistive subject to a clear safe area for cuffing.

I have been a big user of verbal judo. I go through a very choreographed set of verbal advisements, and once I get to "Sir, Is there anything I can say or do at this time to get you to comply".....at this point if they do not immediately comply they get decked. Anyone who does not agree that force should be used at this point is in favor of crooks controlling the encounter, and that does not work in my world, and you may as well not have the police.......which is what a ton of places are now getting.

Gadfly
10-31-2015, 09:59 PM
^^ THIS....

Nyeti speaks words of wisdom.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

LSP552
10-31-2015, 11:25 PM
In my experience officers get in a ton of trouble when they do not do this and merely try to meet resistance. A overwhelming trend I saw with one scenario that usually ended with officers being injured was dealing with females. In all actuality the guy in South Carolina did a good job not getting himself hurt....which nobody seems to give a crap about. Had he been passive with the female like the uneducated and inexperienced think he should have been, I can about guarantee those closed fist punches from the female would start turning into wild clawing, kicking and often biting as many females do not resist with any level of restraint. My rule with females was pretty much "fight like a man, get hit like a man". It isn't pretty and goes against everything I stand for, but it is necessary if you do not want to wind up bleeding or injured.

Law enforcement generally uses less force than they should FAR more often than too much. Cases like the officer who shot the fleeing suspect in the back are total anomalies. Much of what is believed to be excessive by those who do not understand application of force necessary to overcome resistance to effect an arrest is in fact well within what is reasonable including the current SC situation where the only actual force used by the officer was grasping a wrist and pant leg, and physically moving a resistive subject to a clear safe area for cuffing.



I policed for 34 years (Army, city and state) and the only scars I have are from a 110lb woman.....because I didn't treat her like a man.

DocGKR
11-01-2015, 01:20 AM
Well said Nyeti!!!

Keefus--nicely laid out.

Too bad the US AG and DOJ have seemingly lost the wisdom to understand these facts...

Chuck Haggard
11-01-2015, 05:17 AM
So here is a quote from the decision in Graham v. Connor:

[/FONT][/COLOR]So this answers my question about whether jurisdictions can vary in how they apply force in law enforcement since this is established by the SCOTUS nationally. But I still have a question about this: SCOTUS set what the threshold establishing that it must be reasonable given the circumstances, so it is essentially saying there is a maximum amount of force that could be used for a given situation. In other words, if a suspect is drunk and he is trying to punch you and has no weapons and there is no lethal threat, you can't just shoot him...that would exceed the threshold of being "reasonable," right? (Sure, there is always a possible situation when there may be a lethal threat, but normally a drunk guy throwing a punch is not one.) So since there is a maximum lawful level of force that can be used in a given situation, that must mean there is a minimum level of force that could be used in a given situation, right?

Also, since Graham v Connor states that the severity of the crime and the threat to safety and whether a person is resisting arrest are factors that must be used to determine the reasonable amount of force. I think we would all agree that the SC High School situation would mean much less force would be reasonable than if the student was guilty of an assault or was presenting a threat to the class, right? Let's say the girl had earlier in the day punched another student, and the LEO was there to arrest her. How much more force would the officer use based on the fact that the crime was more serious?

And, while I am not suggesting that the level of force used exceeded Graham, was there a lower level of force that could have been applied to get the girl to comply?

I am just trying to understand the application of Graham under the reasonableness standard.
Thanks,
Cody

Please describe this "minimum" level of force as you envision it.

The answer to your question is an emphatic "No!"

The reason for that is, until things are done, and the arrestee is secure, no one has any idea until 20-20 hindsight time what the successful "minimum" level of force might have been, even then the bad guy gets a vote.

In the student case in question, she was not "slammed" as so many people have described this case, not was she "thrown across the room". She was handled with minimal levels of empty hand control, and she was no injured.

stingray
11-01-2015, 08:07 AM
Well said Nyeti!!!

Keefus--nicely laid out.

Too bad the US AG and DOJ have seemingly lost the wisdom to understand these facts...

Sir I respectfully disagree with you here. You cannot lose that, which you never had. The AG has never had such wisdom, evidenced by comments she makes. The DOJ rank and file might be the exception. But DOJ management is a perfect reflection of the current administration.

Word on the streets is Leon Lott (Richland County sheriff who terminated his SRO for following his very own use of force policy) is bucking to become the us marshal for SC if Hilary get elected is another example of not understanding these facts.

Dagga Boy
11-01-2015, 11:51 AM
While we are actually having a decent discussion on force, let's look at some other factors that can get a little confusing. It is also what I think folks are getting confused in cases like both Ferguson and the SC classroom. You have some situations where a level of force is used due to disparity of size issues. A case of an officer the size of Darren Wilson looking at someone the size of Michael Brown, the not so gentle giant, charging him after an already attempted gun grab and shooting is one of those cases where the force level of using lethal force against an "unarmed person". This is a case of a level of force being used because of the officer being in fear of his life due to a totality of circumstances. In the case of the SC classroom. We are looking at the level of force in regard to the force used to effect the arrest. In this case the officer is not trying to make the case for use of a level of force to defend himself, it is the force used to effect the arrest. If we like at the level of force used, by using speed and strength, he was able to efficiently make the arrest with the lowest level of force...physical grasping of a wrist and clothing. What got everybody upset was the speed and overwhelming strength (which I look at as good). Now folks can take the stand that he should have sat down and had lunch with her to discuss why she will not listen to a single person of authority in the school and why her right to use a cell phone in class outweighs the other students right to have an education in the classroom in school, but the level of force is minor no matter how it looked to a bunch of folks in the world who have never had to do this for real. I will be happy to put my 13 year old daughter in a student desk and challenge any of those who think that the force was too great to get a "little girl" out of the desk (note-my kid will be told she gets an iPhone 6 if she keeps the bad person from getting her out of the desk). I will not be responsible if you lose an eye and a testicle in the encounter;). The officers job is to get cuffs on and the force scale is based on that. Again, he is supposed to win decisively and I will contend that handcuffing is a voluntary process. You cannot handcuff a person who does not want to be. Let me clarify for those with less experience in these matters. If someone does voluntarily place there hands in the right position with verbal commands, you are not getting them on without some level of force or pain compliance. Sometimes to the level that you have to make them unconscious. I challenge anyone to try to get me cuffed with just physical force and no pain compliance. I have had up to five adult male police officers test this and have yet to be cuffed on pure strength with no pain compliance. These are the cases where I ask people "what would you have done if what the officer did was wrong". This is where we get ideas like buying the student lunch and having a talk...my retort....and what if she spits food in your face and tells you to go F@ck yourself? Now we are back to the same or higher level of force (like pepper spray or a taser) and the arrestee has dictated the entire event. If that is how we want society run, so be it.

In the case of Leon Lott.....my contacts in the area also regard him as a democrat who is a self serving politician first and no officers who I respect have a single good word about him. I believe "mouth breathing queef" was the nicest thing said. Great, elect Hilary and this is the guy running the most powerful federal LE agency in SC.....should be awesome for the citizenry as far as how the US marshals do their jobs in removing the worst of the worst fugitives from their streets.

stingray
11-01-2015, 04:30 PM
While we are actually having a decent discussion on force, let's look at some other factors that can get a little confusing. It is also what I think folks are getting confused in cases like both Ferguson and the SC classroom. You have some situations where a level of force is used due to disparity of size issues. A case of an officer the size of Darren Wilson looking at someone the size of Michael Brown, the not so gentle giant, charging him after an already attempted gun grab and shooting is one of those cases where the force level of using lethal force against an "unarmed person". This is a case of a level of force being used because of the officer being in fear of his life due to a totality of circumstances. In the case of the SC classroom. We are looking at the level of force in regard to the force used to effect the arrest. In this case the officer is not trying to make the case for use of a level of force to defend himself, it is the force used to effect the arrest. If we like at the level of force used, by using speed and strength, he was able to efficiently make the arrest with the lowest level of force...physical grasping of a wrist and clothing. What got everybody upset was the speed and overwhelming strength (which I look at as good). Now folks can take the stand that he should have sat down and had lunch with her to discuss why she will not listen to a single person of authority in the school and why her right to use a cell phone in class outweighs the other students right to have an education in the classroom in school, but the level of force is minor no matter how it looked to a bunch of folks in the world who have never had to do this for real. I will be happy to put my 13 year old daughter in a student desk and challenge any of those who think that the force was too great to get a "little girl" out of the desk (note-my kid will be told she gets an iPhone 6 if she keeps the bad person from getting her out of the desk). I will not be responsible if you lose an eye and a testicle in the encounter;). The officers job is to get cuffs on and the force scale is based on that. Again, he is supposed to win decisively and I will contend that handcuffing is a voluntary process. You cannot handcuff a person who does not want to be. Let me clarify for those with less experience in these matters. If someone does voluntarily place there hands in the right position with verbal commands, you are not getting them on without some level of force or pain compliance. Sometimes to the level that you have to make them unconscious. I challenge anyone to try to get me cuffed with just physical force and no pain compliance. I have had up to five adult male police officers test this and have yet to be cuffed on pure strength with no pain compliance. These are the cases where I ask people "what would you have done if what the officer did was wrong". This is where we get ideas like buying the student lunch and having a talk...my retort....and what if she spits food in your face and tells you to go F@ck yourself? Now we are back to the same or higher level of force (like pepper spray or a taser) and the arrestee has dictated the entire event. If that is how we want society run, so be it.

In the case of Leon Lott.....my contacts in the area also regard him as a democrat who is a self serving politician first and no officers who I respect have a single good word about him. I believe "mouth breathing queef" was the nicest thing said. Great, elect Hilary and this is the guy running the most powerful federal LE agency in SC.....should be awesome for the citizenry as far as how the US marshals do their jobs in removing the worst of the worst fugitives from their streets.

I myself, have not heard the "mouth breathing queef" quote before. But I can't disagree with them.

45dotACP
11-01-2015, 05:00 PM
As I understand, the students in that very school staged a "walk off" in support of the SRO. And who said kids were all disrespectful little shits :D

Sent from my VS876 using Tapatalk

Dagga Boy
11-01-2015, 05:25 PM
As I understand, the students in that very school staged a "walk off" in support of the SRO. And who said kids were all disrespectful little shits :D

Sent from my VS876 using Tapatalk

I saw that on the big cable news channels.........oh wait......no I didn't. Never mind.

Warren Wilson
11-01-2015, 09:26 PM
Someone (can't remember who) had a short-lived term for this in the 90s. "Litigational hesitation" or something. Another poster mentioned the cyclical nature of anti-law enforcement sentiment and violence. In fact, it's almost predictably cyclical. Most recently, cops were being ambushed by Black Panthers and bombed by socialist filth in the 60’s and 70’s. In the late 70’s and early 80’s, there was an unofficial officer survival movement among law enforcement. Body armor was put into regular use, training was emphasized, and mindsets began to change. The public stopped romanticizing criminals as heroes; especially as innocents became increasingly caught up in the carnage. It was the same in the 20’s and 30’s and in the late 1800’s. The common denominator has always been a inexcusable partnership between a violent criminal element and an ignorant, irresponsible media. I'm a little concerned, however, this one may go a bit deeper since never before have so many nationally-recognized politicians stirred the violence. Also, people are progressively more ignorant of what it takes to win a fight.

One of my daughter's teenage friends who has been at my house regularly since she was in elementary school asked me why cops don't shoot to wound instead of shooting to kill. I think I handled it pretty well and even walked her through some scenarios. I asked her if she'd ever seen anyone get in a fight at school. I was trying to draw on that experience to demonstrate how awkward and ugly physical confrontations are. She never had. After that, I started asking rookies at the department the same question. Except for the folks with prior military or LE experience, not one of them I questioned had ever been in a fight or seen a real fight in person.

Erick Gelhaus
11-01-2015, 10:21 PM
I asked her if she'd ever seen anyone get in a fight at school. I was trying to draw on that experience to demonstrate how awkward and ugly physical confrontations are. She never had. After that, I started asking rookies at the department the same question. Except for the folks with prior military or LE experience, not one of them I questioned had ever been in a fight or seen a real fight in person.

And that is a pretty significant part of the problem for us. Two generations +/- have gone through school in a zero tolerence environment. They haven't been in fights, they haven't seen fights. While school yard fights are a couple steps from the level of violence in the adult world, a lack of exposure to even that seriously handicaps people and their ability to understand what they are seeing.

On a side note, its quite interesting to see that those agitating for & demanding "reform" have little to no idea that actual standards for evaluating an officer's performance exist. Even when shown them, they don't process what the Supreme Court laid out as the test.

drent
11-02-2015, 03:20 AM
Great Post.

Don E
366 MP Det (CID)

rcmh
11-04-2015, 08:54 AM
Plain and simple response....I believe the Ferguson effect is alive and well.

Sent from my SCH-R890 using Tapatalk

johncorey
11-04-2015, 11:37 PM
The DEA chief came out with this in support:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2015/11/04/comey-chuck-rosenberg-dea-ferguson/75160884/

A very telling quote from the article by someone who gets it:
National policing policy is being driven by random YouTube videos

Hambo
11-05-2015, 07:36 AM
The DEA chief came out with this in support:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2015/11/04/comey-chuck-rosenberg-dea-ferguson/75160884/

A very telling quote from the article by someone who gets it:

I don't know what he's like to work for, but Flynn definitely doesn't pull punches when talking to the press.

cclaxton
11-06-2015, 10:46 AM
Before this thread disappears into history, I have a couple more questions:
1) Just because the principal asked the SRO to get the girl to leave does not obligate the SRO to do what the Principal wanted, right? Wouldn't the SRO make his own evaluation of whether this girl has violated the law and needs to be arrested? Couldn't Officer Fields have said to the Principal, "OK, I will try to get her to leave, but I am not going to arrest her unless she breaks the law."
2) Timing is always important in any arrest. Why wouldn't the officer have waited until the next class break, such as lunch? Then, simply told her to stay while the class leaves, and then arrested her? Or used time as a way to minimize the potential of injury to himself and to her.
3) The cell phone violation seems like an incredibly minor infraction. No doubt it should be dealt with, but there are lots of ways to deal with that that don't involve an arrest. I have seen teachers say, "OK, if you don't put the cell phone down then the entire class will have to turn in their cell phones and they will be returned at the end of the day." (The peer pressure approach). Or, use of the school counselor/psychologist to ask the student to go to their office to talk? (This is the typical approach in Fairfax). It just seems to me the SRO could have backed off and told the principal to find another solution.
Thanks,
Cody

41magfan
11-06-2015, 11:21 AM
If discipline is to be meaningful - in any setting - it must be predictable, consistent and uniformly applied; anything less is a negotiation. If anyone thinks that tactic works on people lacking self-control, personal restraint or motivation, then you are simply CLUELESS.

HCM
11-06-2015, 11:53 AM
Before this thread disappears into history, I have a couple more questions:
1) Just because the principal asked the SRO to get the girl to leave does not obligate the SRO to do what the Principal wanted, right? Wouldn't the SRO make his own evaluation of whether this girl has violated the law and needs to be arrested? Couldn't Officer Fields have said to the Principal, "OK, I will try to get her to leave, but I am not going to arrest her unless she breaks the law."

The SRO should make his own evaluation. As many have noted, the students refusal to comply with the principals demand to leave constitutes trespassing in most states. However, once once the officer has decided there is a potential violation and to get involved, they cannot "try" to get her to leave and just go away if she refuses to comply. That undermines the Officers authority and just creates more problems in the future

2) Timing is always important in any arrest. Why wouldn't the officer have waited until the next class break, such as lunch? Then, simply told her to stay while the class leaves, and then arrested her? Or used time as a way to minimize the potential of injury to himself and to her. Ordering the other students to leave the classroom to remove the audience the student was performing for would not have been a bad idea. No need to wait for lunch etc. Plus in many schools there are multiple staggered lunch periods.


3) The cell phone violation seems like an incredibly minor infraction. No doubt it should be dealt with, but there are lots of ways to deal with that that don't involve an arrest. I have seen teachers say, "OK, if you don't put the cell phone down then the entire class will have to turn in their cell phones and they will be returned at the end of the day." (The peer pressure approach). Or, use of the school counselor/psychologist to ask the student to go to their office to talk? (This is the typical approach in Fairfax). It just seems to me the SRO could have backed off and told the principal to find another solution.

The SRO could have made a decision not to get involved in the first place but once committed backing off would undermine their authority and create future problems. The cell phone violation itself was not the problem. The disruption of the class and repeated refusal to comply with the lawful orders of the teacher, principal and officer is the problem. Kids should not have cell phones in school. Period.


Thanks,
Cody

DpdG
11-06-2015, 12:07 PM
Although this reply is directed towards Cody's comments, it is meant as a response to the wider commentary:

The primary goal of law enforcement is to accomplish the lawful objective (whatever that objective is), not necessarily to avoid the use of force at all costs. There are many situations where the use of force may be avoided if the officer is willing to compromise the lawful objective. However, that compromise wholey undermines the entire reason LE exists.

Once the decision to use force to accomplish the lawful objective has been made, officers can use whatever force is reasonable and necessary to accomplish said objective, based on the facts and objectively reasonable inferences available to the officer at the time (See Graham v. Connor). Notice there is NOTHING in the above sentence that says the officer must use the least amount of force that might accomplish an objective.

I think a lot of this ongoing dialog (nationally speaking) had been due to some confusion over these two issues. LE is working on one set of rules/priorities, while a segment of the population believes a different set is more appropriate (see my first paragraph).


-G

runcible
11-06-2015, 12:15 PM
The primary goal of law enforcement is to accomplish the lawful objective (whatever that objective is), not necessarily to avoid the use of force at all costs. There are many situations where the use of force may be avoided if the officer is willing to compromise the lawful objective. However, that compromise wholey undermines the entire reason LE exists.

Once the decision to use force to accomplish the lawful objective has been made, officers can use whatever force is reasonable and necessary to accomplish said objective, based on the facts and objectively reasonable inferences available to the officer at the time (See Graham v. Connor). Notice there is NOTHING in the above sentence that says the officer must use the least amount of force that might accomplish an objective.


I think this - especially your first sentence of the first paragraph quoted - very succinctly captures the heart of cclaxton's willful disconnect. I believe that it encapsulates the heart of the issue much better then the overarching question of applying the pagan ethos vs the Abrahamic ethos (or whatever they call it these days) to the business of things. Good stuff, dude!

Gadfly
11-06-2015, 12:26 PM
Before this thread disappears into history, I have a couple more questions:
1) Just because the principal asked the SRO to get the girl to leave does not obligate the SRO to do what the Principal wanted, right? Wouldn't the SRO make his own evaluation of whether this girl has violated the law and needs to be arrested? Couldn't Officer Fields have said to the Principal, "OK, I will try to get her to leave, but I am not going to arrest her unless she breaks the law."
2) Timing is always important in any arrest. Why wouldn't the officer have waited until the next class break, such as lunch? Then, simply told her to stay while the class leaves, and then arrested her? Or used time as a way to minimize the potential of injury to himself and to her.
3) The cell phone violation seems like an incredibly minor infraction. No doubt it should be dealt with, but there are lots of ways to deal with that that don't involve an arrest. I have seen teachers say, "OK, if you don't put the cell phone down then the entire class will have to turn in their cell phones and they will be returned at the end of the day." (The peer pressure approach). Or, use of the school counselor/psychologist to ask the student to go to their office to talk? (This is the typical approach in Fairfax). It just seems to me the SRO could have backed off and told the principal to find another solution.
Thanks,
Cody

1) I don't know what the MOU between the school district admin and the police. But the officer is there to help keep order. Using a cell phone is not "unlawful" or "criminal' per say. The disruption it caused is the problem, which brought the whole class to a halt.

2) Timing can be important. But why are you going to let the kid/suspect/crook/whoever dictate the time and pacing of the encounter? The teachers wants her to simply leave. The principal wants her to simply leave. The timing here is not just to get her to leave, but to let the other students see and know that the school is not going to come to a halt because you want attention. Letting her continue on sends the wrong message. Letting this stuff slide is what makes it so rampant.

3) As mentioned, the cell phone infraction is NOT criminal. We call all agree on that. Once she is asked to leave and refuses, the principal gets involved. She is again asked to leave the room by a person who arguably has "care, custody and control" of the school building. Now, she is disrupting class and has been asked by the custodian of the property to exit. She will not. School police shows up. I DO NOT KNOW SC LAW. But I am guessing we are in a "disturbing the peace" and "trespass" situation at this point. SHE is control still. All she has to do is go, and the worst outcome is probably after school detention. She is given the choice to leave OR be removed. SHE CHOOSES removal. Having the officer come in and ask her to go and then simply walk away is simply undercutting any authority the officer has. If your not going to use him, don't call him. Otherwise, you make every future interaction between admin and students that much harder. The SRO could have backed off. Absolutely. And then when you really need him, will kids listen to him, or just assume he is bluffing like with the girl in class?

I like the "take every phone" ideal, but guess what, that is illegal in many Texas districts. I also like the ideal of a jammer that scrambles the phones during class and allows their use during lunch and breaks. As far as "call the counselor", if she has not listened to the teacher, and not listened to the principal, why would she listen to the counselor? If the counselor does not work, then what? call the parent? Then what? how many people will talk to this kid before you finally get to simply removing her? Do you just negotiate until the bell rings, then forget it happened and let everyone go home?

The officer has used officer presence, verbal commands, and is now at the lowest level of force for her passive resistance, which is empty hand-soft control techniques. He simply grabbed a wrist and pant leg to pull her from the chair. HER explosive reaction escalates to active resistant, and it goes from simple removal to arrest. HER action and HER decisions dictated everything that occurred.

So, it comes down to the question of who runs the school? the administration or the kids? Is one kids tantrum worth the other 25 kids in the room missing the days lesson? Are we helping or hurting kids by allowing them to simply assume that no rule applies to them? If there is no consequence for actions, how can you expect to maintain any order?

Dagga Boy
11-06-2015, 03:42 PM
Before this thread disappears into history, I have a couple more questions:
1) Just because the principal asked the SRO to get the girl to leave does not obligate the SRO to do what the Principal wanted, right? Wouldn't the SRO make his own evaluation of whether this girl has violated the law and needs to be arrested? Couldn't Officer Fields have said to the Principal, "OK, I will try to get her to leave, but I am not going to arrest her unless she breaks the law."
2) Timing is always important in any arrest. Why wouldn't the officer have waited until the next class break, such as lunch? Then, simply told her to stay while the class leaves, and then arrested her? Or used time as a way to minimize the potential of injury to himself and to her.
3) The cell phone violation seems like an incredibly minor infraction. No doubt it should be dealt with, but there are lots of ways to deal with that that don't involve an arrest. I have seen teachers say, "OK, if you don't put the cell phone down then the entire class will have to turn in their cell phones and they will be returned at the end of the day." (The peer pressure approach). Or, use of the school counselor/psychologist to ask the student to go to their office to talk? (This is the typical approach in Fairfax). It just seems to me the SRO could have backed off and told the principal to find another solution.
Thanks,
Cody

1.-Cops don't really have to do a damn thing......the public is seeing how that works. Some things do have legislative demands to arrest with no discretion. In S.C., she did break the law and it was a criminal violation. If you want cops to not arrest for criminal violations....that can be arranged, have seen it in action and if criminal anarchy is the goal, it is easily attained. The one caveat I have seen in large metropolitan agencies.....once law and order is gone and the crime starts to spike, it will never get fixed for real. It will simply be a statistical manipulation from then on, so folks should choose wisely.

2. Timing is important. It is easy to Monday Morning QB it and say, "well jeez, we could just wait till it is convenient for the criminal to be arrested". Great idea.......if you think the way to go is to let one student ruin a full day of class time for everyone else.......great, that is an option. As a parent of a teen, I do not want my kid losing class time because some kid doesn't feel like following the rules or obey the law that day. I guess we are really shooting for the bottom in how our students fair compared to the rest of the world.

3. Cody, just fricking stop it. You always pull this crap, just like the guy "getting killed for gambling". The cell phone is NOT WHY SHE WAS ARRESTED. The cell phone issue is what got her asked to stop, then asked to leave by the teacher(which she refused), and then was asked to leave the class by the school administrator (which she refused), and then asked to get up and leave by the officer (which she refused), and then told she would be physically removed, and she still refused to leave. So leave and go to the office multiple times fits your "lets go to the office to talk" the exact thing that Fairfax does and she refused multiple times. SO.......your solution is the cop should have just left.
I hope you never have a disorderly trespasser on your property or in your business. Think about handling it your way. You tell them to leave, the cops tell them to leave, and the cop turns around and says "sorry he won't leave, figure it out yourself, have a nice day and drives off". That is apparently the world you want to live in, because that is what you are breeding. First we excuse simple trespass, then we excuse minor graffiti and vandalism, and then its petty theft, and pretty soon, the cops stop doing much of anything and you get the neighborhood you wanted that is essentially a lawless crap hole run by gang members and drug dealers.

South Carolina (along with Chicago) has some of the worst performing schools in the country......letting the students run the schools is obviously working well.

HCM
11-06-2015, 05:50 PM
1)

I like the "take every phone" ideal, but guess what, that is illegal in many Texas districts. I also like the ideal of a jammer that scrambles the phones during class and allows their use during lunch and breaks.



It may not work at bigger schools but at many charters the kids cannot have phones in their possession during the school day - they must check their phones in and out at the office. I think the jammer idea is great as long as it still allows 911 calls. Not sure if that is technically possible. Given the resistance by the FCC to Cell jammers for correctional facilities, I don't see it happening anytime soon.

Dagga Boy
11-06-2015, 06:39 PM
I have actually learned to like the contact I have with my kid at school. Additionally, the school uses modern social messaging for both her honor society stuff as well as athletics. She also understands it is a privilege. The one time mine got caught on the phone, she broke down in total tears when they contacted me......there are consequences FAR more severe in my home than school, which is what the obvious problem is in many homes where apparently the ability for a kid to goof off on the phone during class is a constitutional right and screw anyone who tries to interfere with that.

HCM
11-07-2015, 12:36 AM
I have actually learned to like the contact I have with my kid at school. Additionally, the school uses modern social messaging for both her honor society stuff as well as athletics. She also understands it is a privilege. The one time mine got caught on the phone, she broke down in total tears when they contacted me......there are consequences FAR more severe in my home than school, which is what the obvious problem is in many homes where apparently the ability for a kid to goof off on the phone during class is a constitutional right and screw anyone who tries to interfere with that.

Yes, you are very much the exception re: consequences at home.

Totem Polar
11-07-2015, 02:09 AM
The inevitable result of letting kids get out of hand. Video is going viral now, but a bit of bread crumb following seems to indicate that the footage comes from a vocational school, sometime in 2011. At any rate, the point is easy to get.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OVn9bwhf84w#t=67

41magfan
11-07-2015, 09:16 AM
One of my kids is an Elementary Grade Educator and she will tell you emphatically - as if it really needed stating - that the battle for the classroom is lost in Kindergarten and 1st Grade. When they inevitably figure out that all you can do is "talk" to them (that's the negotiating thing I mentioned in an earlier post) those lacking structured discipline in their lives quickly develop the GFY attitude.

Now with that reality in mind, why would any reasonably intelligent person fail to see the connection between discipline in the classroom and productive learning?

We can't teach kids to read because we can't even make a 1st Grader sit down, if he's not so inclined.

What's occupying far too many seats in America's classrooms are undisciplined, uneducated and unmotivated malcontents. This phenomenon is called the law of natural consequences but the damage doesn't fully manifest itself until this generation propagates a generation of it's own.

BaiHu
11-07-2015, 09:21 AM
One of my kids is an Elementary Grade Educator and she will tell you emphatically - as if it really needed stating - that the battle for the classroom is lost in Kindergarten and 1st Grade. When they inevitably figure out that all you can do is "talk" to them (that's the negotiating thing I mentioned in an earlier post) those lacking structured discipline in their lives quickly develop the GFY attitude.

Now with that reality in mind, why would any reasonably intelligent person fail to see the connection between discipline in the classroom and productive learning?

We can't teach kids to read because we can't even make a 1st Grader sit down, if he's not so inclined.

What's occupying far too many seats in America's classrooms are undisciplined, uneducated and unmotivated malcontents. This phenomenon is called the law of natural consequences but the damage doesn't fully manifest itself until this generation propagates a generation of it's own.
Can't thumbs up this enough. As an extracurricular teacher, I have seen the same thing transpire over 20 years. The 4-6 year old kids I taught then were markedly easier to teach than the same age today. I'd say it's at least 3X more difficult, but I've found a way every year. Demand more accountability from the student and then the parent....amazing how that works.

Dagga Boy
11-07-2015, 10:01 AM
I ve been working as a volunteer proctor at my kids school. It didn't take me long to figure out that I could take 20-25 kids out of the school and put them in a environment like I had at the police academy and improve the schools performance academically and the environment without a nickel of money. When I was in the academy when we got "breaks" from the classroom, we dreaded it because all we did is run and do push ups. You wanted to be in class. If some folks were sleeping, talking, or not paying attention, the instructor would call "the trailer" next to the grinder where the Tac staff was while we were in class. The Tac staff would make sure everyone was so worn out and miserable that you were happy to sit up and pay attention when you got back in the classroom. That is how are LEO's, First Responders and Soldiers live in training,why is that not possible with our crappy kids?

hufnagel
11-07-2015, 01:02 PM
the optics are it looks too much like some kind of slavery to some people.

Dagga Boy
11-07-2015, 01:30 PM
the optics are it looks too much like some kind of slavery to some people.

Listening to people who think like this is what is wrong. I am so sick of the slavery cop out. If people have not figured out that things have changed in a 150 years, they have some serious issues. But hey, if you want to have stupid, un disciplined people leaving our school system, they will be slaves to the government and poverty for the rest of their lives, and parasites to the producers of the world who they are disrupting at every opportunity.

Gadfly
11-07-2015, 04:31 PM
I ve been working as a volunteer proctor at my kids school. It didn't take me long to figure out that I could take 20-25 kids out of the school and put them in a environment like I had at the police academy and improve the schools performance academically and the environment without a nickel of money. When I was in the academy when we got "breaks" from the classroom, we dreaded it because all we did is run and do push ups. You wanted to be in class. If some folks were sleeping, talking, or not paying attention, the instructor would call "the trailer" next to the grinder where the Tac staff was while we were in class. The Tac staff would make sure everyone was so worn out and miserable that you were happy to sit up and pay attention when you got back in the classroom. That is how are LEO's, First Responders and Soldiers live in training,why is that not possible with our crappy kids?

The real difference is, people volunteer to be cops, fire and military. If they don't follow the rules, they are cast out. This threat bothers people who want yo be there. In school, the kids don't want to be there, and no matter how much the screw up, they won't get kicked out because "no child left behind".

My kids principal told me straight up she can't expel kids, because if she did, they would be out breaking into out cars and homes during the school day. Her job was to wear house the little shits until they were 18 and could actually go to jail. She said half the kids are really good hearted and want to be in school. 40% don't care, but don't really cause problems, and 10% are just biding their time until jail. Sounds about right.

I went to military school. If we mouthed off in class, swats were the cure. Since it was a boarding school, there was no escape from school after the bell. If you really screwed up, your whole platoon could lose TV or town leave privileges. Push ups, mopping halls, polishing brass door nobs, cleaning bathrooms...all were used to keep us in line. Any real problem child was dealt with peer pressure style. If they did not break, they got sent home and the parents lost the tuition. No refunds. It worked.

In the Sheriff's academy, one guy dosed off, one time. The LT said "oh, am I boring you guys? Let me find something more exciting for you." We were smoked out on the PT field enough that no one ever dosed off again... Good times.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Dagga Boy
11-07-2015, 04:36 PM
Yep, that is about right on your numbers. Those 10% of criminals in waiting need to be introduced to an institution like school environment. It may be a REAL way to prevent some of them from actually becoming criminals.

John Hearne
11-07-2015, 07:50 PM
Why is the existence of the Ferguson Effect even being debated?

Lest we forget, Darren Wilson was completely, legally justified when he shot and killed a strong armed robber who physically assaulted him and gave him probable cause to believe he would be disarmed. His willingness to patrol a crime ravaged neighborhood and actually act on his observations has gotten him what?

First, there were the riots, a huge societal upheaval that caused millions of dollars of damage. Second, more personally, Darren Wilson is not longer a police officer. Darren Wilson will in all likelihood never work in law enforcement again. Darren Wilson has been demonized and is now a hated man by much of this country. Darren Wilson now lives as a recluse and has to live in constant fear of assassination for doing his job as he thought society wanted him to.

If Darren Wilson could go back in time and "overlook" the robbery suspect and avoid the whole confrontation do you think he would? Even if he still would, do you think his wife and kids would want him to overlook the suspect?

Post-Ferguson, no police officer's word is worth a damn. Unless a UOF incident is recorded on video, it is automatically assumed that the UOF was wrong, illegal, and the officer should be charged. Even if the UOF is captured on video, the UOF is no longer judged by the prior legal standards of Graham v. Connor, TN v. Garner, or Scott v. Harris. UOF is now judged in the court of public opinion by people who have never experienced anything more than a harsh word. Even if a UOF is completely legal, the fact that it displeases the public's sensibilities is enough to get an officer fired. The rightness or wrongness of a UOF is even worse when there is a minority offender and the officer is white - legal standards no longer have any bearing. It is now assumed that if a white officer uses force on a minority suspect, that officer is a racist and motivated only by deep bigoted animosity, not the actions of the suspect.

In this brave new world, you have to question whether police officers are acting in a less proactive manner, especially in high-crime minority neighborhoods? Really?

GardoneVT
11-08-2015, 03:44 AM
Why is the existence of the Ferguson Effect even being debated?

Because the people capable of fixing it are the ones responsible for causing it.

stingray
11-08-2015, 07:17 AM
One of my kids is an Elementary Grade Educator and she will tell you emphatically - as if it really needed stating - that the battle for the classroom is lost in Kindergarten and 1st Grade. When they inevitably figure out that all you can do is "talk" to them (that's the negotiating thing I mentioned in an earlier post) those lacking structured discipline in their lives quickly develop the GFY attitude.

Now with that reality in mind, why would any reasonably intelligent person fail to see the connection between discipline in the classroom and productive learning?

We can't teach kids to read because we can't even make a 1st Grader sit down, if he's not so inclined.

What's occupying far too many seats in America's classrooms are undisciplined, uneducated and unmotivated malcontents. This phenomenon is called the law of natural consequences but the damage doesn't fully manifest itself until this generation propagates a generation of it's own.

Cannot agree with this more.

Then the "parents" call the police because thie little kiddo won't go to school.

hufnagel
11-08-2015, 08:25 AM
Listening to people who think like this is what is wrong. I am so sick of the slavery cop out. If people have not figured out that things have changed in a 150 years, they have some serious issues. But hey, if you want to have stupid, un disciplined people leaving our school system, they will be slaves to the government and poverty for the rest of their lives, and parasites to the producers of the world who they are disrupting at every opportunity.

You, me, and that wall are in 100% agreement. The people who "run" things however... I think the end result (slaves to the gov't) is entirely their design and goal, and the eventual firestorm that erupts from all of it, the Civil War will pale in comparison.

Coyotesfan97
11-08-2015, 08:13 PM
It's amazing to me how calls get dispatched for someone who's 5 years old is out of control. Really?!

Dagga Boy
11-08-2015, 08:56 PM
My favorite's were the parents telling me "well it's illegal to hit them" in front of the little turd kid. My response of "no it's not, you can spank them till you are tired" always seemed to solve the problem. Usually, the little turd just deflated on the spot when they realized that there would now be physical consequences.

41magfan
11-08-2015, 09:51 PM
I must have missed this on the local news last week. This kid jumped the GFY attitude and went straight to assaulting the Teacher. Care to predict what this little hellion will be like by the time he reaches puberty? Something tells me he won't be a good student.

http://www.wcnc.com/story/news/crime/2015/10/29/report-cms-kindergartner-punches-teacher/74841888/

Dagga Boy
11-08-2015, 10:46 PM
Anybody ever remember this stuff happening during the years of corporal punishment for students? Sounds like America made a choice. Students get to do whatever they want, teachers make a "report", and the LEO's are now on the do nothing program which should work well with the do nothing juvenile "justice" system.

Nephrology
11-09-2015, 06:42 AM
I ve been working as a volunteer proctor at my kids school. It didn't take me long to figure out that I could take 20-25 kids out of the school and put them in a environment like I had at the police academy and improve the schools performance academically and the environment without a nickel of money. When I was in the academy when we got "breaks" from the classroom, we dreaded it because all we did is run and do push ups. You wanted to be in class. If some folks were sleeping, talking, or not paying attention, the instructor would call "the trailer" next to the grinder where the Tac staff was while we were in class. The Tac staff would make sure everyone was so worn out and miserable that you were happy to sit up and pay attention when you got back in the classroom. That is how are LEO's, First Responders and Soldiers live in training,why is that not possible with our crappy kids?

Unfortunately, I think that these days you have to want that sort of environment in order to find it (i.e. selecting into a profession like LE). I always found this odd because it typically the entire point of that kind of education is that it should be, to some extent, involuntary...

jondoe297
11-09-2015, 04:24 PM
Anybody ever remember this stuff happening during the years of corporal punishment for students? Sounds like America made a choice. Students get to do whatever they want, teachers make a "report", and the LEO's are now on the do nothing program which should work well with the do nothing juvenile "justice" system.

Corporal punishment at school was never a major deterrent to me (and I received it a couple of times). The asskicking waiting on me when I got home though? That's a different matter.

okie john
11-09-2015, 04:37 PM
Corporal punishment at school was never a major deterrent to me (and I received it a couple of times). The asskicking waiting on me when I got home though? That's a different matter.

Bwahahahaha.

Exactly!

School didn't hold a candle to my old man. Or to my mother, for that matter. If I had refused a direct order from a teacher, then the Witness Protection Program couldn't have saved me.


Okie John

Gadfly
11-09-2015, 04:47 PM
Corporal punishment at school was never a major deterrent to me (and I received it a couple of times). The asskicking waiting on me when I got home though? That's a different matter.

I got double jeopardy, as in an swat at school AND at home for the same offense... Then it was off to military school, where there were occasional swats, but LOTS of pushups, mopping, polishing, trash call and other things to motivate a young lad into compliance. Military school was the best thing that happened to me in my youth. I hated the first year. After the second year, my dad told me I could come home since my grades were up, and my attitude adjusted. But by then, I had friends, I had some rank, and I drank the kool aid and wanted to stay. There were some kids that military school made worse. Some just learned ot hide their shit head ways. But I would say at least half the kids came out much better for the experience.

Totem Polar
11-09-2015, 08:24 PM
I am delighted to be able to both grab-ass, and stay on topic with this link:

http://www.ew.com/article/2015/11/09/south-park-police

(promo clip at bottom is gold)

jondoe297
11-12-2015, 09:00 AM
Bwahahahaha.

Exactly!

School didn't hold a candle to my old man. Or to my mother, for that matter. If I had refused a direct order from a teacher, then the Witness Protection Program couldn't have saved me.


Okie John

They would usually give us the option "Swats or detention?". I'd always opt for the swats, because they didn't inform your parents. With detention, my mom would know what I did.

BaiHu
11-17-2015, 11:50 PM
Where's Ben Field's attorney?

Let's see how this one goes:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=12&v=OBmDIHXVnTU

Drang
10-18-2016, 11:29 AM
Apologies for the necro-post, but I decided against starting a new thread: I saw on the news last night that Michael Brown's mother was in Seattle at a BLM meeting, touting her new book, Tell The Truth and Shame The Devil.

voodoo_man
10-18-2016, 11:42 AM
Apologies for the necro-post, but I decided against starting a new thread: I saw on the news last night that Michael Brown's mother was in Seattle at a BLM meeting, touting her new book, Tell The Truth and Shame The Devil.

Fitting title if she's talking about her son.

OlongJohnson
01-13-2017, 09:18 AM
Interesting (and worrying) development in the anti-gun rhetoric.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xJMdk2AiKvQ

In the first few minutes of this video, Horowitz attributes the rise in violent crime in the Ferguson Effect era to loosened gun control laws (citing a study in Missouri), rather than to the anti-police activism and associated drawdown of police activity. It's the first time I've heard it, but the twist of reason and ignoring of evidence is such a strong pivot for their side that I fully expect this to be a new drum beat. If a listener hasn't been paying attention and is completely unaware of the Ferguson Effect, the correlation in the data when studies are performed in limited areas may be convincing, rather than being another example of obvious anti-gun lying and manipulation. "The sky really is falling, and it's because of those scary, dangerous, hateful Republicans removing the laws that keep you safe."