Lordy!! Minneapolis Police Defunded; City Council Members "Alarmed" By Soaring Crime

[Darryl]

Liberal politicians are something else:

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/min...und-the-police

Darryl

[CitizenBBN]

On a related note, I just read this study that said if you put flammable substances on an open flame that the size of the fire will increase.

I'm dying to see their "violence interruptors" go out to a domestic call at 2am with a couple of drunk and stoned people going at it full tilt. Them with no weapons, AFAIK no power to arrest them, going to reason with them and make it all work out OK.

Most people simply have no idea what officers really deal with each day, the level of sheer insanity and stupidity of the people they have to handle to protect mainstream America. I'm sure there are abuses, and bad actors, I have no doubt, but I also know that if you put 95% of people in their position, having to deal with repeat offender dumbasses, getting spat on, assaulted, etc. and having to hold their cool and keep within the rules, they'd fail miserably.

I can't imagine going out to deal with what they deal with without a gun and handcuffs and the power of arrest. I have no doubt that in SOME cases sending someone less confrontational might in fact even help, but for every one of those there is the one where the only way people are going to respond is if they have the threat of physical force and the intimidation of an officer giving you the option to back off or go to jail.

Dealing with some of the homeless, etc. I can also see they may not need a weapon, etc. THAT TIME, like when they had to fish the crazy lady out of my dumpster, but what if that crazy lady pulls out a knife or takes a broken bottle after them? They have no backup for the situations that go bad.

IMO we do have a confidence gap with law enforcement. that much is beyond dispute, and needs to be addressed, and I have no doubt there is both ethnic and socioeconomic bias that needs to be addressed.

But the solution is to change our militarization approach to law enforcement altogether to a different model, while still maintaining the simple rule that the laws will be enforced and that LEOS must be obeyed when they give instructions. Some of these ideas actually hit on some good points, focusing on non-force methods, but when those fail you will have to resort to force, and that's when you need a Glock and a uniform.

As usual, the best solution is in the middle, but no one is willing to meet there to work on it.

[StuBleedsBlue2]

I have never in my life seen a vote happen and change be completely implemented and measurable within 2 months, but let's assume that is what happened here. There is absolutely NO evidence that there is a correlation between the defunding of police and a crime spike. It's poor journalism here to imply that is what is happening. Not to mention the data is for ALL of 2020, not just the last two months.

We know that due to civil unrest and a pandemic that police departments across the country has scaled back on policing certain crimes. Opportunists are going to do their thing.

I wonder why there is civil unrest? Oh yeah, it's because racist cops are killing black people, especially in Minneapolis. There are successful models that indicates reallocating funds and restructuring police departments actually works. Camden, NJ is the one that always comes top of mind.

We can't even wait to see how a plan that has probably been barely implemented to be able to gauge success.

A nice propaganda piece.

[Darryl]

I have never in my life seen a vote happen and change be completely implemented and measurable within 2 months, but let's assume that is what happened here. There is absolutely NO evidence that there is a correlation between the defunding of police and a crime spike. It's poor journalism here to imply that is what is happening. Not to mention the data is for ALL of 2020, not just the last two months.

We know that due to civil unrest and a pandemic that police departments across the country has scaled back on policing certain crimes. Opportunists are going to do their thing.

I wonder why there is civil unrest? Oh yeah, it's because racist cops are killing black people, especially in Minneapolis. There are successful models that indicates reallocating funds and restructuring police departments actually works. Camden, NJ is the one that always comes top of mind.

We can't even wait to see how a plan that has probably been barely implemented to be able to gauge success.

A nice propaganda piece.

Since this unrest started, I believe more cops have been killed by racist black people than vice versa.

Darryl

[CitizenBBN]

Stu, that's naive.

No, I'm sure there is only a marginal impact in terms of hard numbers, though the article says they've lost twice as many officers as usual over this time frame and that is an impact.

But messaging is critical and important. If criminals think they are less likely to be arrested they will commit more crimes.

And no doubt a lot of it is due to having to reallocate to deal with civil unrest. There's another fine benefit of looting lol.

As for "restructuring", I'm all for addressing issues within law enforcement, and was calling for it here years ago on the subject of law enforcement militarization. UKHistory and I have had some very nice discussions on why local police were getting free armored HUmvees and assault weapons, and why the Department of Education has it's own SWAT team.

those are all parts of the mentality that also contributes to situations like George Floyd.

But the idea of making law enforcement some kind of enemy of the people, rather than calling for changes, doesnt' help a lot in a situation that is already us v. them.

I'll be curious to see what plan they implement, but I think it will prove to be less than successful simply b/c there is so much pressure to not listen to the voices within law enforcement that are correct on some issues. There are situations where full blown top down militaristic enforcement is not needed and is harmful, but there are also simply a lot of bad, dumb, drugged up people out there and they cannot be social worked into a different path.

As for me I'm waiting to see their plan. A balanced approach would probably be a big improvement, but I don't expect a balanced approach there given their political climate. Hell they won't even run hookers and pimps and drug dealers out of their public parks at this point.

[Darryl]

Chuck, my brother was a policeman for 30+ years and my sister worked in social work for the same. Both think if cities start sending social workers out on domestic disturbance calls, we are going to have a lot of same getting hurt or killed.

Domestic disturbance calls are incredibly volatile/dangerous.

Darryl

[CitizenBBN]

Chuck, my brother was a policeman for 30+ years and my sister worked in social work for the same. Both think if cities start sending social workers out on domestic disturbance calls, we are going to have a lot of same getting hurt or killed.

Domestic disturbance calls are incredibly volatile/dangerous.

Darryl

They are actually one of the most dangerous situations in all of law enforcement. Nothing gets people acting without any rational thought more than a personal relationship.

The only thing I think that would work is to a) emphasize more non-force training for officers so they are more trained in other options to at least try first (though of course many if not most officers already have some of this training), and b) send an officer AND a social worker, so there is still someone on scene who can step in when things go wrong.

People just don't get who the cops normally have to handle every day. They aren't like anyone on this board, or any of our friends, etc. They aren't rational and don't act in their own self interest b/c if they did they likely wouldn't be having a drunk brawl at 2am on their front lawn.

I have no doubt some kinds of diversion programs and training would improve things, and I do think officers need to take a hard look and ask why so many people don't trust them, even people who are law abiding. That's a real legitimate question.

People shouldn't be afraid of the police unless they just committed a crime.

But there's a big difference between that and what we are seeing, both in the "protests" and wishing cops would die but also in the lack of leadership support for the rule of law.

I'm all for addressing the gap between law enforcment and the communities they serve, and there is a gap, a large one in many cases, but it doesn't mean the officers aren't right about much of their jobs, and that few people could do what they do.

IMO the real issue is simple: officers deal with so many scumbags where authoritarian control is about the only way to deal with them, that it becomes the normalized way they interact with everyone. They are trained to maintain control of the situation, and they MUST do that with those people, but it then gets used against every traffic stop and every encounter, esp, if they are unsure of the person(s).

And I get why, b/c their safety is on the line. I totally get it, but I also get how it creates a separation between officers and their communities.

[CitizenBBN]

And part of it is also human nature. If an officer encounters me at 2am walking down the street in torn clothes, etc. I'm going to get very different treatment than if I call him for the lady in my dumpster and I'm meeting him in a jacket and tie.

In the latter he will feel far less threatened, thus less need for control, thus a different encounter. Officers in my experienced are much more sociable when I call them or they come by to ask a question about something versus for example a traffic stop situation.

I'm not sure how that changes, b/c they have no idea what they are walking up on in a traffic stop, whereas knocking on the door of my business to ask about video for a crime investigation they have no concerns for their safety.

[StuBleedsBlue2]

Stu, that's naive.

No, I'm sure there is only a marginal impact in terms of hard numbers, though the article says they've lost twice as many officers as usual over this time frame and that is an impact.

But messaging is critical and important. If criminals think they are less likely to be arrested they will commit more crimes.

And no doubt a lot of it is due to having to reallocate to deal with civil unrest. There's another fine benefit of looting lol.

As for "restructuring", I'm all for addressing issues within law enforcement, and was calling for it here years ago on the subject of law enforcement militarization. UKHistory and I have had some very nice discussions on why local police were getting free armored HUmvees and assault weapons, and why the Department of Education has it's own SWAT team.

those are all parts of the mentality that also contributes to situations like George Floyd.

But the idea of making law enforcement some kind of enemy of the people, rather than calling for changes, doesnt' help a lot in a situation that is already us v. them.

I'll be curious to see what plan they implement, but I think it will prove to be less than successful simply b/c there is so much pressure to not listen to the voices within law enforcement that are correct on some issues. There are situations where full blown top down militaristic enforcement is not needed and is harmful, but there are also simply a lot of bad, dumb, drugged up people out there and they cannot be social worked into a different path.

As for me I'm waiting to see their plan. A balanced approach would probably be a big improvement, but I don't expect a balanced approach there given their political climate. Hell they won't even run hookers and pimps and drug dealers out of their public parks at this point.

What exactly is naive?

I was making a couple of points. 1) There is absolutely no correlation between the vote to defund police and the spike in crime in 2020. 2) Spikes in crime in Minneapolis and across the country are more about the pandemic and social unrest (that was triggered by racist cops murdering black men)

The article was poorly written to insinuate that defunding police has caused the spike in crime, or at least that was the theme of the thread.

I actually agree with a lot of what you have said here. I have also said many times before that for every action, there tends to be an overreaction. You hope that things can settle in the middle somewhere.

[StuBleedsBlue2]

Since this unrest started, I believe more cops have been killed by racist black people than vice versa.

Darryl

I'm not so sure about that, but those cop killers deserve the same fate as the cops that killed George Floyd, the Antifa guy that killed the Trump guy (although he already got his death sentence), Kyle Rittenhouse, and anyone else who has decided to kill in this civil war.

Can you say that?

[CitizenBBN]

What exactly is naive?

I was making a couple of points. 1) There is absolutely no correlation between the vote to defund police and the spike in crime in 2020. 2) Spikes in crime in Minneapolis and across the country are more about the pandemic and social unrest (that was triggered by racist cops murdering black men)

The article was poorly written to insinuate that defunding police has caused the spike in crime, or at least that was the theme of the thread.

I actually agree with a lot of what you have said here. I have also said many times before that for every action, there tends to be an overreaction. You hope that things can settle in the middle somewhere.

IMO it doesn't insinuate the lack of funding is leading to the problems, but it's a real question if the message of the defunding is in fact creating an incentive for increased crime.

A lot of leaders have been far too cavalier in tolerating the extremes of these protests.

Just like how a President largely impacts policy by the bully pulpit more than actual legislation or regulation, there's no doubt that the position taken by these city councils can influence behavior long before the impact of actual changes in the budget.

I doubt it's the only factor, but the particularly strong reaction there is certainly a real possible contributing factor. We're talking about a place that has sitting council members not calling for a "restructuring" but "no more police". I doubt they go that far, but the language is dangerous.

Surely as someone who wont' care for Trump's incendiary language you can agree that language and message are important and do have an impact. We could certainly be seeing that in this case, along with other factors on which we generally agree.

[catmanjack]

Of course here in Louisville one of the changes is to send out social workers on certain police calls and my first thought is that we will see a situation where one of that gets killed.

[CitizenBBN]

Of course here in Louisville one of the changes is to send out social workers on certain police calls and my first thought is that we will see a situation where one of that gets killed.

One will get in trouble, or have to step away and leave and the situation meanwhile gets out of control.

I'm sure they can call an officer if needed, but some of these things move quickly.

I could see sending both, but then they will need MORE money, not less.

[StuBleedsBlue2]

IMO it doesn't insinuate the lack of funding is leading to the problems, but it's a real question if the message of the defunding is in fact creating an incentive for increased crime.

A lot of leaders have been far too cavalier in tolerating the extremes of these protests.

Just like how a President largely impacts policy by the bully pulpit more than actual legislation or regulation, there's no doubt that the position taken by these city councils can influence behavior long before the impact of actual changes in the budget.

I doubt it's the only factor, but the particularly strong reaction there is certainly a real possible contributing factor. We're talking about a place that has sitting council members not calling for a "restructuring" but "no more police". I doubt they go that far, but the language is dangerous.

Surely as someone who wont' care for Trump's incendiary language you can agree that language and message are important and do have an impact. We could certainly be seeing that in this case, along with other factors on which we generally agree.

The problem is that according to the article, there is no evidence of an uptick since the end of July, it's all about the year of 2020. At this point, we don't know enough to make a correlation.

The messaging part, I'm not convinced on that yet either although your reasoning is sensible. Then again I'm not a criminal and do not pretend to act like I think that I can get inside the criminal mind, so it's beyond my pay grade. If I had to make a reasoned guess, I would suspect that crime is up in cities because of the two reasons that I suggested the end result being there are fewer police on the streets, which does not have much to do at all with defunding as those changes most likely have yet to be implemented.

[catmanjack]

These cities that believe in defunding the police will most certainly be overrun by criminals.
The el Chapos of the world are just waiting to take over and run these cities.
Then on top of that Biden wants to open the boarders that will allow even more criminals to join the fun.
So glad America is getting ruined!

[VirginiaCat]

Stu,

There is definite correlation. What you are trying to say is there is no proof of causation.

You admit correlation in your defense above. Less police presence lead to more opportunistic criminals. That is a correlation. Is the causation truly the opportunistic criminals or is it because there is less policing?

There are a lot of independent variables that may be playing into this but it is a logical conclusion to reach that as the funding was cut, police leadership authorize less OT and have less bodies available which leads to more crime.

But you keep living in your dream world where the police are the bad guys...even though the stats prove you are dead wrong.

What exactly is naive?

I was making a couple of points. 1) There is absolutely no correlation between the vote to defund police and the spike in crime in 2020. 2) Spikes in crime in Minneapolis and across the country are more about the pandemic and social unrest (that was triggered by racist cops murdering black men)

The article was poorly written to insinuate that defunding police has caused the spike in crime, or at least that was the theme of the thread.

I actually agree with a lot of what you have said here. I have also said many times before that for every action, there tends to be an overreaction. You hope that things can settle in the middle somewhere.

[KeithKSR]

The uptick in crime has occurred over the last six weeks.

https://dailycaller.com/2020/09/16/m...mfRZZtRnUe57Es

[CitizenBBN]

Stu,

There is definite correlation. What you are trying to say is there is no proof of causation.

You admit correlation in your defense above. Less police presence lead to more opportunistic criminals. That is a correlation. Is the causation truly the opportunistic criminals or is it because there is less policing?

There are a lot of independent variables that may be playing into this but it is a logical conclusion to reach that as the funding was cut, police leadership authorize less OT and have less bodies available which leads to more crime.

But you keep living in your dream world where the police are the bad guys...even though the stats prove you are dead wrong.

Exactly, and that causation is underlying there as well.

For example, twice as many officers have left the force as was normal, so they are down 50 officers versus norm. Well, that's b/c the environment for them is getting very difficult and that definitely ties to a lack of perceived support by the city government. Now some could be bad cops getting out while the getting is good, etc., but clearly there is an impact.

Whenever any group of employees don't feel management has their back it takes a toll.

All of those factors stem from that messaging, a message in this case that wasn't just "we need reform" even on the level of say Louisville, but extreme "get rid of the police completely" talk from actual council members.

Fewer police will mean more crime. It's possible that switching to other methods of crime mitigation can pick up some of that slack over time, but instead of being additive, by increasing funding for those methods while maintaining a strong police force to deal with those criminals that won't be mitigated by various forms of social work, they are being very subtractive, and it will only lead to problems.

They already have problems with public parks (Not sure if that was actually in Minneapolis, will have to look) etc. where they have backed off running off the homeless so they are of course now flocking to those spots, along with hookers and pimps and drug dealers.

[UKHistory]

Citizen wrote this below:

But the solution is to change our militarization approach to law enforcement altogether to a different model, while still maintaining the simple rule that the laws will be enforced and that LEOS must be obeyed when they give instructions. Some of these ideas actually hit on some good points, focusing on non-force methods, but when those fail you will have to resort to force, and that's when you need a Glock and a uniform.

As usual, the best solution is in the middle, but no one is willing to meet there to work on it.

I am totally on board with that. There is a middle ground. And while police need to treat everyone with respect, we must show respect back.

Had an attempted burglary at our home Tuesday. Thankfully no one got in and we weren't hurt. We know it happened because our lock on the front door was just ruined.

Called the police--three officers came and they were awesome. Not a lot could be done but now they are heightened alert for the neighborhood.

Great experience with Arlington Police and I want to recognize they were great.

Big picture, police need training to deal with some of the issues they encounter. We have to show respect. Follow their requests and after the fact file a report if we think they went too far.

[CitizenBBN]

History, great post as always.

I've had some great interactions with officers. I've had some that left me very disappointed. That's also true of every other profession I've encountered.

I'm all for looking at ways to reform and improve. I do think it's a given there is disconnect in some communities with law enforcement and that is not a good thing, and I think there's always room for improvement. And I'm not naive to think there are no cops out there doing wrong, I'm sure there are. Growing up it was always a joke that cops had the best drugs for instance.

But we cannot give up the standard that we must have law enforcement and that we must obey the rule of law and those dispensing it. There are remedies for dealing with errors and mistakes, but it is not acceptable to resist arrest or disobey a restraining order, etc. We must fix the system, not throw out the rule of law.

[kingcat]

On a related note, I just read this study that said if you put flammable substances on an open flame that the size of the fire will increase.

I'm dying to see their "violence interruptors" go out to a domestic call at 2am with a couple of drunk and stoned people going at it full tilt. Them with no weapons, AFAIK no power to arrest them, going to reason with them and make it all work out OK.

Most people simply have no idea what officers really deal with each day, the level of sheer insanity and stupidity of the people they have to handle to protect mainstream America. I'm sure there are abuses, and bad actors, I have no doubt, but I also know that if you put 95% of people in their position, having to deal with repeat offender dumbasses, getting spat on, assaulted, etc. and having to hold their cool and keep within the rules, they'd fail miserably.

I can't imagine going out to deal with what they deal with without a gun and handcuffs and the power of arrest. I have no doubt that in SOME cases sending someone less confrontational might in fact even help, but for every one of those there is the one where the only way people are going to respond is if they have the threat of physical force and the intimidation of an officer giving you the option to back off or go to jail.

Dealing with some of the homeless, etc. I can also see they may not need a weapon, etc. THAT TIME, like when they had to fish the crazy lady out of my dumpster, but what if that crazy lady pulls out a knife or takes a broken bottle after them? They have no backup for the situations that go bad.

IMO we do have a confidence gap with law enforcement. that much is beyond dispute, and needs to be addressed, and I have no doubt there is both ethnic and socioeconomic bias that needs to be addressed.

But the solution is to change our militarization approach to law enforcement altogether to a different model, while still maintaining the simple rule that the laws will be enforced and that LEOS must be obeyed when they give instructions. Some of these ideas actually hit on some good points, focusing on non-force methods, but when those fail you will have to resort to force, and that's when you need a Glock and a uniform.

As usual, the best solution is in the middle, but no one is willing to meet there to work on it.

Great post

[StuBleedsBlue2]

Stu,

There is definite correlation. What you are trying to say is there is no proof of causation.

You admit correlation in your defense above. Less police presence lead to more opportunistic criminals. That is a correlation. Is the causation truly the opportunistic criminals or is it because there is less policing?

There are a lot of independent variables that may be playing into this but it is a logical conclusion to reach that as the funding was cut, police leadership authorize less OT and have less bodies available which leads to more crime.

But you keep living in your dream world where the police are the bad guys...even though the stats prove you are dead wrong.

You got all of that from the article?

Actually, you are supporting what I said, which was less police presence leads to more opportunistic criminals, in your words. What I am saying is that there is absolutely no way that the defund the police vote has impacted this to date. There is no way that the vote has actually been implemented yet to be measurable. Citizen brings up messaging is important, and maybe that is, but that is above my pay grade, but there is absolutely no way to tell that from the article.

The lesser police presence is due more to the pandemic and civil unrest, as we are seeing in many other cities other than Minneapolis.

[StuBleedsBlue2]

The uptick in crime has occurred over the last six weeks.

https://dailycaller.com/2020/09/16/m...mfRZZtRnUe57Es

That article is hardly a vote of confidence for police. It seems like Minneapolis police are refusing to do their jobs because of the vote. If that happens to be the case, they should be immediately terminated and really says something about their character.

[catmanjack]

Really want to discuss character?

[kingcat]

They did a great job Investigating and hunting down the “Umbrella Man” and “proud boy”/hells angel that started the riots and looting.
And I am being serious..it was great police work.

[Darryl]

Really want to discuss character?

Stu is an avowed Cop hater.

Darryl

[suncat05]

Good verbal and non-verbal communication is the key to good police work.
It all starts and ends with good communication skills. Period.
And then there's those knotheads that no matter how much and how well you communicate with them, they're going to ignore, obstruct, and refuse to communicate with officers on scene.
That's just the reality of Police Work 101. And why verbal and non-verbal communication is such a huge block of instruction in Police Academy curriculum.
Everything officers are taught in the Police Academy is so very important. Everything.

And after reading this thread, and upon watching the news on TV or the computer, I have no doubts that my decision to retire from the Sheriff's Office was the correct decision for me, and for my family.
It's not worth it anymore. And I cannot, in good conscience, recommend a career in law enforcement to anyone interested in it anymore. Not enough support from the criminal justice system, not enough support from the upper echelons of police administration, low pay, diminishing benefits, and truthfully, with as much stress and liability as there is now, it's just not a good career decision.
Just my humble opinion.

[KeithKSR]

That article is hardly a vote of confidence for police. It seems like Minneapolis police are refusing to do their jobs because of the vote. If that happens to be the case, they should be immediately terminated and really says something about their character.

The city council made it clear they didn’t want policing done, now that they got what they wanted they are surprised by the results.

[CitizenBBN]

Good verbal and non-verbal communication is the key to good police work.
It all starts and ends with good communication skills. Period.
And then there's those knotheads that no matter how much and how well you communicate with them, they're going to ignore, obstruct, and refuse to communicate with officers on scene.
That's just the reality of Police Work 101. And why verbal and non-verbal communication is such a huge block of instruction in Police Academy curriculum.
Everything officers are taught in the Police Academy is so very important. Everything.

And after reading this thread, and upon watching the news on TV or the computer, I have no doubts that my decision to retire from the Sheriff's Office was the correct decision for me, and for my family.
It's not worth it anymore. And I cannot, in good conscience, recommend a career in law enforcement to anyone interested in it anymore. Not enough support from the criminal justice system, not enough support from the upper echelons of police administration, low pay, diminishing benefits, and truthfully, with as much stress and liability as there is now, it's just not a good career decision.
Just my humble opinion.

It's going to get worse, and then people will be outraged at the lower quality and even bigger problems.

It won't attract people with the character to do a good job b/c of all of these issues.

The solution is to INCREASE funding to the police, so they can raise salaries and benefits, provide more training, and attract quality people to the profession.

If management doesn't support the employees you'll have real morale problems with your business. Same thing here.

The police will become depleted, be increasingly manned by people who don't have better career choices or who are there purely for the power trip, and things will be even worse.

[KeithKSR]

It's going to get worse, and then people will be outraged at the lower quality and even bigger problems.

It won't attract people with the character to do a good job b/c of all of these issues.

The solution is to INCREASE funding to the police, so they can raise salaries and benefits, provide more training, and attract quality people to the profession.

If management doesn't support the employees you'll have real morale problems with your business. Same thing here.

The police will become depleted, be increasingly manned by people who don't have better career choices or who are there purely for the power trip, and things will be even worse.

It doesn’t help that the media hypes any event that can be used to create race division, but doesn’t mention corresponding events that include caucasian victims.