An interesting video I watched while scrolling down my news feed on FB regarding statistics of complaints of police brutality.

https://www.facebook.com/ajudkins/videos/10205077972202979/

 

This video has been going around for a while and I love it.

Here's a YouTube link for those that have trouble with Facebook's video player. These facts need to be shared because we aren't going to see them on the news.

 

Just a few things to clear up.

Those FBI statistics are based upon self-reporting from police departments, so they are not representative of the scope of police brutality cases. There currently is no comprehensive database for police misconduct. It also shouldn't come as a surprise that people without any money or power do not fight back when they feel like they've been wronged. 

Another scary number is that New York City (My home turf) payed $735 Million dollars in police abuse settlements: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2012-09-04/nyc-police-abuse-joins-pothole-settlements-costing-735-million. Imagine what our city could do with that money...

Personally, I think if the police want to earn back the respect and trust of the people they serve, they have to do more to strengthen relations with the communities instead of treating everyone as a threat or a criminal. Listen, I know plenty of good cops. The problem isn't about good or bad cops, its about the overall police culture.

I won't debate anyone on this, I'm just presenting the other side. If you respond negatively, that's on you.

Just a few things to clear up.

Those FBI statistics are based upon self-reporting from police departments, so they are not representative of the scope of police brutality cases. There currently is no comprehensive database for police misconduct. It also shouldn't come as a surprise that people without any money or power do not fight back when they feel like they've been wronged. 

Another scary number is that New York City (My home turf) payed $735 Million dollars in police abuse settlements: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2012-09-04/nyc-police-abuse-joins-pothole-settlements-costing-735-million. Imagine what our city could do with that money...

Personally, I think if the police want to earn back the respect and trust of the people they serve, they have to do more to strengthen relations with the communities instead of treating everyone as a threat or a criminal. Listen, I know plenty of good cops. The problem isn't about good or bad cops, its about the overall police culture.

I won't debate anyone on this, I'm just presenting the other side. If you respond negatively, that's on you.

​Everyone is allowed to have their own opinion, even if other's disagree with it. But, facts are important in helping us form our opinions so just to clear a few things up, self reported statistics comprised by the FBI are more credible than made up statistics and opinions seen on the nightly news.

It doesn't take any money or power to call a local station and ask for a supervisor if you feel you've been mistreated.

As for the "scary" settlement number of $735 million, after reading the the article you linked, it clearly explains that is the foretasted budget for the year, not the actual dollar amount spent on settlements. That article is also from 2012. More importantly, that budget plan was not for "police abuse settlements", it was for total settlements for all settlements and lawsuits involving the city. According to that article, those potential settlements include "malpractice in public hospitals, collisions with fire trucks, potholes causing accidents, property damage, and contract disputes."

Yes police abuse settlements are included in the city's budget, but using the previous year (FY2011) as an example, the article reports that out of the total of $664 million in settlements, only $119 million was used for police misconduct. That's only 17.9% of all lawsuits settled with the city. The other 82.1% of the settlement funding was used for incidents that had nothing to do with the police.

Personally, I think if the citizens want to earn back the respect and trust of the police that protect them, they have to stop breaking the law and accept responsibility for their own actions and poor decisions, instead of treating every police officer as a racist abusive tyrant.

This thread wasn't intended to be a debate, I'm just presenting the factual side of the story. If you respond negatively, that's on you.

Edited May 3, 201510 yr by johnclark1102

​Everyone is allowed to have their own opinion, even if other's disagree with it. But, facts are important in helping us form our opinions so just to clear a few things up, self reported statistics comprised by the FBI are more credible than made up statistics and opinions seen on the nightly news.

It doesn't take any money or power to call a local station and ask for a supervisor if you feel you've been mistreated.

As for the "scary" settlement number of $735 million, after reading the the article you linked, it clearly explains that is the foretasted budget for the year, not the actual dollar amount spent on settlements. That article is also from 2012. More importantly, that budget plan was not for "police abuse settlements", it was for total settlements for all settlements and lawsuits involving the city. According to that article, those potential settlements include "malpractice in public hospitals, collisions with fire trucks, potholes causing accidents, property damage, and contract disputes."

Yes police abuse settlements are included in the city's budget, but using the previous year (FY2011) as an example, the article reports that out of the total of $664 million in settlements, only $119 million was used for police misconduct. That's only 17.9% of all lawsuits settled with the city. The other 82.1% of the settlement funding was used for incidents that had nothing to do with the police.

Personally, I think if the citizens want to earn back the respect and trust of the police that protect them, they have to stop breaking the law and accept responsibility for their own actions and poor decisions, instead of treating every police officer as a racist abusive tyrant.

This thread wasn't intended to be a debate, I'm just presenting the factual side of the story. If you respond negatively, that's on you.

​Well there's no incentive for police departments to report their abuse complaints to a federal agency, and you're implying of course that the supervisor takes the complaint-ant's word of his fellow officer.

I did not catch that the article is referring to the foretasted budget, thank you. But the fact remains that cities across the country are paying out millions upon millions of dollars in avoidable abuse claims. As a taxpayer, I hope you would hope that your local departments are at least putting some concrete measures into place to reduce that. And if you're in to facts, there are a bunch of studies I would like to share with you (maybe over PM)?

Personally I've had almost all great experiences with cops (except that one cop that pulled his gun on me for no reason). Its not always the citizens fault, police are often responsible for poor relationships with their communities (I know that's definitely true where I live in NYC) 

I honestly don't know why you're using such an angry connotation. I get that its the internet, but we're still having a conversation. 

 ​First and foremost, I'm not angry and any connotation of such is simply a misunderstanding due to the inability to convey tone through text. I apologize for that. We are having a conversation, and our perspectives are different because of different experience. I will freely admit that my text may have come across as a bit "short", and frankly that's because I grow tired of having conversations about our nation's current state of affairs where talking points are based solely on opinions or false /  misleading information, such as the article you posted.

​Well there's no incentive for police departments to report their abuse complaints to a federal agency, and you're implying of course that the supervisor takes the complaint-ant's word of his fellow officer 

There may not be a quantifiable incentive that you are aware of for police departments to report their statistics, but most agencies still do. The incentive can be as simple as an ethical obligation in the interest of justice, or it could be a funding related provision, or recognition by the federal government through programs such as agencies being nationally accredited. There may be no incentive at all. As for a supervisor not taking a complaint, I'm implying that they would based on my personal experience, and you're implying that they wouldn't based on, I don't know what. Again, different perspectives based on different experience.

I did not catch that the article is referring to the foretasted budget, thank you. But the fact remains that cities across the country are paying out millions upon millions of dollars in avoidable abuse claims.

Settlement payouts do not automatically prove wrong doing. Again, from my first hand experience, out of court settlements can simply mean that the cost of fighting a claim in court outweighed the cost of making a settlement. Processing claims in court can take a toll on the system and prevent more pressing matters from being heard in a timely manner. I will agree with you that the abuse claims are completely avoidable, though I would counter that the first step in avoiding those claims would be for citizens to not break the law.

As a taxpayer, I hope you would hope that your local departments are at least putting some concrete measures into place to reduce that.

As a taxpayer, I do hope my local agencies are doing everything they can to prevent unnecessary law suits. But I also hope that they spend my tax dollars to relentlessly enforce the law and hold law breakers accountable for their poor choices and actions.

Personally I've had almost all great experiences with cops (except that one cop that pulled his gun on me for no reason).

Personally, I've had mostly great experiences with police officers as well. I've even had guns drawn on me too, during a felony traffic stop. At the time, I had no idea what was going on, but it later turned out that it was certainly not for "no reason". Police are reactionary in nature, everything an officer does is a direct reaction to something someone else did. So, while I knew of nothing that I had done wrong and no laws that I had violated, I still complied with the officers instructions, allowed them to handcuff me and place me in their car. I answered their questions, and was on my way in less than 10 minutes with their sincere apology after they determined that I was not the bank robber they were looking for.

My point with that story is, while someone may argue that I had guns drawn on me for "no reason", the reality is the reason was because I was the only person driving away from the bank at 2 in the morning and the silent alarm had been triggered. I didn't know it at the time, but the officers had reasonable suspicion to believe I had robbed the bank, even though I knew I didn't. Your experience will vary.

 Its not always the citizens fault, police are often responsible for poor relationships with their communities

You and I also agree that it is not always the citizen's fault when a poor police /  community relationship exists. However, citizens are often responsible for that breakdown just like some police officers are. Everyone should be held accountable for their actions.

You can blame the media for dramatizing cases involving the police, you know I really don't get why some people complain about police brutality cases yet they haven't spent a second of their lives researching about supposedly police brutality, if people continue to remain willfully ignorant, than the public will never have good realations within the police . 

Edited May 4, 201510 yr by TheSandwichStealer

 ​

 

There may not be a quantifiable incentive that you are aware of for police departments to report their statistics, but most agencies still do. The incentive can be as simple as an ethical obligation in the interest of justice, or it could be a funding related provision, or recognition by the federal government through programs such as agencies being nationally accredited. There may be no incentive at all. As for a supervisor not taking a complaint, I'm implying that they would based on my personal experience, and you're implying that they wouldn't based on, I don't know what. Again, different perspectives based on different experience.

I would argue that the incentive to cover up or not believe complaints is much stronger than the honesty of most departments. Imagine you're a supervisor, and some woman off the streets comes into the station wailing and screaming about Officer Joe body slamming her on pavement. You know officer Joe, you've been friends and co-workers for years. He says it never happened, and there's no video. Who do you believe? That's part of the problem: There is no comprehensive system to police the police, or dispel false claims.

Settlement payouts do not automatically prove wrong doing. Again, from my first hand experience, out of court settlements can simply mean that the cost of fighting a claim in court outweighed the cost of making a settlement. Processing claims in court can take a toll on the system and prevent more pressing matters from being heard in a timely manner. I will agree with you that the abuse claims are completely avoidable, though I would counter that the first step in avoiding those claims would be for citizens to not break the law.

A lot of the time the victim of police abuse either hasn't done anything wrong, or is already in custody. There's been plenty of instances of suspects being assaulted in handcuffs and holding cells. Plenty of people get arrested, but you can't assault them once they are. For whatever reason, we seem to have two different solutions to that. My solution is "don't assault someone in custody", and yours seems to be "don't break the law in the first place". 

 

Personally, I've had mostly great experiences with police officers as well. I've even had guns drawn on me too, during a felony traffic stop. At the time, I had no idea what was going on, but it later turned out that it was certainly not for "no reason". Police are reactionary in nature, everything an officer does is a direct reaction to something someone else did. So, while I knew of nothing that I had done wrong and no laws that I had violated, I still complied with the officers instructions, allowed them to handcuff me and place me in their car. I answered their questions, and was on my way in less than 10 minutes with their sincere apology after they determined that I was not the bank robber they were looking for.

My point with that story is, while someone may argue that I had guns drawn on me for "no reason", the reality is the reason was because I was the only person driving away from the bank at 2 in the morning and the silent alarm had been triggered. I didn't know it at the time, but the officers had reasonable suspicion to believe I had robbed the bank, even though I knew I didn't. Your experience will vary.

I had a gun pulled on me when I called 911 for my friends medical emergency. A cop pulled up and ordered me sit on the curb. When I tried to explain that my friend couldn't breath, he pulled his gun on me and detained me, all the while my friend was wheezing and gasping. How exactly was that my fault....?

You and I also agree that it is not always the citizen's fault when a poor police /  community relationship exists. However, citizens are often responsible for that breakdown just like some police officers are. Everyone should be held accountable for their actions.

My only caveat to that would be that I think in many cases, police unnecessarily escalate situations that might increase the officer's safety but endanger the safety of the citizen. Pulling guns on people shouldn't be the first step, it should be a last resort. I don't want to bring up race, but when a man of color is pulled over by police at night with no one else around, and feels unsafe, there's a problem there. I'm not calling for a witch hunt of police, I just think that departments should re-evaluate their use of force policies, and we as a country should find a better way to ensure that every complaint is thoroughly investigated and dealt with my someone other than the department in question. Perhaps the DOJ should handle those cases, and they've already taken steps to fund body cameras, which is essential in protecting both parties of a police interaction. As you said, everyone should be held accountable for their actions, which of course I agree with. So I think we can both agree that there's something wrong when there's a huge system created to police us, but next to nothing to police the police. We just have to balance the scales of accountability, that's all us libs are asking for lol 

 

 ​Imagine you're a supervisor, and some woman off the streets comes into the station wailing and screaming about Officer Joe body slamming her on pavement. You know officer Joe, you've been friends and co-workers for years. He says it never happened, and there's no video. Who do you believe? 

 

​Who I believe would depend on a number of factors, especially if the complainant has or does not have physical injuries consistent with her complaint. Being body slammed on pavement during an arrest would leave physical injury ranging from bruises to lacerations or even more serious injuries. If the complainant has no injuries, then reasonable doubt exists and I cannot legally consider her complaint to be sustainable.

That's the biggest problem with "abuse" complaints.  Many complaints turn out to be completely made up and were intended to be a way to seek revenge on an officer that arrested someone, like a child throwing a tantrum. Those false complaints sour every legitimate complaint that comes in.

Remove police officers from the equation. What if you and I got into an argument one day, and I decided to tell the police that you body slammed me on pavement. Would you have them arrest you on the spot based solely on my statement? Why should it be any different when someone makes a complaint against someone that happens to be an officer? Many people make complaints without any form of merit of supporting evidence and in our legal system, the suspect is considered innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt and the burden of proof rests with the accuser.

People also need to remember that officers are legally allowed to use force to make you comply with their instructions. So, was the hypothetical female resisting arrest or detention or otherwise interfering with Officer Joe? If so, using force against her is not abuse, it's the officer doing his job.

A lot of the time the victim of police abuse either hasn't done anything wrong, or is already in custody. There's been plenty of instances of suspects being assaulted in handcuffs and holding cells. Plenty of people get arrested, but you can't assault them once they are.

There have been several instances of truly abusive police officers and it's a shame; they should be prosecuted. Everyone knows the bad officers are out there, it's human nature. But to take the actions of what amount to less than 1% of the total police officers in this country and assume that they will all be abusive is simply wrong. That's what's been happening lately, people are drawing broad conclusions from a small data sample. A large majority of the time when people think they have been abused or had their rights violated, they are wrong. Police are legally allowed to use force to make you comply, so even after you've been arrested and are handcuffed if you are still being combative or resisting in any way, they can use force and it is not "assault".

Again, let's remove police officers from the equation. I'm an airline pilot, for example. There have been a string of airline accidents recently, yet no one assumes when they board my plane I am going to screw up and crash. Everyone has the basic assumption that I am a professional and will do my job correctly. What about when you go to see a doctor? Medical malpractice happens every day, yet no one expects a doctor to be bad at their job as a blanket assumption. So then, why do so many people lately seem to automatically expect police officers to be bad at their job? They are people too, just like the rest of us. Some make mistakes. Most do not.

I agree that someone should not be assaulted while in custody. But the circumstances of what happen during an incident determine if something is legally "assault" or "lawful use of force". Again, many people do not understand the law. 

I had a gun pulled on me when I called 911 for my friends medical emergency. A cop pulled up and ordered me sit on the curb. When I tried to explain that my friend couldn't breath, he pulled his gun on me and detained me, all the while my friend was wheezing and gasping. How exactly was that my fault....?

I can't speak to the circumstances that you experienced because I wasn't there, so I don't know exactly why that officer behaved the way he did. However, as I explained above if he ordered you to sit on the curb and you didn't immediately comply, he is allowed to use force to make you comply. You should also remember the physiological stress that can occur as a police officer. That officer may have just come from a call where someone was physically combative with him, and his body was still under the effects of the adrenaline fight or flight response. Maybe he was just a jerk.

My only caveat to that would be that I think in many cases, police unnecessarily escalate situations that might increase the officer's safety but endanger the safety of the citizen. Pulling guns on people shouldn't be the first step, it should be a last resort.

I think that in many cases, citizens unnecessarily escalate a situation by failing to comply with the lawful orders of a police officer. I disagree about drawing a firearm as a step in the use of force continuum. Police are often so quick to draw weapons because of science; action is faster than re-action. Police officers must treat everyone that chooses not to comply with their instructions as a potential threat, because anyone could be a potential threat. If an officer waited for that threat to become apparent, and had to REACT to it, he would be hurt or killed.

 I don't want to bring up race, but when a man of color is pulled over by police at night with no one else around, and feels unsafe, there's a problem there.

I agree there's a problem with that scenario however, since there's no reasonable way that an officer could know the race of every person he's pulling over before initiating the stop, especially at night, race isn't an issue. If a man of color feels unsafe when he gets pulled over, I believe the problem is his unreasonable and irrational fear of police officers. That's a systemic problem resulting from a number of socioeconomic factors, not a result of legitimate police brutality.

As you said, everyone should be held accountable for their actions, which of course I agree with. So I think we can both agree that there's something wrong when there's a huge system created to police us, but next to nothing to police the police. We just have to balance the scales of accountability, that's all us libs are asking for lol 

I'm all for legitimate "accountability" for everyone and yes, I would agree with you that sometimes the system is broken. My main complaint has always been that many people simply don't have a reasonable definition of that word.