Support NeoGAF

[EdibleKnife]

...the hell is with you and these awful Youtube channels? You subscribed?

People find a lot of weird stuff when they go looking for it it seems.

 

[Noirulus]

The point I am making is if you think it' valid to label a movement that exercises non violence in 99% of it's actions by the 1% that quite frankly is provoked, you're being dishonest. BLM is a movement of none violence. Some dumbass who throws a rock does not invalidate the whole thing. They don't define it in any way. If that's all it takes to affect a movement than literally there is no movement or organization on planet earth that can preach non-violence by that criteria.

It wasn't just one person. Anyway, I'm done with this discussion because once again you quite clearly don't seem to understand that I've said it doesn't invalidate the movement.

 

[Ray Wonder]

That's fine and I understood your point was just making sure you got mine

Believe me sir, I absolutely do.

 

[Infinite]

He's making sense to me. First things to change should be the decriminalization of most drugs and severe restrictions on handgun sales (as well as more cash or gun trade-in).

Cops also shouldn't be used to generate revenue for the county. Quotas and broken windows policing just damages the relationship with an officer and citizens.

 

[travisbickle]

Former Miss Alabama feels no sadness for the murdered Dallas cops, shooter was a MARTYR

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7FaHb3ABWfU

She knows her feelings are wrong, she wants to feel sadness but can't, that's what she explains in the video. What's happening is tearing people apart, a US army veteran killed 5 people when he couldn't control his feelings about the current crisis. Shit needs to be done .

 

[Mr. X]

This quote from Malcolm X is relevant

"I want Dr. King to know that I didn't come to Selma to make his job difficult. I really did come thinking I could make it easier. If the white people realize what the alternative is, perhaps they will be more willing to hear Dr. King."

 

[junpei]

Why is this wrong? this country was founded on a violent uprising. Most of the things we learn about in our history books revolve around violence. Now I'm non violent as they come but I think it's a little foolish to think that you can change the status quo by using only status quo approved peaceful methods . Most peaceful protest are ignored by the media and demonized whenever the movement fucks up a bit. I hate violence and chaos but they definitely can be used for positive change. We live in an era of apathy and unfortunately violence is one of the things that tends to get through.

 

[The Lamp]

Cops are called when people break the law. They are not called upon to solve the underlying social problems.

It really can't be both ways where cops complain that people are asking them for deep societal problems while the defense of that argument is that they are only called on for superficial things.

Are they called to just show up and say "hi" or are they called to deal with and act upon the situation, often so others don't have to? They are asked to deal with results of underlying social problems and risk their lives for it every day. So it is disingenuous to act like they do not have a part in that.

 

[Mumei]

Cry me a river, a huge portion of America expects black people to fix racism. Ain't no one asking you to fix any of those problems you listed, we're asking you to stop being a shitty ass institute, hold yourself accountable for your actions and stop killing us.

We're asking them to do ONE thing, and that's NOT shooting blacks first and asking questions later.

Stupid son of a bitch.

Literally signs up at these rallies that say "Stop shooting us." Where the fuck did anybody ask you and yours for help with our fucking homework?

My favourite part is where he tells people protesting the violent murders of innocent people by his organisation, to stop protesting murders of innocent people and join his organisation that has been violently murdering innocent people.

It's god tier logic.

Man, can you imagine how different life could have been if the Jews knew all they had to do was just join the Nazis and all the hatred, prejudice and killing would have just stopped right there and then.

Damn.

I have to confess that I am honestly baffled by these responses and several others like them. We have passed off mental health and drug addiction to the criminal justice system to deal with, and in some cases we have also put police into schools in a misguided attempt to create a more discipline environment, as anyone familiar with the school-to-prison pipeline phenomenon could tell you. If you take a look at, say, the prevalence of mental illness in jails and prisons (and compare that to their prevalence in state psychiatric institutions) you'll see the effects of this shift over the last thirty or forty years; pay particular attention to the shift from 1980 to 1981.

These are all things that the police are a) not good at handling, but b) have been asked to do anyway, and he is right to suggest that other parts of government aren't doing enough.

I am also surprised that none of you - and I know several of you well enough to know that you care about the issue which is why it surprises me - had read anything about his good faith attempts (and, more notably, successes) at reforming police culture in Dallas, since nearly every news site I have visited in the wake of the shootings seemed to talk about it, often referencing Radley Balko's 2015 piece in the Washington Post, since Balko is well-known as a critic of police militarization. There is also this more recent article in The Atlantic:

If the Dallas Police Department has now become a poster child for police reform due to Brown’s efforts to increase transparency and train officers to reduce the lethality of interactions between police and the community, that was not always the case. Dallas was once notorious for police violence. For years, the third largest city in Texas has had a higher per-capita rate of police-involved shootings than Chicago, New York, or Los Angeles.

This trend began to reverse around four years ago. On July 24, 2012, a Dallas police officer shot and killed James Harper, an unarmed black man. Residents took to the streets. A confrontation with police appeared imminent. But despite the potent and often combustible combination of angry citizens and riot police, a concerted effort by both sides kept the streets relatively peaceful.

In the wake of this near catastrophe, Dallas embraced a new model of community policing which Brown announced over Facebook. “The citizens of Dallas have shown great trust and confidence in the Dallas Police Department,” Brown wrote at the time. “My pledge is that we will continue to work as hard to maintain and improve citizens’ trust as we did to earn it.”

The department committed itself to transparency. It developed a new foot pursuit policy that emphasized de-escalation. One proposal would make police officers in Dallas subject to lethal force training every two months instead of every two years. Brown released an enormous amount of police data, too, publishing statistics including 12 years worth of data on police shootings on an official online repository. The number of body cameras used by officers increased. Poor performing police officers were fired. And after Brown declared that traffic citations were not intended to “raise revenue,” his officers issued half as many tickets at last count as they did in 2006.

Some point out that police reform may not be responsible for plummeting crime rates. But, at the very least, Dallas police appear to have cleaned up their act. Excessive force complaints against the department dropped by 64 percent over a five-year period. Arrests are decreasing by the thousands each year.

“So far this year, in 2016, we have had four excessive force complaints. We’ve averaged between 150 and 200 my whole 33-year career. So this is transformative,” Brown told a crowd of his fellow officers and policymakers at the White House in April. His department is a member of President Obama’s Police Data Initiative. “And we’ve averaged between 18 and 25 police involved shootings my whole career. We’ve had two so far this year.”

I agree that you can criticize some of the things that he said. I agree that his solution to get off the protest line and put an application in isn't completely coherent with his earlier critique that police are asked to do too much. I agree that he seemed to frame the protests as "part of the problem," and while this is belied by his department's supportive stance towards the protests it does still sound wrong. I agree that his comments on single parent homes as a phenomenon that police are expected to solve as opposed to a phenomenon that police have helped to create needs to be rebutted. I agree that his reforms do not address the underlying problem that police who do cross the line are still supremely unlikely to be indicted, let alone convicted.

But he's not wrong that the police are asked to do too much - and in my view asked to do things that result in children, the mentally ill, and people with substance abuse problems going into the criminal justice system rather than receiving the type of help that would be good for them - and acting as if he has no idea what police are asked to do or that he is using those things as an excuse to not reform seems churlish in light of the facts.

I'd like to think it is possible to have a nuanced, informed response to a person, particularly when that person has been demonstrating a commitment for several years now to precisely the kinds of reforms that many police reform advocates have suggested. He was completely right about some things he said, he was technically right about the facts but didn't do the best job analyzing the underlying causes of some other things he said, and some things he said weren't really useful as solutions. It's possible to have a complicated response to someone, and I wish that people would take a step back before immediately assuming the worst.

But I know I'm probably asking too much.

 

[AxelFoley]

No, chief, we're asking cops to do their FUCKING JOBS and not kill unarmed black folks who are complying with police officers' orders.

Have a seat, muthafucka.

 

[PopeReal]

No, chief, we're asking cops to do their FUCKING JOBS and not kill unarmed black folks who are complying with police officers' orders.

Have a seat, muthafucka.

"Maybe.... only if you protest the right way (very quietly and out of sight). Also no crimes may be committed by any black American for 725 days straight. We have to hold those against all of you. If you meet these standards we may consider your request. Even if we do consider it, you must convince us why we shouldn't kill you. This is all on you.

P.S. Smoking weed is punishable by death. For you guys, anyway."

 

[wildfire]

Not looking forward to seeing the ideologues flood this thread and lambast him for adding nuance to the conversation.

He was ranting and there isn't much to be gained from it other than he's tired, he's sidestepping that people are asking for pilice to be held accountable to poor performance and that he has an odd belief about what some of those performance requirements society demands from officers.

Guy needs a night sleep and hopefully noone picks on him for some of the parts of the rant that were odd and instead reinterpret what he says. For example almost noone expects cops to fix failing schools. Though cops certainly are called in way too much to arrest kids that could be sent to detention or have their parents called on them or actually don't deserve the punishment they're getting but the teachers are poorly trained at mediation.

That's on the education professionals failing to do their job adequately and asking a hammer to be their scalpel.

 

[Laieon]

No, chief, we're asking cops to do their FUCKING JOBS and not kill unarmed black folks who are complying with police officers' orders.

Have a seat, muthafucka.

Isn't that exactly what this chief is doing, as pointed out in this thread multiple times?

 

[eddievanclaylen]

My opinion on Cops is this:

Leave us alone. If we need you, we'll call.

 

[Dead Man]

No, chief, we're asking cops to do their FUCKING JOBS and not kill unarmed black folks who are complying with police officers' orders.

Have a seat, muthafucka.

Mumei posted a brilliant post half an hour before you posted this. You should read it. :/

 

[krazen]

Former Miss Alabama feels no sadness for the murdered Dallas cops, shooter was a MARTYR

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7FaHb3ABWfU

In her defense she's a black person whi lives in Alabama, a place thats still 1960's in some areas in race relations, lol

 

[17 Seconds]

kind of stupid to say people ask too much when it's obvious to everyone that you do way too little. "yeah we're awful at our jobs, but we'd never live up to your expectations anyways, so w/e"

 

[Newt]

I agree with this guy 100%. Blaming everything on the cops isn't going to get America anywhere.

 

[Mr. X]

I have to confess that I am honestly baffled by these responses and several others like them. We have passed off mental health and drug addiction to the criminal justice system to deal with, and in some cases we have also put police into schools in a misguided attempt to create a more discipline environment, as anyone familiar with the school-to-prison pipeline phenomenon could tell you. If you take a look at, say, the prevalence of mental illness in jails and prisons (and compare that to their prevalence in state psychiatric institutions) you'll see the effects of this shift over the last thirty or forty years; pay particular attention to the shift from 1980 to 1981.

These are all things that the police are a) not good at handling, but b) have been asked to do anyway, and he is right to suggest that other parts of government aren't doing enough.

I am also surprised that none of you - and I know several of you well enough to know that you care about the issue which is why it surprises me - had read anything about his good faith attempts (and, more notably, successes) at reforming police culture in Dallas, since nearly every news site I have visited in the wake of the shootings seemed to talk about it, often referencing Radley Balko's 2015 piece in the Washington Post, since Balko is well-known as a critic of police militarization. There is also this more recent article in The Atlantic:



I agree that you can criticize some of the things that he said. I agree that his solution to get off the protest line and put an application in isn't completely coherent with his earlier critique that police are asked to do too much. I agree that he seemed to frame the protests as "part of the problem," and while this is belied by his department's supportive stance towards the protests it does still sound wrong. I agree that his comments on single parent homes as a phenomenon that police are expected to solve as opposed to a phenomenon that police have helped to create needs to be rebutted. I agree that his reforms do not address the underlying problem that police who do cross the line are still supremely unlikely to be indicted, let alone convicted.

But he's not wrong that the police are asked to do too much - and in my view asked to do things that result in children, the mentally ill, and people with substance abuse problems going into the criminal justice system rather than receiving the type of help that would be good for them - and acting as if he has no idea what police are asked to do or that he is using those things as an excuse to not reform seems churlish in light of the facts.

I'd like to think it is possible to have a nuanced, informed response to a person, particularly when that person has been demonstrating a commitment for several years now to precisely the kinds of reforms that many police reform advocates have suggested. He was completely right about some things he said, he was technically right about the facts but didn't do the best job analyzing the underlying causes of some other things he said, and some things he said weren't really useful as solutions. It's possible to have a complicated response to someone, and I wish that people would take a step back before immediately assuming the worst.

But I know I'm probably asking too much.

Great post.

 

[shintoki]

He fired a lot of cops that were responsible for being over aggressive in the area once he took over, believes that the police should be in communities because it helps build the relationship between police and the citizens, and is for gun control and is against open carry since it makes their jobs much more complicated

So basically... He is doing what people want, just not what Cops want.

None of his statements are wrong either. I still like the idea of cops from the community being in their community. Cops should get to know the people they are serving.

 

[wesleyshark]

I agree with this guy 100%. Blaming everything on the cops isn't going to get America anywhere.

It's easier to just blame the other side, instead of taking on any sort of personal accountability. And this goes both ways.

 

[Thelonelykoopa]

It is true they do have do things they are not trained to do. My high school fired our psychiatrist and a year or so later replaced her with a police officer.

 

[The Lamp]

I have to confess that I am honestly baffled by these responses and several others like them. We have passed off mental health and drug addiction to the criminal justice system to deal with, and in some cases we have also put police into schools in a misguided attempt to create a more discipline environment, as anyone familiar with the school-to-prison pipeline phenomenon could tell you. If you take a look at, say, the prevalence of mental illness in jails and prisons (and compare that to their prevalence in state psychiatric institutions) you'll see the effects of this shift over the last thirty or forty years; pay particular attention to the shift from 1980 to 1981.

These are all things that the police are a) not good at handling, but b) have been asked to do anyway, and he is right to suggest that other parts of government aren't doing enough.

I am also surprised that none of you - and I know several of you well enough to know that you care about the issue which is why it surprises me - had read anything about his good faith attempts (and, more notably, successes) at reforming police culture in Dallas, since nearly every news site I have visited in the wake of the shootings seemed to talk about it, often referencing Radley Balko's 2015 piece in the Washington Post, since Balko is well-known as a critic of police militarization. There is also this more recent article in The Atlantic:



I agree that you can criticize some of the things that he said. I agree that his solution to get off the protest line and put an application in isn't completely coherent with his earlier critique that police are asked to do too much. I agree that he seemed to frame the protests as "part of the problem," and while this is belied by his department's supportive stance towards the protests it does still sound wrong. I agree that his comments on single parent homes as a phenomenon that police are expected to solve as opposed to a phenomenon that police have helped to create needs to be rebutted. I agree that his reforms do not address the underlying problem that police who do cross the line are still supremely unlikely to be indicted, let alone convicted.

But he's not wrong that the police are asked to do too much - and in my view asked to do things that result in children, the mentally ill, and people with substance abuse problems going into the criminal justice system rather than receiving the type of help that would be good for them - and acting as if he has no idea what police are asked to do or that he is using those things as an excuse to not reform seems churlish in light of the facts.

I'd like to think it is possible to have a nuanced, informed response to a person, particularly when that person has been demonstrating a commitment for several years now to precisely the kinds of reforms that many police reform advocates have suggested. He was completely right about some things he said, he was technically right about the facts but didn't do the best job analyzing the underlying causes of some other things he said, and some things he said weren't really useful as solutions. It's possible to have a complicated response to someone, and I wish that people would take a step back before immediately assuming the worst.

But I know I'm probably asking too much.

And this is definitely better than any way I could have put it. Thanks Mumei. The responses in here are indeed baffling and almost knee-jerk.

 

[Krappadizzle]

Why is this wrong? this country was founded on a violent uprising. Most of the things we learn about in our history books revolve around violence. Now I'm non violent as they come but I think it's a little foolish to think that you can change the status quo by using only status quo approved peaceful methods . Most peaceful protest are ignored by the media and demonized whenever the movement fucks up a bit. I hate violence and chaos but they definitely can be used for positive change. We live in an era of apathy and unfortunately violence is one of the things that tends to get through.

I can't believe I have to explain this. But when you get violent, people tend to respond emotionally rather than rationally and tends to set progress back then push it forward. And comparing our country now to then is exactly what you don't want. We live in an era of peace, setting that back with violent protests won't further expand that. We have the capability of sharing information at the drop of dime and don't need to rely on brute force guerrilla tactics to get a message or point across. You show people facts and stats and make a sound argument, you'll get your point across and no one has to die.

 

[teruterubozu]

My opinion on Cops is this:

Leave us alone. If we need you, we'll call.

"I don't hate cops, but I seem to feel better when they're not around." - Barfly

 

[jchap]

His suggestion that one could have more of an impact on police conduct from the inside than as a protester is probably correct.

 

[Oppo]

Correct. It doesn't take much in the way of reading comprehension to understand this. Too many see the phrase "police chief" and start automated response scripts of one liner dismissals, gleefully tossed out, without care for anything else.

Reminds me of a Patton Oswalt stand-up that observed how a segment of liberal minded people are too preoccupied with the superficiality of proper language as a marker for right/wrong and relatively unconcerned with the intent behind the damn message. It's intellectually lazy to approach with that sort of surface level checklist.

Better people becoming police officers would mean there are more better people as police officers. That's a good thing for society. That's not a cure-all, it's not even close to such, but it's not controversial to say that it's an undeniable improvement.

yeah no kidding. these ... let's call them folks, are making these threads nigh unreadable.

get of the fucking high horse, I know it's comfy but watch the actual conference

 

[Vinland]

Police Chief Brown is just saying that you can't change out a car engine if you only have a flat head screw driver as your only tool.

 

[DJ Lushious]

Here's my take on the sound-bite quote:

Just about all of Americans, particularly low and middle-class, are tasked with doing too much with too less. I've gone without any raise after years at a job (didn't mind, got a lot of experience), piled on more and more responsibilities, and expected to give as much time to work as I can.

Police officers are public servants. You bet your ass I'm gonna call them over a noise complaint or an animal barking incessantly. Why? 'Cause they're trained to deal with people in confrontational situations better than me. Also see the first sentence of this paragraph.

 

[Ovid]

I have to confess that I am honestly baffled by these responses and several others like them. We have passed off mental health and drug addiction to the criminal justice system to deal with, and in some cases we have also put police into schools in a misguided attempt to create a more discipline environment, as anyone familiar with the school-to-prison pipeline phenomenon could tell you. If you take a look at, say, the prevalence of mental illness in jails and prisons (and compare that to their prevalence in state psychiatric institutions) you'll see the effects of this shift over the last thirty or forty years; pay particular attention to the shift from 1980 to 1981.

These are all things that the police are a) not good at handling, but b) have been asked to do anyway, and he is right to suggest that other parts of government aren't doing enough.

I am also surprised that none of you - and I know several of you well enough to know that you care about the issue which is why it surprises me - had read anything about his good faith attempts (and, more notably, successes) at reforming police culture in Dallas, since nearly every news site I have visited in the wake of the shootings seemed to talk about it, often referencing Radley Balko's 2015 piece in the Washington Post, since Balko is well-known as a critic of police militarization. There is also this more recent article in The Atlantic:



I agree that you can criticize some of the things that he said. I agree that his solution to get off the protest line and put an application in isn't completely coherent with his earlier critique that police are asked to do too much. I agree that he seemed to frame the protests as "part of the problem," and while this is belied by his department's supportive stance towards the protests it does still sound wrong. I agree that his comments on single parent homes as a phenomenon that police are expected to solve as opposed to a phenomenon that police have helped to create needs to be rebutted. I agree that his reforms do not address the underlying problem that police who do cross the line are still supremely unlikely to be indicted, let alone convicted.

But he's not wrong that the police are asked to do too much - and in my view asked to do things that result in children, the mentally ill, and people with substance abuse problems going into the criminal justice system rather than receiving the type of help that would be good for them - and acting as if he has no idea what police are asked to do or that he is using those things as an excuse to not reform seems churlish in light of the facts.

I'd like to think it is possible to have a nuanced, informed response to a person, particularly when that person has been demonstrating a commitment for several years now to precisely the kinds of reforms that many police reform advocates have suggested. He was completely right about some things he said, he was technically right about the facts but didn't do the best job analyzing the underlying causes of some other things he said, and some things he said weren't really useful as solutions. It's possible to have a complicated response to someone, and I wish that people would take a step back before immediately assuming the worst.

But I know I'm probably asking too much.

Great post.

 

[MogCakes]

Mumei articulated my thoughts better than I could.

 

[necrosis]

I have to confess that I am honestly baffled by these responses and several others like them. We have passed off mental health and drug addiction to the criminal justice system to deal with, and in some cases we have also put police into schools in a misguided attempt to create a more discipline environment, as anyone familiar with the school-to-prison pipeline phenomenon could tell you. If you take a look at, say, the prevalence of mental illness in jails and prisons (and compare that to their prevalence in state psychiatric institutions) you'll see the effects of this shift over the last thirty or forty years; pay particular attention to the shift from 1980 to 1981.

These are all things that the police are a) not good at handling, but b) have been asked to do anyway, and he is right to suggest that other parts of government aren't doing enough.

I am also surprised that none of you - and I know several of you well enough to know that you care about the issue which is why it surprises me - had read anything about his good faith attempts (and, more notably, successes) at reforming police culture in Dallas, since nearly every news site I have visited in the wake of the shootings seemed to talk about it, often referencing Radley Balko's 2015 piece in the Washington Post, since Balko is well-known as a critic of police militarization. There is also this more recent article in The Atlantic:



I agree that you can criticize some of the things that he said. I agree that his solution to get off the protest line and put an application in isn't completely coherent with his earlier critique that police are asked to do too much. I agree that he seemed to frame the protests as "part of the problem," and while this is belied by his department's supportive stance towards the protests it does still sound wrong. I agree that his comments on single parent homes as a phenomenon that police are expected to solve as opposed to a phenomenon that police have helped to create needs to be rebutted. I agree that his reforms do not address the underlying problem that police who do cross the line are still supremely unlikely to be indicted, let alone convicted.

But he's not wrong that the police are asked to do too much - and in my view asked to do things that result in children, the mentally ill, and people with substance abuse problems going into the criminal justice system rather than receiving the type of help that would be good for them - and acting as if he has no idea what police are asked to do or that he is using those things as an excuse to not reform seems churlish in light of the facts.

I'd like to think it is possible to have a nuanced, informed response to a person, particularly when that person has been demonstrating a commitment for several years now to precisely the kinds of reforms that many police reform advocates have suggested. He was completely right about some things he said, he was technically right about the facts but didn't do the best job analyzing the underlying causes of some other things he said, and some things he said weren't really useful as solutions. It's possible to have a complicated response to someone, and I wish that people would take a step back before immediately assuming the worst.

But I know I'm probably asking too much.

this is a good post

i can't dispute that he isn't wrong -- because he is not. my issue with what has been said is that the present controversy surrounding the police has little, if anything, to do with mental health and/or drug addiction. being asked to do too much doesn't excuse you to execute a restrained black man, nor fire on one who is being cooperative

his statements strike me as an attempt to divert attention from the root cause(s) of the protests, and therein lies my issue with them

 

[MogCakes]

his statements strike me as an attempt to divert attention from the root cause(s) of the protests, and therein lies my issue with them

From listening to his voice clips and the excerpts on npr it doesn't appear the questions were about BLM in particular. The presser seemed to be more about Brown specifically as head of DPD. Perhaps that is where the confusion stems from.

 

[TestOfTide]

Badly worded speech, but some of the stuff he said clearly had good intentions with bad wording. His answer about "get out of the protest lines and join the police" was probably his way of saying "I want to see pro-reform people become a bigger chunk of the police" which I'm sure any pro reform person would see as a great way to increase pressure on the police to reform.

 

[MogCakes]

Badly worded speech, but some of the stuff he said clearly had good intentions with bad wording.

Thing is it was a press conference and not a speech, so pretty much a Q&A with reporters. He doesn't appear to have prepared answers beforehand so all his responses were raw.

 

[MHWilliams]

I have to confess that I am honestly baffled by these responses and several others like them. We have passed off mental health and drug addiction to the criminal justice system to deal with, and in some cases we have also put police into schools in a misguided attempt to create a more discipline environment, as anyone familiar with the school-to-prison pipeline phenomenon could tell you. If you take a look at, say, the prevalence of mental illness in jails and prisons (and compare that to their prevalence in state psychiatric institutions) you'll see the effects of this shift over the last thirty or forty years; pay particular attention to the shift from 1980 to 1981.

These are all things that the police are a) not good at handling, but b) have been asked to do anyway, and he is right to suggest that other parts of government aren't doing enough.

I am also surprised that none of you - and I know several of you well enough to know that you care about the issue which is why it surprises me - had read anything about his good faith attempts (and, more notably, successes) at reforming police culture in Dallas, since nearly every news site I have visited in the wake of the shootings seemed to talk about it, often referencing Radley Balko's 2015 piece in the Washington Post, since Balko is well-known as a critic of police militarization. There is also this more recent article in The Atlantic:



I agree that you can criticize some of the things that he said. I agree that his solution to get off the protest line and put an application in isn't completely coherent with his earlier critique that police are asked to do too much. I agree that he seemed to frame the protests as "part of the problem," and while this is belied by his department's supportive stance towards the protests it does still sound wrong. I agree that his comments on single parent homes as a phenomenon that police are expected to solve as opposed to a phenomenon that police have helped to create needs to be rebutted. I agree that his reforms do not address the underlying problem that police who do cross the line are still supremely unlikely to be indicted, let alone convicted.

But he's not wrong that the police are asked to do too much - and in my view asked to do things that result in children, the mentally ill, and people with substance abuse problems going into the criminal justice system rather than receiving the type of help that would be good for them - and acting as if he has no idea what police are asked to do or that he is using those things as an excuse to not reform seems churlish in light of the facts.

I'd like to think it is possible to have a nuanced, informed response to a person, particularly when that person has been demonstrating a commitment for several years now to precisely the kinds of reforms that many police reform advocates have suggested. He was completely right about some things he said, he was technically right about the facts but didn't do the best job analyzing the underlying causes of some other things he said, and some things he said weren't really useful as solutions. It's possible to have a complicated response to someone, and I wish that people would take a step back before immediately assuming the worst.

But I know I'm probably asking too much.

A great post by Mumei. All of it needs be read. There parts where Brown was correct and the parts where he faltered. To lean on either side too much is to miss the nuance that the OP was looking for.

 

[EvilEvoVIII]

"I don't hate cops, but I seem to feel better when they're not around." - Barfly

I am on the complete opposite side of that quote; I feel better when I see them around and have quite a bit of respect for them. Granted, I live in a really nice suburb where nothing happens, ever. So I have never had to interact with them, but if I do, I know and trust they will be there to assist me.

On topic, I think this Police Chief is speaking honestly, in that, they are expected to play many different roles and try to solve too many social issues that so much of our society can't. Perhaps he could have framed his response differently, but I think he's just absolutely exhausted.

 

[perfectchaos007]

Read the post above, and actually look at a picture of the guy.

*sigh*

If there was a picture of Police Chief Brown in the OP, the responses would have a lot different.

 

[OriginofHysteria]

*sigh*

If there was a picture of Police Chief Brown in the OP, the responses would have a lot different.

No because as others have said in this thread, he's a self hating black person. Which is ridiculous.

 

[Piggus]

kind of stupid to say people ask too much when it's obvious to everyone that you do way too little. "yeah we're awful at our jobs, but we'd never live up to your expectations anyways, so w/e"

I have to wonder if people making these sort of posts have any clue as to how policing in Dallas works. Dallas police have a great reputation and place an emphasis on de-escalation and community engagement. They do way too little? Dallas has the fewest officer-related shootings of just about any major city and is safer than it's been in almost a century.

The broad generalizations that occur when people talk about the police is sickening sometimes.

 

[Liu Kang Baking A Pie]

No because as others have said in this thread, he's a self hating black person. Which is ridiculous.

Don Lemon's been on TV for a long time now.

 

[Lathentar]

Great post Mumei.

 

[Saint Gregory]

*sigh*

If there was a picture of Police Chief Brown in the OP, the responses would have a lot different.

Not really, the whole idea that black people aren't capable of having bigoted views about other black people is why you see Fox News and other conservative outlets trot out self hating black people to reinforce the most vitriolic stereotypes to give themselves cover.

I don't see this particular set of answers in quite the same light as the average Ben Carson/Stacey Dash shtick and I don't believe that Brown intended it to come across that way but it's pretty clear that even as a very progressive black police chief he has some unfortunate views about the people in his own communities. That shouldn't discredit him, his work or his message but it should illustrate how complex this problem is when even someone who's accomplished so much in terms of reducing police brutality in his own city still seems to sound very much like every other police chief when pressed on the solutions to these issues.

"Single Black Moms/Absentee Black Dads" is a pretty tired talking point that needs to be retired along with "Black on Black Crime". They attempt to assign color to issues that have nothing to do with race and make it appear that African Americans exhibit unique behavior in these instances when studies suggest otherwise.

 

[OriginofHysteria]

Don Lemon's been on TV for a long time now.

I'm not saying the idea of a self hating black man is ridiculous, but rather idea that the Dallas PD chief is was imo ridiculous.

 

[devilhawk]

Sounds like Obama at the memorial just reiterated what the Chief said:

We tell police 'you're the social worker, you're the drug counselor, you're the parent.

 

[necrosis]

Former Miss Alabama feels no sadness for the murdered Dallas cops, shooter was a MARTYR

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7FaHb3ABWfU

just because this needs some attention: wow you are taking what she said out of context

she is struggling to reconcile her sense of right and wrong with her disdain for police in general. she knows that her feelings are fucked up and is visibly upset about it. it's not difficult to empathize with her

From listening to his voice clips and the excerpts on npr it doesn't appear the questions were about BLM in particular. The presser seemed to be more about Brown specifically as head of DPD. Perhaps that is where the confusion stems from.

given the state of things, i feel like he is implicitly addressing BLM when mentioning "protestors"

 

[HP_Wuvcraft]

The quote about open carry in on point.

All that shit about raising black kids.... well, pure racism.

Failing schools? How is society expecting cops to fix failing schools? Is that referring to officers placed in schools?

9-11 gets clogged with BS calls from citizens that think the police are there to help them with the wrong fast food order. This was one of the things that I liked about the TV show, 'Southland'. Almost every episode, someone calls in with some ridiculous bullshit.

 

[ryutaro's mama]

I am on the complete opposite side of that quote; I feel better when I see them around and have quite a bit of respect for them. Granted, I live in a really nice suburb where nothing happens, ever. So I have never had to interact with them, but if I do, I know and trust they will be there to assist me.

What a nice dream. <sigh>

I live in a nice neighborhood too and still have no interest in an interaction with that gang.

I am also Black.

So I know that in the process of "assisting" me, they may mistake me as fitting the description of some generic someone and I may get assisted to my own demise.

No thank you.

 

[ProfessorMoran]

Racist love blaming black women for the downfall of society

Being a father to a one year old, I can't imagine ever being a single parent, that's Hard, no way I would be able to keep my son out of trouble, and I can see how tired my wife gets at times, for a lot of single mothers in the African American community, having to raise their children right all by themselves and making a living in poor neighborhoods? The odds are against them, it's better to have a partner to get through it together.

 

[Mumei]

Sounds like Obama at the memorial just reiterated what the Chief said:

I was on break at work and caught that part of the speech on one of the television sets in the break room, actually.

A great post by Mumei. All of it needs be read. There parts where Brown was correct and the parts where he faltered. To lean on either side too much is to miss the nuance that the OP was looking for.

Thanks.

I was thinking about it during the day, and I did think of one reason why he might actually want people to apply that I didn't think about last night:

Although widely praised for these efforts, Brown and the department’s top brass have also come in for criticism from city council members, police associations, and others who have called their tactics unsustainable. Officers have been voting with their feet as well: At least 143 individuals have left the department, while recruitment has stagnated. Academy classes are regularly canceled for lack of applicants.

If that's an actual reason, I wish he had framed it that way, though perhaps more directly addressing those underlying tensions is something that he is trying to avoid. I'm sure it's a difficult needle to thread.