i think any officer involved in a shooting should have thorough psychological vetting after the incident, to make sure they are not 'burnt out', that their training is adequate, that they have not grown desensitized or dehumanized in the course of their duty, etc. the previous shooting incident involving the two officers should have been occasion for a serious review of their fitness to serve on active duty.
instead, the department shushed it, covered it up, hid and evaded the proper paperwork. the judge was shocked by the flagrancy and 'chaos' of it. rather than trying to review the officers' fitness, the police force circled around their own, adopted a defensive posture. now, no surprises, those two officers are again involved in a shooting, this time a lethal one.
why were they so swiftly returned to duty? why are we talking about things like 'training scars'? a life has been taken, that's as serious as it gets.
the level of cop-killings in the US would suggest that there is a serious problem in the training of the police, or perhaps even a systemic problem in the culture and sociology of policing itself. viewing the populace as 'enemies' or 'targets', thinking about asserting 'dominance' etc, just makes the police seem like a semi-militarized occupying force. the whole business of policing seems thoroughly dehumanized; your insistence on process is a part of that. your attention to detail continually highlights the probity and reasonability of the police, and always finds the deceased in error. every alarm-bell that is raised about the police's conduct and history you conveniently explain away, or abstract away from the immediately pressing legal requirement of proving 'reasonability'. but the mental state, training, past behaviour of the police, etc. DO matter; it's about more than dissecting the actus reus and mens rea of the incident.
you have similar levels of cop-killing as a destabilized central american country. as developing nations. as ex-military dictatorships. it's not even close to other western nations of comparable stature. what is going wrong? instead you quibble and say 'hah! your chart doesn't include statistics for asian-americans, it's flawed data'. O K.
Last edited by uziq (2020-06-21 07:34:13)