3 ms·
Strongly disagree. "Use of force" policies are how we got into this mess. Essentially it is the honor code, where police can change it on a whim without oversi
by Someone1234 6y ago
Strongly disagree.
"Use of force" policies are how we got into this mess. Essentially it is the honor code, where police can change it on a whim without oversight or public accountability, and when they're violated there's no clear framework.
We should completely scrap "use of force" policies and create use of force LAWS, with special prosecutors and civilian oversight. Police shouldn't be policing each other. In fact police should be members of the public with limited additional powers, or "police are the public and that the public are the police" as Peel said.
Doubling down on a toxic idea is wrongheaded.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- ianai 6y agoI think reviews should be done by grand jury and maybe a three member judicial panel.
- optimiz3 6y agoLaws tend to lag technological capabilities. There have been rapid developments in lethal and non-lethal methods of force. Policy is needed for when it may be difficult to update laws and more agility is needed. There's a balance.
- rsynnott 6y agoI’m pretty sure killing someone by asphyxiation has been around for a while.
- Someone1234 6y agoGood? Allowing additional modes of force should be slow and conservative, not rushed out into the field as quickly as possible in the name of "progress." We're talking about policing, not a Silicon Value startup. "Move fast and break things" shouldn't apply to members of the public, as the police test their new gadgets.