4 ms·

> non-violent mentally ill Is this true though? Many cases involved violent mentally ill.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
danielheath 5y ago
Police frequently get called to suicide threats. While threatening to commit suicide is a horrible thing to do, it doesn’t warrant an armed response. Instead of arguing over the edge cases, I suggest pushing for the part of the proposal that’s unambiguously helpful (eg: no armed response without a plausible threat of violence).
- accurrent 5y ago
  I'm not American. But I used to be firefighter for 2 years. Where I live both firefighters and police respond to suicides. In the 2 years I have attended over 100 suicide calls of various forms (in various stages). In none of them have we ever used an "armed response" unless you consider a bolt cutter/saw a weapon. It does seem to puzzle me why one would want to use weapons in a suicide case.
  - throwawaysea 5y ago
    The language used by the parent comment is ambiguous. By armed response they mean that the responding police officers carry a gun. I don’t see that as a problem, because you never know what kind of situation they will encounter and what the needs might be.
    - danielheath 5y ago
      I don’t know about you but when someone with a gun shows up, my motivation begins and ends at “get rid of this person”. I am not going to have a productive conversation, because I don’t know what kind of situation I will encounter.
LeonB 5y ago
Certainly, you make a good point. When we talk about someone “in crisis” it’s very likely to have them appear quite violent. And all people threatening suicide are threatening violence. ==== edited to add (as stated below) What I'm intending to say, quite badly as it appears, is that even if someone in crisis appears to be "violent" -- or if a person threatening suicide can be interpreted as threatening "violence" -- that is no reason to withdraw them from eligibility for a caring response.
- temp8964 5y ago
  Not only the moment “in crisis”. Some have violent history. Burglary / robbery is not uncommon among drug users.
  - jdavis703 5y ago
    Burglary is not a violent crime, it’s a property crime.
    - temp8964 5y ago
      Updated my text.
    - throwawaysea 5y ago
      I feel any crime involving physical force (such as breaking and entering) constitutes violence, whether it involves a person or property. From the American Heritage dictionary (https://www.wordnik.com/words/violence https://www.wordnik.com/words/violence): > Behavior or treatment in which physical force is exerted for the purpose of causing damage or injury.
      - alisonkisk 5y ago
        Using intentionally ambiguous language to misdirect is only temporarily convincing until people cotton to your game.
        5y ago
throwawaysea 5y ago
Not just many cases but also some of the most prominent ones hailed as an instance of unjust policing. For example, in Seattle there was a situation where a woman named Charleena Lyles called in a fake incident to lure police, with an intent apparently to kill them because she is thought to have had some kind of fear that they would otherwise come for her. When the police responded, she cornered an officer in a kitchen with knives in hand (https://www.q13fox.com/news/seattle-officer-in-charleena-lyles-shooting-the-knife-is-produced-its-the-oh-my-god-moment https://www.q13fox.com/news/seattle-officer-in-charleena-lyl...), and another cop had to shoot her. All this took place in 2017. Activists initially tried to turn this event into something but it didn’t gather momentum because it was clearly a defensive police action after they had been lured with an intention to do harm. Come 2020, this incident was dredged up after George Floyd’s death, and suddenly it gained lots of news attention, activist vigils, and so on. And despite how clear cut this incident was, activists claim the police were wrong and that responses to the mentally ill don’t require armed response. Meanwhile, the fact that Lyles had just recently been arrested for harassment and obstruction of police has not been scrutinized. The truth is she was let off with no consequence, a byproduct of Seattle’s restorative justice policies, and went on with her mental health issues / intent to harm police officers.
- alisonkisk 5y ago
  This is an absurd misrepresentation of what happened to Ms. Lyles.
  - throwawaysea 5y ago
    Can you help me understand why you hold this perspective? Per various news sources the previous incident involving Lyles was very similar, where she threatened police officers with scissors, but they were able to convince her to drop them and arrest her without anyone being harmed (https://www.huffpost.com/entry/seattle-police-shooting-charleena-lyles_n_59479a12e4b0f15cd5bc7ff1 https://www.huffpost.com/entry/seattle-police-shooting-charl...). There are also audio recordings from the officers’ response in the later fatal encounter that corroborates their version of the story, including the fact that they gave her warnings to back away 11 times before shooting (https://www.kiro7.com/news/local/charleena-lyles-seattle-police-shooting-case-what-we-know/536467321/ https://www.kiro7.com/news/local/charleena-lyles-seattle-pol...). Per these links she also had a long history of crimes going further back (assault, robbery, theft, etc). To me it is unconscionable that someone with her history of crime and mental issues is permitted to live without supervision, let alone keep her children, and it is further unacceptable that she was let off a serious incident (threatening to kill a police officer) with no consequence or accountability by a “mental health court”. This looks to me more like a failure of soft-on-crime restorative justice policies rather than a failure of policing.
void_mint 5y ago
> Many Citation needed.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

Police frequently get called to suicide threats. While threatening to commit suicide is a horrible thing to do, it doesn’t warrant an armed response. Instead of arguing over the edge cases, I suggest pushing for the part of the proposal that’s unambiguously helpful (eg: no armed response without a plausible threat of violence).

accurrent 5y ago
I'm not American. But I used to be firefighter for 2 years. Where I live both firefighters and police respond to suicides. In the 2 years I have attended over 100 suicide calls of various forms (in various stages). In none of them have we ever used an "armed response" unless you consider a bolt cutter/saw a weapon. It does seem to puzzle me why one would want to use weapons in a suicide case.
- throwawaysea 5y ago
  The language used by the parent comment is ambiguous. By armed response they mean that the responding police officers carry a gun. I don’t see that as a problem, because you never know what kind of situation they will encounter and what the needs might be.
  - danielheath 5y ago
    I don’t know about you but when someone with a gun shows up, my motivation begins and ends at “get rid of this person”. I am not going to have a productive conversation, because I don’t know what kind of situation I will encounter.

LeonB 5y ago

Certainly, you make a good point. When we talk about someone “in crisis” it’s very likely to have them appear quite violent. And all people threatening suicide are threatening violence. ==== edited to add (as stated below) What I'm intending to say, quite badly as it appears, is that even if someone in crisis appears to be "violent" -- or if a person threatening suicide can be interpreted as threatening "violence" -- that is no reason to withdraw them from eligibility for a caring response.

temp8964 5y ago
Not only the moment “in crisis”. Some have violent history. Burglary / robbery is not uncommon among drug users.
- jdavis703 5y ago
  Burglary is not a violent crime, it’s a property crime.
  - temp8964 5y ago
    Updated my text.
  - throwawaysea 5y ago
    I feel any crime involving physical force (such as breaking and entering) constitutes violence, whether it involves a person or property. From the American Heritage dictionary (https://www.wordnik.com/words/violence https://www.wordnik.com/words/violence): > Behavior or treatment in which physical force is exerted for the purpose of causing damage or injury.
    - alisonkisk 5y ago
      Using intentionally ambiguous language to misdirect is only temporarily convincing until people cotton to your game.
      - 5y ago

throwawaysea 5y ago

Not just many cases but also some of the most prominent ones hailed as an instance of unjust policing. For example, in Seattle there was a situation where a woman named Charleena Lyles called in a fake incident to lure police, with an intent apparently to kill them because she is thought to have had some kind of fear that they would otherwise come for her. When the police responded, she cornered an officer in a kitchen with knives in hand (https://www.q13fox.com/news/seattle-officer-in-charleena-lyles-shooting-the-knife-is-produced-its-the-oh-my-god-moment https://www.q13fox.com/news/seattle-officer-in-charleena-lyl...), and another cop had to shoot her. All this took place in 2017. Activists initially tried to turn this event into something but it didn’t gather momentum because it was clearly a defensive police action after they had been lured with an intention to do harm. Come 2020, this incident was dredged up after George Floyd’s death, and suddenly it gained lots of news attention, activist vigils, and so on. And despite how clear cut this incident was, activists claim the police were wrong and that responses to the mentally ill don’t require armed response. Meanwhile, the fact that Lyles had just recently been arrested for harassment and obstruction of police has not been scrutinized. The truth is she was let off with no consequence, a byproduct of Seattle’s restorative justice policies, and went on with her mental health issues / intent to harm police officers.

alisonkisk 5y ago
This is an absurd misrepresentation of what happened to Ms. Lyles.
- throwawaysea 5y ago
  Can you help me understand why you hold this perspective? Per various news sources the previous incident involving Lyles was very similar, where she threatened police officers with scissors, but they were able to convince her to drop them and arrest her without anyone being harmed (https://www.huffpost.com/entry/seattle-police-shooting-charleena-lyles_n_59479a12e4b0f15cd5bc7ff1 https://www.huffpost.com/entry/seattle-police-shooting-charl...). There are also audio recordings from the officers’ response in the later fatal encounter that corroborates their version of the story, including the fact that they gave her warnings to back away 11 times before shooting (https://www.kiro7.com/news/local/charleena-lyles-seattle-police-shooting-case-what-we-know/536467321/ https://www.kiro7.com/news/local/charleena-lyles-seattle-pol...). Per these links she also had a long history of crimes going further back (assault, robbery, theft, etc). To me it is unconscionable that someone with her history of crime and mental issues is permitted to live without supervision, let alone keep her children, and it is further unacceptable that she was let off a serious incident (threatening to kill a police officer) with no consequence or accountability by a “mental health court”. This looks to me more like a failure of soft-on-crime restorative justice policies rather than a failure of policing.

void_mint 5y ago

> Many Citation needed.