4 ms·

I think part of the Sandra Bland story is the apparent escalation of the encounter BY the officer. Asking sarcastic, passive aggressive questions when you have

by mwerd 11y ago

I think part of the Sandra Bland story is the apparent escalation of the encounter BY the officer. Asking sarcastic, passive aggressive questions when you have the trust of the community and a gun at your waist is abusive. Its outrageous to many of us who watch the video and just juvenile bullying really. Regarding your comments on the danger of policing, its somewhat fallacious--police work is generally safer than it's ever been and not any more dangerous than simply walking the streets in most U.S. cities. Im having a hard time pasting the link on mobile but Radley Balko has a number of articles on the subject in the Washington Post and Reason.

chroma 11y ago
I completely agree. The behavior of that officer was egregious. Engaging in dominance games is stupid and petty; doubly-so when you have weapons, training, and legal authority. I thought I addressed the stats about danger, though not deeply: > While police work isn't particularly dangerous compared to fishing or logging, people can't internalize that fact. And in fairness to intuitions, much of the risk is compressed into short moments such as traffic stops. I know police work isn't particularly dangerous, but I also think that during a traffic stop, it would take superhuman willpower to not be more prone to violence than the situation merits. That's just how people are wired. There might be some training or technology that could ameliorate this, but I don't think it exists yet.
- tzs 11y ago
  It should be noted that those stats are averaged over all aspects of police work. Some particular aspects are more dangerous, and some are less dangerous. Traffic stops are more dangerous, accounting for something like more than half of on duty officer deaths and serious injuries. Also, several people here seem to be reasoning that policing is safe, so there is no need for police to take strong control in these situations. Isn't it possible that taking strong control in these encounters is why they are reasonably safe?

by mwerd 11y ago

chroma 11y ago

I completely agree. The behavior of that officer was egregious. Engaging in dominance games is stupid and petty; doubly-so when you have weapons, training, and legal authority. I thought I addressed the stats about danger, though not deeply: > While police work isn't particularly dangerous compared to fishing or logging, people can't internalize that fact. And in fairness to intuitions, much of the risk is compressed into short moments such as traffic stops. I know police work isn't particularly dangerous, but I also think that during a traffic stop, it would take superhuman willpower to not be more prone to violence than the situation merits. That's just how people are wired. There might be some training or technology that could ameliorate this, but I don't think it exists yet.

tzs 11y ago
It should be noted that those stats are averaged over all aspects of police work. Some particular aspects are more dangerous, and some are less dangerous. Traffic stops are more dangerous, accounting for something like more than half of on duty officer deaths and serious injuries. Also, several people here seem to be reasoning that policing is safe, so there is no need for police to take strong control in these situations. Isn't it possible that taking strong control in these encounters is why they are reasonably safe?