If there's anything that would build public trust back in police institutions, it would be politically-empowered independent citizen's oversight boards. It is such a shame that most cities in the US don't have these.
I'd like the police to be a (mostly) transparent organization that is concerned with the health of our society and key partners to all upstanding citizens. Citizen oversight boards is one path to making that happen.
Unfortunately so many police departments are just gangs now with political backing. Just this 4th of July the NYPD decided it was their right to commandeer viewing areas for their families and prevent the public from using them. No repercussions, no politicians demanding an investigation, just armed people in uniform daring you to say something. This is a massive open abuse of power and its just shrugged off.
* Early in it's formation, the historical precursor to the NYPD was two separate police forces; one run by the city and one run by the state. At one point the city police (Municipals) was literally protecting the mayor from arrest by the state police (Metropolitans).
* Having to be rescued by actual nativist[0] gangs after riots broke out after the Metropolitans won out over the Municipals
* Repeated bi-decennial corruption investigations that lead to reforms which just push the corruption somewhere else and make it worse
Fun fact: the NYPD even operates in other countries. There's a weird post-9/11 program called the International Liaison Program[1] in which other countries pay the NYPD to station NYC cops in their country. It's absolutely insane that this somehow doesn't violate some kind of Geneva convention[2].
[0] People who wanted to build a wall and make the Irish pay for it.
On the face of it, the last one does not sound so bad, as long as the NYPD is operating with permission from the jurisdictions where they are operating.
Just like how a company wholly owned by New York City could have contracts with New York City, London and Paris at the same time.
Except cops aren't your Average Joe, they need to obey the local laws regarding a police force operations and without a lot of laws (or a suitable hand-waving) can't do anything more than an American tourist in the destination country.
They should formalize this. They have to work on the 4th of July, I don't actually see a problem with making it easier for them to be closer to the kids/spouse that day.
Why should they get more rights than the populace they enforce the laws over? More importantly this is not a formal policy they simply commandeered the space and forced the plebians out. If you don't think people should lose their jobs and be prosecuted for abuse of power over this I don't know what to say.
The #1 thing that would reform the US police institutions is this:
- All damages would be paid from their pension fund.
That's it. If the bill goes to the city/county, nobody cares. If $cop1 fucking up messes up $cop[1..n]'s future pension plans? They'll start to self-police real fast.
Or they will just make sure $cop1 is not caught using whatever they need including witness intimidation. NYPD cops raped a handcuffed girl in a van and 9 other cops turned up at her hospital room and tried to intimidate her into changing her story.
Or case of another cop that recorded fellow officers admitting to crimes and corruption. He turned in evidence and was abducted by other cops and committed to a mental institution.
Where I am outside of the US, the anti police-corruption police are hated by the normal police, which I think is a pretty good indication of how many police don't like being held accountable. A lot of police misconduct really relates to a culture of closing ranks so it's seen as a betrayal to investigate that properly. It doesn't need to be said that police should be held to a higher standard than anyone else since they gain pretty major privileges and powers, obviously including the legal ability to use deadly force.
Pensions funds are already underfunded and subject to corruption such as understatement of liabilities and investments in politically connected ventures.
The only result is future taxpayers get to pay higher taxes.
- states and local governments may not hire any police officers unless they fully fund the pension obligations ahead of time.
If we can force the USPS to do this, I'd say we can force state and local governments to do this as well. Problem is, I think this will lead to local governments privatizing the police force, getting rid of pension obligations completely, which will be an even worse outcome. Private, for profit companies with qualified immunity...
…or do the extremely easy thing and scrap all compensation that extends further than the end of employment, just like any other non taxpayer funded employer operates in the US.
A government with the ability to issue new money is not comparable.
Social security can exist or not exist, the relevant question will be what kind of purchasing power will the social security benefit have at some point in the future, and that is completely dependent upon politics.
I’m not sure I agree with that. I don’t think a good cop should have his pension harmed because a different cop in some other precinct did wrong.
What I do think is that bad cops should be fired and when they make egregious errors. An when they commit crimes (which they seem to do often and while on the job) they should go to jail. End qualified immunity.
If a good cop watches a bad cop breaking the law or brutalizing someone and does not stop him then that is not a good cop. Using that standard you will quickly start running out of good cops. Search the internet there are hundreds of videos of cops just standing there watching another cop beat people. Even in the rare occasion where video forces the precinct to charge or suspended the violent cop the bystanders are unpunished. The George Floyd case is the only one I can think of where they were.
If a cop stood idly by and watched another cop brutalize someone, I would not call that person a good cop. Fire them. I'd fire a doctor who sat by and did nothing while a patient go into cardiac arrest. I'd fire a fireman who sat by and watched a house burn down without attempting to put it out.
I'm fine with firing the lot of them. I'd honestly rather see mass firing than pension raids because when it comes down to it, we need those people to stop being cops.
Hopefully that would increase recruiting and give people with better values into the system. Right now it feels like policing is family generational business.
> I’m not sure I agree with that. I don’t think a good cop should have his pension harmed because a different cop in some other precinct did wrong.
Quite the opposite. Police are paid tax money to enforce the law and prevent crime, regardless of perpetrator. If they can't do this, they don't deserve the money.
They should be scrutinizing their own ranks first and foremost, as they are granted special privileges (i.e. weapons) that make breaking the law easier and more convenient.
I'd rather just see the bad cop be fired. I feel that if we were to penalize their pension fund, their union and local government would just find some back door to refund the money. Better to just terminate the bad cops and be done with them.
If you look at the top of the thread, you'll see I said "when they commit crimes (which they seem to do often and while on the job) they should go to jail".
But the debate is should there be collective punishment for bad cops or should they be terminated. I favor termination.
One main reason I prefer terminating bad cops vs hitting their pensions is that bad behavior is less of a cost impact to the bad cop than losing their job. A cop does something wrong, maybe it will impact their retirement pension by a small percentage. That's not a big disincentive. Loosing their job, that's a big disincentive.
Another way to go about this is to have cops purchase mandatory insurance. Any bad behavior would be paid by their insurance and if they make too big an error, they become un-insurable and thus can no longer be law enforcement.
We need those good cops to be actually saying something though. It's not like bad police operate in a vacuum, they go on patrols with the good cops. The good cops know all of the bad cops.
In the US, being a "good cop" in this context is a career-ending move. People in power don't really like it when abuses of their power are exposed. The "thin blue line" and all.
>I don’t think a good cop should have his pension harmed because a different cop in some other precinct did wrong.
I disagree. The silence of the so called good cops is acceptance of the bad behavior. If they don't report and if nothing is done then yes, take it from all of them. They're all part of the same system
Someone posted something I disagree with, but you're operating in the "same system" as them and didn't stop them, so we'll just downvote you instead, cool?
Pretty sure I speak up, check my comment history. Not to mention, police actively killing innocent people is way different than disagreeing on the internet. Are you seriously conflating those?
This is exactly the solution. I've long proposed civilian review boards assembled like juries - random citizens called in to judge specific cases of police actions. Theses juries would have the ability to rule on the culpability of the officers, select penalties and their deliberations would be secret and final.
Police that know their actions would be reviewed and their chiefs and administrators would have no ability to save them would certainly reduce the amount of police illegality.
I'd like the police to be a (mostly) transparent organization that is concerned with the health of our society and key partners to all upstanding citizens. Citizen oversight boards is one path to making that happen.