SavannahMann
Platinum Member
- Nov 16, 2016
- 13,857
- 6,483
- 365
It has been mentioned here more than once that it takes more hours of training to become a barber than it does to become a cop. States require more training time to become a barber than a police officer - CNN.com
It has also been noted that Police Misconduct is the only criminal category where the numbers are based upon convictions, instead of reports.
Now, the Wall Street Journal has conducted a study and found that cops often keep their licenses, even after misconduct is proven, and sometimes even while serving prison sentences.
Why Some Problem Cops Don’t Lose Their Badges
The Wall Street Journal believes that most cops are good and honest and all of that. While reporting on the problem, they want to believe that those who are not convicted are good guys. This of course is the normal bias that is encountered when someone admits that there are bad cops, but only a few, just a few. Less than one percent based upon convictions. Using that math, only a few, perhaps ten percent of drug dealers are criminals. The rest are never convicted. Of course, that is an asinine statement, but we know that there are a lot of asinine beliefs out there.
On the message board Discussionist, and Democratic Underground, I posted a thread about what kind of reforms I wanted to see in the Police. One of those would eliminate a vast majority of corruption.
If you have a Top Secret Clearance, and you handle classified information. Every now and then you have to take a Polygraph test. CIA agents do so as do NSA and Military people. These integrity checks are done from time to time to make sure you or anyone else isn't passing the classified information to anyone.
Why can't we demand that police do the same? Think about this. Every six months or so you spend an hour getting quizzed on the box. The hour is to go through the questions with you ahead of time, and then you take the actual test. A dozen questions and you're back on the street doing a fine job or whatever.
Have you planted evidence? Have you seen anyone plant evidence? Have you lied on a report? Have you seen anyone lie on a report? Have you lied under oath? Have you seen anyone else lie under oath?
Now, I know that you can't use Polygraphs in court. But we do use them to allow people to maintain their access to classified data. Why can't we use them to keep the police working? If you fail, you're not fired. You might be having a bad day. Take a week or two and get your head right and come on back. If you fail again, you're free to go, but you're leaving your badge and gun on the table. I'm not saying we should throw the cops in jail for flunking. I'm saying they shouldn't be cops if they flunk the polygraph.
There were other suggestions, body cameras for example. But I believe that Polygraphs could be put to good use in making corruption as rare as humanly possible. Police are granted a great deal of authority, and like those who are entrusted with access to sensitive information, they should be willing to demonstrate they are worthy of that trust.
It has also been noted that Police Misconduct is the only criminal category where the numbers are based upon convictions, instead of reports.
Now, the Wall Street Journal has conducted a study and found that cops often keep their licenses, even after misconduct is proven, and sometimes even while serving prison sentences.
Why Some Problem Cops Don’t Lose Their Badges
The Wall Street Journal believes that most cops are good and honest and all of that. While reporting on the problem, they want to believe that those who are not convicted are good guys. This of course is the normal bias that is encountered when someone admits that there are bad cops, but only a few, just a few. Less than one percent based upon convictions. Using that math, only a few, perhaps ten percent of drug dealers are criminals. The rest are never convicted. Of course, that is an asinine statement, but we know that there are a lot of asinine beliefs out there.
On the message board Discussionist, and Democratic Underground, I posted a thread about what kind of reforms I wanted to see in the Police. One of those would eliminate a vast majority of corruption.
If you have a Top Secret Clearance, and you handle classified information. Every now and then you have to take a Polygraph test. CIA agents do so as do NSA and Military people. These integrity checks are done from time to time to make sure you or anyone else isn't passing the classified information to anyone.
Why can't we demand that police do the same? Think about this. Every six months or so you spend an hour getting quizzed on the box. The hour is to go through the questions with you ahead of time, and then you take the actual test. A dozen questions and you're back on the street doing a fine job or whatever.
Have you planted evidence? Have you seen anyone plant evidence? Have you lied on a report? Have you seen anyone lie on a report? Have you lied under oath? Have you seen anyone else lie under oath?
Now, I know that you can't use Polygraphs in court. But we do use them to allow people to maintain their access to classified data. Why can't we use them to keep the police working? If you fail, you're not fired. You might be having a bad day. Take a week or two and get your head right and come on back. If you fail again, you're free to go, but you're leaving your badge and gun on the table. I'm not saying we should throw the cops in jail for flunking. I'm saying they shouldn't be cops if they flunk the polygraph.
There were other suggestions, body cameras for example. But I believe that Polygraphs could be put to good use in making corruption as rare as humanly possible. Police are granted a great deal of authority, and like those who are entrusted with access to sensitive information, they should be willing to demonstrate they are worthy of that trust.
