CDZ BLM's 10-point manifesto

[Mac1958]

Protesting and screaming get people's attention, but at some point you have to get clear and specific. Well, it looks like Black Lives Matter has done that.

In our terribly binary society, many will throw these out as a group because they don't like or agree with one or two points. So: Which of these ideas is/are absolutely unworkable and unreasonable? Where we can find areas of agreement here? This doesn't look like a list of crazy, off the wall ideas to me.

Black Lives Matter Just Delivered Their 10 Point Manifesto, and This Is What They Want

1. End “broken windows” policing, which aggressively polices minor crimes in an attempt to stop larger ones.
“Broken windows” policing is the idea that vigorously enforcing small crimes (like vandalism) will prevent larger crimes from happening. This law has allowed police to increase “stop and frisks”, which BLM claims enables racial stereotyping. They argue that Black men and women are unfairly targeted by police using this law as an excuse, and that this policy ultimately led to the death of Eric Garner (remember the guy that was choked to death after he was caught selling loose cigarettes). This is their first point in their plan, and probably the most controversial.

2. Use community oversight for misconduct rather than having the police department decide what consequences officers should face.
Rather than the police deciding how an officer is punished after they’ve committed a crime (like when an officer who caused a death is ‘punished’ by being put on paid leave for six months), they want an independent group to review all cases and dole out the punishments. Since, you know, the police department might be a tad on biased.

3. Make standards for reporting police use of deadly force.
A lot of reports of police using deadly force aren’t released to the public. This skews the statistics when it comes down to who died by police hands and it leaves the public in the dark about how the police operate. BLM want to standardize the reporting methods and make the whole process more transparent.

4. Independently investigate and prosecute police misconduct.
Much like point two, BLM doesn’t want the police investigating crimes committed by the police since it’s proven to be a recipe for trouble. Instead, they want an independently run government body to investigate whether or not an officer has violated the law. The short version: if a cop shoots someone, someone other than the cops should look into the case to see if that shooting was lawful.

5. Have the racial makeup of police departments reflect the communities they serve.
This one is simple enough to ask for, harder to carry out in practice. BLM want the police force to be racially representative of the areas they protect. If a community is 50% Black, 30% Hispanic, and 20% White, they want to see a police force that reflects those demographics. Hypothetically, for every two White officers they’d hire, they’d also hire five Black officers and three Hispanic officers.

6. Require officers to wear body cameras.
This policy has already been implemented in several different police forces across the country – and with great success in some cases. However, the debate starts when it comes down to when and why an officer can turn the camera off. For example, you wouldn’t want people watching you when you went for a piss, would you?

7. Provide more training for police officers.
More training is never a bad thing. Many supporters of BLM believe that a lot of the issues between police officers and citizens have been instigated by rookie cops that are a little too eager to prove themselves in the field, and they feel a little extra training could help that out.

8. End for-profit policing practices.
This is a biggie. As of now, the police can legally take any money or property that they “believe” is in some way linked to a crime, and they can use that money and property as they see fit, even if you’re never convicted of that crime. It’s called Civil Forfeiture and the police in many areas have used this “right” to fund their own agencies and precincts. This is a major issue, and many people from different walks of life see it as legalized robbery. For more information check out John Oliver’s take on it, as he explains it far more eloquently than I ever could.

9. End the police use of military equipment.
BLM argues that the police should be working with the community to provide peaceful resolutions to society’s issues and that the use of military equipment shows an intent to abuse their power over citizens. It drives home the Us vs Them mentality. Big guns and body armour = scared citizens. Open dialogue and transparency = happy citizens.

10. Implement police union contracts that hold officers accountable for misconduct.
So, police unions have a history of protecting police (shocking, I know). Police officers accused of misconduct are no exception, but other members are oftendiscouraged by their unions to speak out against those accused. This can delay convictions and stop valuable information or evidence from coming to light which prevents real justice. While the police need unions to protect their rights, BLM argue that the unions should play their part in weeding out the bad apples. If not, the abuse of power will continue because the bad officers know they can get away with it.

 

[candycorn]

#6 seems like an easy fix. Just buy them and use them. 5, 7 and 10 , by and large seem like they are jurisdiction specific. #1 is a bad idea. I think that is when you need to drop the hammer harder and faster. So you remember what happened last time.; not worry about "this time". 2, 3, and 4 are useless unless we have standards across jurisdictions. Also you have to take into account the aggression. Does a broken wrist = a broken back?

#9 is silly. The police need more protection; not less.

#8 is what I want to focus on. The entire system is in need of an overhaul.
The police and courts are both paid by the same entities. The grand jury that decides on convicting someone meets in the same place they'll be tried. And there you are with your attorney trying to fight the police, the judge, the jury, and the prosecutor who all are employed to catch, detain, prosecute and find you guilty/not guity. Seems way to chummy. Whats more is that the fines imposed on those who are arrested are crazy. Public Defeners do not work for free--the accused has to pay them. Evidence (espeically DNA evidence) is gathered by the police who are arresting you...and who are testifying against you. You have to come up with your own experts on your own dime to pursuate the jury otherwise.

It's not a BLM thing; the system looks like it is rigged from the get-go. We need to separate the cops from the courts and put them on equal footing with the defendants.

 

[gipper]

Some good and some bad there.

Why would anyone listen to a terrorist group? This is akin to the KKK presenting their manifesto...would anyone listen?

 

[Bush92]

10points that do no address the deeper cultural problems within the black community that lead to the need for rigorous police presence in said communities.

 

[JoeMoma]

Some good and some bad there.

Why would anyone listen to a terrorist group? This is akin to the KKK presenting their manifesto...would anyone listen?

The good ideas are good regardless who they come from. Same for the bad.

 

[Two Thumbs]

10 points and at no time did they mention what they are going to do to make things better.


aside from the glaring obviousness

how's all this extra government going to be paid for?

will they accept paying more or getting less?

of course not.


the cops should NOT be able to get better arms - armor than us

 

[JoeMoma]

10 points and at no time did they mention what they are going to do to make things better.


aside from the glaring obviousness

how's all this extra government going to be paid for?

will they accept paying more or getting less?

of course not.


the cops should NOT be able to get better arms - armor than us

I suspect that they beleive that 100% of the problem is with the police. They being the BLM leadership.......

 

[JoeMoma]

#1: If an action is damaging enough to be against the law, then the law should be enforced, otherwise it should not be against the law. Vandalism is a terrible example of a crime not to enforce laws against. If vandals are damaging my property, I want them arrested, etc.

Laws should be enforced equally regardless of color. That being said, areas that have high crime rates will probably have a higher police presence, if we want the police to effectively do their jobs. If the high crime rate neighborhoods tend to be majority black neighborhoods, it may seem like the police are targeting and profiling blacks when they are actually simply reacting to the higher crime rates.

Eric Garner, the guy selling loose cigarettes, was probably a time bomb waiting to go off. Some say that the cops should have simply written him a ticket for this which would be fine for a first offence; however, what are the police to do if the tickets go unpaid? At some point, an arrest has to be made and the person breaking the law has to face the consequences. Having said that, Eric Garner died because of New York's outrageously high tax on cigarettes. Without the high tax, selling loose cirgrettes need not be against the law.

 

[gipper]

#1: If something is important enough to be against the law, then the law should be enforced, otherwise it should not be against the law. Vandalism is a terrible example of a crime not to enforce laws against. If vandals are damaging my property, I want them arrested, etc.

Laws should be enforced equally regardless of color. That being said, areas that have high crime rates will probably have a higher police presence, if we want the police to effectively do their jobs. If the high crime rate neighborhoods tend to be majority black neighborhoods, it may seem like the police are targeting and profiling blacks when they are actually simply reacting to the higher crime rates.

Eric Garner, the guy selling loose cigarettes, was probably a time bomb waiting to go off. Some say that the cops should have simply written him a ticket for this which would be fine for a first offence; however, what are the police to do if the tickets go unpaid? At some point, an arrest has to be made and the person breaking the law has to face the consequences. Having said that, Eric Garner died because of New York's outrageously high tax on cigarettes. Without the high tax, selling loose cirgrettes need not be against the law.

Very good point about the cig tax by the idiots running the gov in NY. In effect, government was at least partially responsible for Mr. Garner's death.

We now have a government passing ridiculous laws every day...and those laws have to be enforced by the cops.

It has been stated that Americans break the law three times a day...every day...unknowingly.

Isn't government wonderful?


You Break the Law Every Day ... Without Even Knowing It

James Duane, a professor at Regent Law School and former defense attorney, notes in his excellent lecture on why it is never a good idea to talk to the police:

Estimates of the current size of the body of federal criminal law vary. It has been reported that the Congressional Research Service cannot even count the current number of federal crimes. These laws are scattered in over 50 titles of the United States Code, encompassing roughly 27,000 pages. Worse yet, the statutory code sections often incorporate, by reference, the provisions and sanctions of administrative regulations promulgated by various regulatory agencies under congressional authorization. Estimates of how many such regulations exist are even less well settled, but the ABA thinks there are ”nearly 10,000.”

If the federal government can’t even count how many laws there are, what chance does an individual have of being certain that they are not acting in violation of one of them?

As Supreme Court Justice Breyer elaborates:
The complexity of modern federal criminal law, codified in several thousand sections of the United States Code and the virtually infinite variety of factual circumstances that might trigger an investigation into a possible violation of the law, make it difficult for anyone to know, in advance, just when a particular set of statements might later appear (to a prosecutor) to be relevant to some such investigation.

For instance, did you know that it is a federal crime to be in possession of a lobster under a certain size? It doesn’t matter if you bought it at a grocery store, if someone else gave it to you, if it’s dead or alive, if you found it after it died of natural causes, or even if you killed it while acting in self defense. You can go to jail because of a lobster.

If the federal government had access to every email you’ve ever written and every phone call you’ve ever made, it’s almost certain that they could find something you’ve done which violates a provision in the 27,000 pages of federal statues or 10,000 administrative regulations. You probably do have something to hide, you just don’t know it yet.

And that’s just federal laws.

Crazy State Laws

You Break the Law Every Day ... Without Even Knowing It | Zero Hedge

 

[JoeB131]

#6 seems like an easy fix. Just buy them and use them. 5, 7 and 10 , by and large seem like they are jurisdiction specific. #1 is a bad idea. I think that is when you need to drop the hammer harder and faster. So you remember what happened last time.; not worry about "this time". 2, 3, and 4 are useless unless we have standards across jurisdictions. Also you have to take into account the aggression. Does a broken wrist = a broken back?

Have to disagree. The police hassling street merchants and jaywalkers is not going to reduce the murder rate. What it does do is make the community more wary of the police.

#9 is silly. The police need more protection; not less.

I'm sorry, the baby that was injured by a grenade thrown by a SWAT team on a "no-knock" warrant. (they mistakenly believed a drug dealer lived there) wasn't a threat to anyone.

 

[JoeMoma]

#1: If something is important enough to be against the law, then the law should be enforced, otherwise it should not be against the law. Vandalism is a terrible example of a crime not to enforce laws against. If vandals are damaging my property, I want them arrested, etc.

Laws should be enforced equally regardless of color. That being said, areas that have high crime rates will probably have a higher police presence, if we want the police to effectively do their jobs. If the high crime rate neighborhoods tend to be majority black neighborhoods, it may seem like the police are targeting and profiling blacks when they are actually simply reacting to the higher crime rates.

Eric Garner, the guy selling loose cigarettes, was probably a time bomb waiting to go off. Some say that the cops should have simply written him a ticket for this which would be fine for a first offence; however, what are the police to do if the tickets go unpaid? At some point, an arrest has to be made and the person breaking the law has to face the consequences. Having said that, Eric Garner died because of New York's outrageously high tax on cigarettes. Without the high tax, selling loose cirgrettes need not be against the law.

Very good point about the cig tax by the idiots running the gov in NY. In effect, government was at least partially responsible for Mr. Garner's death.

We now have a government passing ridiculous laws every day...and those laws have to be enforced by the cops.

It has been stated that Americans break the law three times a day...every day...unknowingly.

Isn't government wonderful?


You Break the Law Every Day ... Without Even Knowing It

James Duane, a professor at Regent Law School and former defense attorney, notes in his excellent lecture on why it is never a good idea to talk to the police:

Estimates of the current size of the body of federal criminal law vary. It has been reported that the Congressional Research Service cannot even count the current number of federal crimes. These laws are scattered in over 50 titles of the United States Code, encompassing roughly 27,000 pages. Worse yet, the statutory code sections often incorporate, by reference, the provisions and sanctions of administrative regulations promulgated by various regulatory agencies under congressional authorization. Estimates of how many such regulations exist are even less well settled, but the ABA thinks there are ”nearly 10,000.”

If the federal government can’t even count how many laws there are, what chance does an individual have of being certain that they are not acting in violation of one of them?

As Supreme Court Justice Breyer elaborates:
The complexity of modern federal criminal law, codified in several thousand sections of the United States Code and the virtually infinite variety of factual circumstances that might trigger an investigation into a possible violation of the law, make it difficult for anyone to know, in advance, just when a particular set of statements might later appear (to a prosecutor) to be relevant to some such investigation.

For instance, did you know that it is a federal crime to be in possession of a lobster under a certain size? It doesn’t matter if you bought it at a grocery store, if someone else gave it to you, if it’s dead or alive, if you found it after it died of natural causes, or even if you killed it while acting in self defense. You can go to jail because of a lobster.

If the federal government had access to every email you’ve ever written and every phone call you’ve ever made, it’s almost certain that they could find something you’ve done which violates a provision in the 27,000 pages of federal statues or 10,000 administrative regulations. You probably do have something to hide, you just don’t know it yet.

And that’s just federal laws.

Crazy State Laws

You Break the Law Every Day ... Without Even Knowing It | Zero Hedge

I've watched Duane's lecture. It is excellent advice which can be summerized as STFU when dealing with law enforcement. That being said, I would not take the advice quite as far as he reconmends. Police need the public's help to solve crimes, so if I witness a crime I will be happy to tell the cops what I know.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

1. End “broken windows” policing, which aggressively polices minor crimes in an attempt to stop larger ones.
“Broken windows” policing is the idea that vigorously enforcing small crimes (like vandalism) will prevent larger crimes from happening. This law has allowed police to increase “stop and frisks”, which BLM claims enables racial stereotyping. They argue that Black men and women are unfairly targeted by police using this law as an excuse, and that this policy ultimately led to the death of Eric Garner (remember the guy that was choked to death after he was caught selling loose cigarettes). This is their first point in their plan, and probably the most controversial.

No. The law is the law. Enforce it or have it taken off the books.

2. Use community oversight for misconduct rather than having the police department decide what consequences officers should face.
Rather than the police deciding how an officer is punished after they’ve committed a crime (like when an officer who caused a death is ‘punished’ by being put on paid leave for six months), they want an independent group to review all cases and dole out the punishments. Since, you know, the police department might be a tad on biased.

No. The community may be a tad biased as well. If there's a problem, take it to the courts. That's what they're there for.

5. Have the racial makeup of police departments reflect the communities they serve.
This one is simple enough to ask for, harder to carry out in practice. BLM want the police force to be racially representative of the areas they protect. If a community is 50% Black, 30% Hispanic, and 20% White, they want to see a police force that reflects those demographics. Hypothetically, for every two White officers they’d hire, they’d also hire five Black officers and three Hispanic officers.

No. Balkanizing society is causing it to fly apart. Drop the race thing altogether. We are all Americans and subject to the same laws.

9. End the police use of military equipment.
BLM argues that the police should be working with the community to provide peaceful resolutions to society’s issues and that the use of military equipment shows an intent to abuse their power over citizens. It drives home the Us vs Them mentality. Big guns and body armour = scared citizens. Open dialogue and transparency = happy citizens.

Mixed. They should have whatever equipment is necessary to do the job, and law should prohibit their being Federalized.

 

[gipper]

#1: If something is important enough to be against the law, then the law should be enforced, otherwise it should not be against the law. Vandalism is a terrible example of a crime not to enforce laws against. If vandals are damaging my property, I want them arrested, etc.

Laws should be enforced equally regardless of color. That being said, areas that have high crime rates will probably have a higher police presence, if we want the police to effectively do their jobs. If the high crime rate neighborhoods tend to be majority black neighborhoods, it may seem like the police are targeting and profiling blacks when they are actually simply reacting to the higher crime rates.

Eric Garner, the guy selling loose cigarettes, was probably a time bomb waiting to go off. Some say that the cops should have simply written him a ticket for this which would be fine for a first offence; however, what are the police to do if the tickets go unpaid? At some point, an arrest has to be made and the person breaking the law has to face the consequences. Having said that, Eric Garner died because of New York's outrageously high tax on cigarettes. Without the high tax, selling loose cirgrettes need not be against the law.

Very good point about the cig tax by the idiots running the gov in NY. In effect, government was at least partially responsible for Mr. Garner's death.

We now have a government passing ridiculous laws every day...and those laws have to be enforced by the cops.

It has been stated that Americans break the law three times a day...every day...unknowingly.

Isn't government wonderful?


You Break the Law Every Day ... Without Even Knowing It

James Duane, a professor at Regent Law School and former defense attorney, notes in his excellent lecture on why it is never a good idea to talk to the police:

Estimates of the current size of the body of federal criminal law vary. It has been reported that the Congressional Research Service cannot even count the current number of federal crimes. These laws are scattered in over 50 titles of the United States Code, encompassing roughly 27,000 pages. Worse yet, the statutory code sections often incorporate, by reference, the provisions and sanctions of administrative regulations promulgated by various regulatory agencies under congressional authorization. Estimates of how many such regulations exist are even less well settled, but the ABA thinks there are ”nearly 10,000.”

If the federal government can’t even count how many laws there are, what chance does an individual have of being certain that they are not acting in violation of one of them?

As Supreme Court Justice Breyer elaborates:
The complexity of modern federal criminal law, codified in several thousand sections of the United States Code and the virtually infinite variety of factual circumstances that might trigger an investigation into a possible violation of the law, make it difficult for anyone to know, in advance, just when a particular set of statements might later appear (to a prosecutor) to be relevant to some such investigation.

For instance, did you know that it is a federal crime to be in possession of a lobster under a certain size? It doesn’t matter if you bought it at a grocery store, if someone else gave it to you, if it’s dead or alive, if you found it after it died of natural causes, or even if you killed it while acting in self defense. You can go to jail because of a lobster.

If the federal government had access to every email you’ve ever written and every phone call you’ve ever made, it’s almost certain that they could find something you’ve done which violates a provision in the 27,000 pages of federal statues or 10,000 administrative regulations. You probably do have something to hide, you just don’t know it yet.

And that’s just federal laws.

Crazy State Laws

You Break the Law Every Day ... Without Even Knowing It | Zero Hedge

I've watched Duane's lecture. It is excellent advice which can be summerized as STFU when dealing with law enforcement. That being said, I would not take the advice quite as far as he reconmends. Police need the public's help to solve crimes, so if I witness a crime I will be happy to tell the cops what I know.

Agreed, but we must be careful...the old adage; no good deed goes unpunished...applies here.

 

[TNHarley]

Protesting and screaming get people's attention, but at some point you have to get clear and specific. Well, it looks like Black Lives Matter has done that.

In our terribly binary society, many will throw these out as a group because they don't like or agree with one or two points. So: Which of these ideas is/are absolutely unworkable and unreasonable? Where we can find areas of agreement here? This doesn't look like a list of crazy, off the wall ideas to me.

Black Lives Matter Just Delivered Their 10 Point Manifesto, and This Is What They Want

1. End “broken windows” policing, which aggressively polices minor crimes in an attempt to stop larger ones.
“Broken windows” policing is the idea that vigorously enforcing small crimes (like vandalism) will prevent larger crimes from happening. This law has allowed police to increase “stop and frisks”, which BLM claims enables racial stereotyping. They argue that Black men and women are unfairly targeted by police using this law as an excuse, and that this policy ultimately led to the death of Eric Garner (remember the guy that was choked to death after he was caught selling loose cigarettes). This is their first point in their plan, and probably the most controversial.

2. Use community oversight for misconduct rather than having the police department decide what consequences officers should face.
Rather than the police deciding how an officer is punished after they’ve committed a crime (like when an officer who caused a death is ‘punished’ by being put on paid leave for six months), they want an independent group to review all cases and dole out the punishments. Since, you know, the police department might be a tad on biased.

3. Make standards for reporting police use of deadly force.
A lot of reports of police using deadly force aren’t released to the public. This skews the statistics when it comes down to who died by police hands and it leaves the public in the dark about how the police operate. BLM want to standardize the reporting methods and make the whole process more transparent.

4. Independently investigate and prosecute police misconduct.
Much like point two, BLM doesn’t want the police investigating crimes committed by the police since it’s proven to be a recipe for trouble. Instead, they want an independently run government body to investigate whether or not an officer has violated the law. The short version: if a cop shoots someone, someone other than the cops should look into the case to see if that shooting was lawful.

5. Have the racial makeup of police departments reflect the communities they serve.
This one is simple enough to ask for, harder to carry out in practice. BLM want the police force to be racially representative of the areas they protect. If a community is 50% Black, 30% Hispanic, and 20% White, they want to see a police force that reflects those demographics. Hypothetically, for every two White officers they’d hire, they’d also hire five Black officers and three Hispanic officers.

6. Require officers to wear body cameras.
This policy has already been implemented in several different police forces across the country – and with great success in some cases. However, the debate starts when it comes down to when and why an officer can turn the camera off. For example, you wouldn’t want people watching you when you went for a piss, would you?

7. Provide more training for police officers.
More training is never a bad thing. Many supporters of BLM believe that a lot of the issues between police officers and citizens have been instigated by rookie cops that are a little too eager to prove themselves in the field, and they feel a little extra training could help that out.

8. End for-profit policing practices.
This is a biggie. As of now, the police can legally take any money or property that they “believe” is in some way linked to a crime, and they can use that money and property as they see fit, even if you’re never convicted of that crime. It’s called Civil Forfeiture and the police in many areas have used this “right” to fund their own agencies and precincts. This is a major issue, and many people from different walks of life see it as legalized robbery. For more information check out John Oliver’s take on it, as he explains it far more eloquently than I ever could.

9. End the police use of military equipment.
BLM argues that the police should be working with the community to provide peaceful resolutions to society’s issues and that the use of military equipment shows an intent to abuse their power over citizens. It drives home the Us vs Them mentality. Big guns and body armour = scared citizens. Open dialogue and transparency = happy citizens.

10. Implement police union contracts that hold officers accountable for misconduct.
So, police unions have a history of protecting police (shocking, I know). Police officers accused of misconduct are no exception, but other members are oftendiscouraged by their unions to speak out against those accused. This can delay convictions and stop valuable information or evidence from coming to light which prevents real justice. While the police need unions to protect their rights, BLM argue that the unions should play their part in weeding out the bad apples. If not, the abuse of power will continue because the bad officers know they can get away with it.

#5 is racist as a mother fucker
#7? Give police MORE training? Trained like a CIA agent? Or do they mean like psychological training? What are they talking about? Seems inconsistent.
Then you have #9. wow lol..
I don't have a problem with a lot of them. And even have one they should consider. Get rid of AA and low standards for hiring. Police depts. should be able to pick the best.
Also, they could stop killing at such an abundant amount. They could stop breaking the law. I bet that would help, too. Putting the blame solely ont he LEOs is irresponsible bullshit.

 

[rightwinger]

Protesting and screaming get people's attention, but at some point you have to get clear and specific. Well, it looks like Black Lives Matter has done that.

In our terribly binary society, many will throw these out as a group because they don't like or agree with one or two points. So: Which of these ideas is/are absolutely unworkable and unreasonable? Where we can find areas of agreement here? This doesn't look like a list of crazy, off the wall ideas to me.

Black Lives Matter Just Delivered Their 10 Point Manifesto, and This Is What They Want

1. End “broken windows” policing, which aggressively polices minor crimes in an attempt to stop larger ones.
“Broken windows” policing is the idea that vigorously enforcing small crimes (like vandalism) will prevent larger crimes from happening. This law has allowed police to increase “stop and frisks”, which BLM claims enables racial stereotyping. They argue that Black men and women are unfairly targeted by police using this law as an excuse, and that this policy ultimately led to the death of Eric Garner (remember the guy that was choked to death after he was caught selling loose cigarettes). This is their first point in their plan, and probably the most controversial.

2. Use community oversight for misconduct rather than having the police department decide what consequences officers should face.
Rather than the police deciding how an officer is punished after they’ve committed a crime (like when an officer who caused a death is ‘punished’ by being put on paid leave for six months), they want an independent group to review all cases and dole out the punishments. Since, you know, the police department might be a tad on biased.

3. Make standards for reporting police use of deadly force.
A lot of reports of police using deadly force aren’t released to the public. This skews the statistics when it comes down to who died by police hands and it leaves the public in the dark about how the police operate. BLM want to standardize the reporting methods and make the whole process more transparent.

4. Independently investigate and prosecute police misconduct.
Much like point two, BLM doesn’t want the police investigating crimes committed by the police since it’s proven to be a recipe for trouble. Instead, they want an independently run government body to investigate whether or not an officer has violated the law. The short version: if a cop shoots someone, someone other than the cops should look into the case to see if that shooting was lawful.

5. Have the racial makeup of police departments reflect the communities they serve.
This one is simple enough to ask for, harder to carry out in practice. BLM want the police force to be racially representative of the areas they protect. If a community is 50% Black, 30% Hispanic, and 20% White, they want to see a police force that reflects those demographics. Hypothetically, for every two White officers they’d hire, they’d also hire five Black officers and three Hispanic officers.

6. Require officers to wear body cameras.
This policy has already been implemented in several different police forces across the country – and with great success in some cases. However, the debate starts when it comes down to when and why an officer can turn the camera off. For example, you wouldn’t want people watching you when you went for a piss, would you?

7. Provide more training for police officers.
More training is never a bad thing. Many supporters of BLM believe that a lot of the issues between police officers and citizens have been instigated by rookie cops that are a little too eager to prove themselves in the field, and they feel a little extra training could help that out.

8. End for-profit policing practices.
This is a biggie. As of now, the police can legally take any money or property that they “believe” is in some way linked to a crime, and they can use that money and property as they see fit, even if you’re never convicted of that crime. It’s called Civil Forfeiture and the police in many areas have used this “right” to fund their own agencies and precincts. This is a major issue, and many people from different walks of life see it as legalized robbery. For more information check out John Oliver’s take on it, as he explains it far more eloquently than I ever could.

9. End the police use of military equipment.
BLM argues that the police should be working with the community to provide peaceful resolutions to society’s issues and that the use of military equipment shows an intent to abuse their power over citizens. It drives home the Us vs Them mentality. Big guns and body armour = scared citizens. Open dialogue and transparency = happy citizens.

10. Implement police union contracts that hold officers accountable for misconduct.
So, police unions have a history of protecting police (shocking, I know). Police officers accused of misconduct are no exception, but other members are oftendiscouraged by their unions to speak out against those accused. This can delay convictions and stop valuable information or evidence from coming to light which prevents real justice. While the police need unions to protect their rights, BLM argue that the unions should play their part in weeding out the bad apples. If not, the abuse of power will continue because the bad officers know they can get away with it.

Other than the first one, I think the proposals have merit

 

[Anathema]

.... Which of these ideas is/are absolutely unworkable and unreasonable? Where we can find areas of agreement here? This doesn't look like a list of crazy, off the wall ideas to me.

1. End “broken windows” policing, which aggressively polices minor crimes in an attempt to stop larger ones..

2. Use community oversight for misconduct rather than having the police department decide what consequences officers should face.

3. Make standards for reporting police use of deadly force.

4. Independently investigate and prosecute police misconduct.

5. Have the racial makeup of police departments reflect the communities they serve.

6. Require officers to wear body cameras.

7. Provide more training for police officers.

8. End for-profit policing practices.

9. End the police use of military equipment.

10. Implement police union contracts that hold officers accountable for misconduct.

1. Broken window policies are proven to reduce crime. Of course they also reduce income opportunities and increase chances of incarceration for BLM supporters, so I can see why they disapprove.

2. Yep. Let's also let the inmates run the prisons and lunatics run the asylums.

3. This I agree with, so long as the standards are set by the Government, not the criminals.

4. By the State AG's office, possibly. By some group of civilians, NFW.

5. Only in those communities where sufficient QUALIFIED applicants of the racial mix can be found, and Departments need to be given time to meet the criteria.

6. INNOCENT until proven Guilty applies to LEOs as much as criminals. Body cameras are an assumption of guilt and a violation of the 5th Amendment.

7. I agree. More training on how to protect themselves and put more criminals in jail.

8. No. Crime should never pay for criminals.

9. Right after we end the criminals use of ALL forms of weapons. Police should ALWAYS outgunned criminals.

10. Fine. So long as it is the Departments and Contracts defining misconduct, not the criminals.

 

[Fair&Balanced]

Protesting and screaming get people's attention, but at some point you have to get clear and specific. Well, it looks like Black Lives Matter has done that.

In our terribly binary society, many will throw these out as a group because they don't like or agree with one or two points. So: Which of these ideas is/are absolutely unworkable and unreasonable? Where we can find areas of agreement here? This doesn't look like a list of crazy, off the wall ideas to me.

Black Lives Matter Just Delivered Their 10 Point Manifesto, and This Is What They Want

1. End “broken windows” policing, which aggressively polices minor crimes in an attempt to stop larger ones.
“Broken windows” policing is the idea that vigorously enforcing small crimes (like vandalism) will prevent larger crimes from happening. This law has allowed police to increase “stop and frisks”, which BLM claims enables racial stereotyping. They argue that Black men and women are unfairly targeted by police using this law as an excuse, and that this policy ultimately led to the death of Eric Garner (remember the guy that was choked to death after he was caught selling loose cigarettes). This is their first point in their plan, and probably the most controversial.

2. Use community oversight for misconduct rather than having the police department decide what consequences officers should face.
Rather than the police deciding how an officer is punished after they’ve committed a crime (like when an officer who caused a death is ‘punished’ by being put on paid leave for six months), they want an independent group to review all cases and dole out the punishments. Since, you know, the police department might be a tad on biased.

3. Make standards for reporting police use of deadly force.
A lot of reports of police using deadly force aren’t released to the public. This skews the statistics when it comes down to who died by police hands and it leaves the public in the dark about how the police operate. BLM want to standardize the reporting methods and make the whole process more transparent.

4. Independently investigate and prosecute police misconduct.
Much like point two, BLM doesn’t want the police investigating crimes committed by the police since it’s proven to be a recipe for trouble. Instead, they want an independently run government body to investigate whether or not an officer has violated the law. The short version: if a cop shoots someone, someone other than the cops should look into the case to see if that shooting was lawful.

5. Have the racial makeup of police departments reflect the communities they serve.
This one is simple enough to ask for, harder to carry out in practice. BLM want the police force to be racially representative of the areas they protect. If a community is 50% Black, 30% Hispanic, and 20% White, they want to see a police force that reflects those demographics. Hypothetically, for every two White officers they’d hire, they’d also hire five Black officers and three Hispanic officers.

6. Require officers to wear body cameras.
This policy has already been implemented in several different police forces across the country – and with great success in some cases. However, the debate starts when it comes down to when and why an officer can turn the camera off. For example, you wouldn’t want people watching you when you went for a piss, would you?

7. Provide more training for police officers.
More training is never a bad thing. Many supporters of BLM believe that a lot of the issues between police officers and citizens have been instigated by rookie cops that are a little too eager to prove themselves in the field, and they feel a little extra training could help that out.

8. End for-profit policing practices.
This is a biggie. As of now, the police can legally take any money or property that they “believe” is in some way linked to a crime, and they can use that money and property as they see fit, even if you’re never convicted of that crime. It’s called Civil Forfeiture and the police in many areas have used this “right” to fund their own agencies and precincts. This is a major issue, and many people from different walks of life see it as legalized robbery. For more information check out John Oliver’s take on it, as he explains it far more eloquently than I ever could.

9. End the police use of military equipment.
BLM argues that the police should be working with the community to provide peaceful resolutions to society’s issues and that the use of military equipment shows an intent to abuse their power over citizens. It drives home the Us vs Them mentality. Big guns and body armour = scared citizens. Open dialogue and transparency = happy citizens.

10. Implement police union contracts that hold officers accountable for misconduct.
So, police unions have a history of protecting police (shocking, I know). Police officers accused of misconduct are no exception, but other members are oftendiscouraged by their unions to speak out against those accused. This can delay convictions and stop valuable information or evidence from coming to light which prevents real justice. While the police need unions to protect their rights, BLM argue that the unions should play their part in weeding out the bad apples. If not, the abuse of power will continue because the bad officers know they can get away with it.

Some of these are reasonable, most of them are stupid.

Let me point out one specific area where BLM is ignorant in their demands.

Suggesting that police departments be more representative in their makeup of the general community. Take a city like NYC , for example. It is a FACT that NYC is predominantly white but the police department is actually made up mostly of minorities. On purpose. That's right, they purposely said "even though the city is mostly white, we're going to make the department mostly non white", and many other cities follow suit.

 

[candycorn]

#6 seems like an easy fix. Just buy them and use them. 5, 7 and 10 , by and large seem like they are jurisdiction specific. #1 is a bad idea. I think that is when you need to drop the hammer harder and faster. So you remember what happened last time.; not worry about "this time". 2, 3, and 4 are useless unless we have standards across jurisdictions. Also you have to take into account the aggression. Does a broken wrist = a broken back?

Have to disagree. The police hassling street merchants and jaywalkers is not going to reduce the murder rate. What it does do is make the community more wary of the police.

So, how many broken windows does it take before you lock Mr. Window Breaker up for, lets say, 5 years—serious time?

#9 is silly. The police need more protection; not less.

I'm sorry, the baby that was injured by a grenade thrown by a SWAT team on a "no-knock" warrant. (they mistakenly believed a drug dealer lived there) wasn't a threat to anyone.

I think we can all find anecdotes to support our side. Having the equipment is paramount. But to your point, so is smart/logical deployment.

 

[guno]

Protesting and screaming get people's attention, but at some point you have to get clear and specific. Well, it looks like Black Lives Matter has done that.

In our terribly binary society, many will throw these out as a group because they don't like or agree with one or two points. So: Which of these ideas is/are absolutely unworkable and unreasonable? Where we can find areas of agreement here? This doesn't look like a list of crazy, off the wall ideas to me.

Black Lives Matter Just Delivered Their 10 Point Manifesto, and This Is What They Want

1. End “broken windows” policing, which aggressively polices minor crimes in an attempt to stop larger ones.
“Broken windows” policing is the idea that vigorously enforcing small crimes (like vandalism) will prevent larger crimes from happening. This law has allowed police to increase “stop and frisks”, which BLM claims enables racial stereotyping. They argue that Black men and women are unfairly targeted by police using this law as an excuse, and that this policy ultimately led to the death of Eric Garner (remember the guy that was choked to death after he was caught selling loose cigarettes). This is their first point in their plan, and probably the most controversial.

2. Use community oversight for misconduct rather than having the police department decide what consequences officers should face.
Rather than the police deciding how an officer is punished after they’ve committed a crime (like when an officer who caused a death is ‘punished’ by being put on paid leave for six months), they want an independent group to review all cases and dole out the punishments. Since, you know, the police department might be a tad on biased.

3. Make standards for reporting police use of deadly force.
A lot of reports of police using deadly force aren’t released to the public. This skews the statistics when it comes down to who died by police hands and it leaves the public in the dark about how the police operate. BLM want to standardize the reporting methods and make the whole process more transparent.

4. Independently investigate and prosecute police misconduct.
Much like point two, BLM doesn’t want the police investigating crimes committed by the police since it’s proven to be a recipe for trouble. Instead, they want an independently run government body to investigate whether or not an officer has violated the law. The short version: if a cop shoots someone, someone other than the cops should look into the case to see if that shooting was lawful.

5. Have the racial makeup of police departments reflect the communities they serve.
This one is simple enough to ask for, harder to carry out in practice. BLM want the police force to be racially representative of the areas they protect. If a community is 50% Black, 30% Hispanic, and 20% White, they want to see a police force that reflects those demographics. Hypothetically, for every two White officers they’d hire, they’d also hire five Black officers and three Hispanic officers.

6. Require officers to wear body cameras.
This policy has already been implemented in several different police forces across the country – and with great success in some cases. However, the debate starts when it comes down to when and why an officer can turn the camera off. For example, you wouldn’t want people watching you when you went for a piss, would you?

7. Provide more training for police officers.
More training is never a bad thing. Many supporters of BLM believe that a lot of the issues between police officers and citizens have been instigated by rookie cops that are a little too eager to prove themselves in the field, and they feel a little extra training could help that out.

8. End for-profit policing practices.
This is a biggie. As of now, the police can legally take any money or property that they “believe” is in some way linked to a crime, and they can use that money and property as they see fit, even if you’re never convicted of that crime. It’s called Civil Forfeiture and the police in many areas have used this “right” to fund their own agencies and precincts. This is a major issue, and many people from different walks of life see it as legalized robbery. For more information check out John Oliver’s take on it, as he explains it far more eloquently than I ever could.

9. End the police use of military equipment.
BLM argues that the police should be working with the community to provide peaceful resolutions to society’s issues and that the use of military equipment shows an intent to abuse their power over citizens. It drives home the Us vs Them mentality. Big guns and body armour = scared citizens. Open dialogue and transparency = happy citizens.

10. Implement police union contracts that hold officers accountable for misconduct.
So, police unions have a history of protecting police (shocking, I know). Police officers accused of misconduct are no exception, but other members are oftendiscouraged by their unions to speak out against those accused. This can delay convictions and stop valuable information or evidence from coming to light which prevents real justice. While the police need unions to protect their rights, BLM argue that the unions should play their part in weeding out the bad apples. If not, the abuse of power will continue because the bad officers know they can get away with it.

Some of these are reasonable, most of them are stupid.

Let me point out one specific area where BLM is ignorant in their demands.

Suggesting that police departments be more representative in their makeup of the general community. Take a city like NYC , for example. It is a FACT that NYC is predominantly white but the police department is actually made up mostly of minorities. On purpose. That's right, they purposely said "even though the city is mostly white, we're going to make the department mostly non white", and many other cities follow suit.

wrong, NYC is mostly minority and police are majority white

Demographics of New York City - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/09/03/us/the-race-gap-in-americas-police-departments.html



In a City of Many Colors, New York Police Are Mostly White / Only Phoenix, San Diego have less diversity



NYPD a long way from matching city’s racial makeup | New York Post

 

[rightwinger]

Protesting and screaming get people's attention, but at some point you have to get clear and specific. Well, it looks like Black Lives Matter has done that.

In our terribly binary society, many will throw these out as a group because they don't like or agree with one or two points. So: Which of these ideas is/are absolutely unworkable and unreasonable? Where we can find areas of agreement here? This doesn't look like a list of crazy, off the wall ideas to me.

Black Lives Matter Just Delivered Their 10 Point Manifesto, and This Is What They Want

1. End “broken windows” policing, which aggressively polices minor crimes in an attempt to stop larger ones.
“Broken windows” policing is the idea that vigorously enforcing small crimes (like vandalism) will prevent larger crimes from happening. This law has allowed police to increase “stop and frisks”, which BLM claims enables racial stereotyping. They argue that Black men and women are unfairly targeted by police using this law as an excuse, and that this policy ultimately led to the death of Eric Garner (remember the guy that was choked to death after he was caught selling loose cigarettes). This is their first point in their plan, and probably the most controversial.

2. Use community oversight for misconduct rather than having the police department decide what consequences officers should face.
Rather than the police deciding how an officer is punished after they’ve committed a crime (like when an officer who caused a death is ‘punished’ by being put on paid leave for six months), they want an independent group to review all cases and dole out the punishments. Since, you know, the police department might be a tad on biased.

3. Make standards for reporting police use of deadly force.
A lot of reports of police using deadly force aren’t released to the public. This skews the statistics when it comes down to who died by police hands and it leaves the public in the dark about how the police operate. BLM want to standardize the reporting methods and make the whole process more transparent.

4. Independently investigate and prosecute police misconduct.
Much like point two, BLM doesn’t want the police investigating crimes committed by the police since it’s proven to be a recipe for trouble. Instead, they want an independently run government body to investigate whether or not an officer has violated the law. The short version: if a cop shoots someone, someone other than the cops should look into the case to see if that shooting was lawful.

5. Have the racial makeup of police departments reflect the communities they serve.
This one is simple enough to ask for, harder to carry out in practice. BLM want the police force to be racially representative of the areas they protect. If a community is 50% Black, 30% Hispanic, and 20% White, they want to see a police force that reflects those demographics. Hypothetically, for every two White officers they’d hire, they’d also hire five Black officers and three Hispanic officers.

6. Require officers to wear body cameras.
This policy has already been implemented in several different police forces across the country – and with great success in some cases. However, the debate starts when it comes down to when and why an officer can turn the camera off. For example, you wouldn’t want people watching you when you went for a piss, would you?

7. Provide more training for police officers.
More training is never a bad thing. Many supporters of BLM believe that a lot of the issues between police officers and citizens have been instigated by rookie cops that are a little too eager to prove themselves in the field, and they feel a little extra training could help that out.

8. End for-profit policing practices.
This is a biggie. As of now, the police can legally take any money or property that they “believe” is in some way linked to a crime, and they can use that money and property as they see fit, even if you’re never convicted of that crime. It’s called Civil Forfeiture and the police in many areas have used this “right” to fund their own agencies and precincts. This is a major issue, and many people from different walks of life see it as legalized robbery. For more information check out John Oliver’s take on it, as he explains it far more eloquently than I ever could.

9. End the police use of military equipment.
BLM argues that the police should be working with the community to provide peaceful resolutions to society’s issues and that the use of military equipment shows an intent to abuse their power over citizens. It drives home the Us vs Them mentality. Big guns and body armour = scared citizens. Open dialogue and transparency = happy citizens.

10. Implement police union contracts that hold officers accountable for misconduct.
So, police unions have a history of protecting police (shocking, I know). Police officers accused of misconduct are no exception, but other members are oftendiscouraged by their unions to speak out against those accused. This can delay convictions and stop valuable information or evidence from coming to light which prevents real justice. While the police need unions to protect their rights, BLM argue that the unions should play their part in weeding out the bad apples. If not, the abuse of power will continue because the bad officers know they can get away with it.

Some of these are reasonable, most of them are stupid.

Let me point out one specific area where BLM is ignorant in their demands.

Suggesting that police departments be more representative in their makeup of the general community. Take a city like NYC , for example. It is a FACT that NYC is predominantly white but the police department is actually made up mostly of minorities. On purpose. That's right, they purposely said "even though the city is mostly white, we're going to make the department mostly non white", and many other cities follow suit.

Nothing wrong with police being representative of the communities they serve. Police in Hispanic neighborhoods should be bilingual. While an absolute quota is not the best solution, the days of lily white officers in minority neighborhoods are gone