Neverending **** the Police thread.

[cajunrevenge]

Yep

They pulled tasers on parents who wanted to go in and they had at least one tackled to the ground.

****ing pussies

I can already hear their excuse..... "look we couldnt go into the school because we had to deal with all these unruly parents".



I saw one politician praise the cops for interdivision cooperation and said they saved the lives of the other 600 kids. Disgusting.

[cajunrevenge]

fun story here. Pot smoker becomes a cop, he is lauded for finding the most drugs, turns out he is smoking some of those drugs on camera in his squad car, other cops cover it up, when it gets exposed the cop gets a sweatheart plea deal that might even allow for him to become a cop in another state in a few years. It takes a special kind of asshole to smoke pot and then take a job where you lock up other pot smokers.

[sturg33]

An excellent point... as we see it everywhere in society where people pull out their phone to tape someone getting murdered

[cajunrevenge]

https://www.saratogian.com/2015/07/0...pray-incident/


Yeah, why do we demonize cops.... maybe because when bad apples are caught red handed they get protected by the supposed good apples. The cop pulled over a driver for flipping him off. Pepper sprays and kidnaps the victim. Threatens him with a deadly weapon. Non lethal when used on you, deadly weapon if used on a cop. This criminal with a badge is never charged. Only fired and cant reapply in the same city. Free to go to the next town and be a cop. "oh you were fired for illegally detaining people and beating them up? Thats no biggie, you're hired, its not like you committed a real crime like ratting on another cop".

[cajunrevenge]

Look at this ****. Terrorized a city for 10 years using their badge. They beat, framed, and robbed hundreds if not thousands of people. Some are already out of prisons and the ones still in are in a minimum security prison. Wtf, these are violent felons. They should be sharing cells with murderers and rapists.

[cajunrevenge]

what do you do when police decide to run you out of town.

[cajunrevenge]

[sturg33]

Can't get enough of this stupid bitch

[Tapate50]

2B MORE ?!?

As in Billion ?

Holy ****. Get this chick outta there stat

57 needs to rush in and tell us what Rand said about it

[sturg33]

The defund the police was so obviously stupid that one wonders.if they intentionally made the citizens.lives worse

(Spoiler... It was by design)

[nsacpi]

ST. ANN, Mo. — A patrol officer spotted a white minivan with an expired license plate, flipped on his lights and siren, and when the driver failed to stop, gave chase. The driver fled in rush-hour traffic at speeds of up to 90 mph, as other officers joined in the pursuit. Ten miles later, the van slammed into a green Toyota Camry, leaving its 55-year-old driver, Brent Cox, permanently disabled.

That 2017 police chase was at the time the latest in a long line of questionable vehicle pursuits by officers of the St. Ann Police Department. Eleven people had been injured in 19 crashes during high-speed pursuits over the two prior years. Social justice activists and reporters were scrutinizing the department, and Cox and others were suing.

Undeterred, St. Ann Police Chief Aaron Jimenez stood behind the high-octane pursuits and doubled down on the department’s decades-old motto: “St. Ann will chase you until the wheels fall off.”

Then, an otherwise silent stakeholder stepped in. The St. Louis Area Insurance Trust risk pool — which provided liability coverage to the city of St. Ann and the police department — threatened to cancel coverage if the department didn’t impose restrictions on its use of police chases. City officials shopped around for alternative coverage but soon learned that costs would nearly double if they did not agree to their insurer’s demands.

Jimenez’s attitude swiftly shifted: In 2019, 18 months after the chase that left Cox permanently disabled, the chief and his 48-member department agreed to ban high-speed pursuits for traffic infractions and minor, nonviolent crimes.

“I didn’t really have a choice,” Jimenez said in an interview. “If I didn’t do it, the insurance rates were going to go way up. I was going to have to lose 10 officers to pay for it.”

Where community activists, use-of-force victims and city officials have failed to persuade police departments to change dangerous and sometimes deadly policing practices, insurers are successfully dictating changes to tactics and policies, mostly at small to medium-size departments throughout the nation.

The movement is driven by the increasingly large jury awards and settlements that cities and their insurers are paying in police use-of-force cases, especially since the 2020 deaths of Breonna Taylor and George Floyd. Those cases led to settlements of $12 million and $27 million, respectively. Insurance companies are passing the costs — and potential future costs — on to their law enforcement clients.

Larger law enforcement agencies — like the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department or the New York Police Department — handle it in different ways, often by creating a special fund to finance settlements or by paying those costs from the county’s or city’s general fund. This insulates them from external demands by insurers.

Departments with a long history of large civil rights settlements have seen their insurance rates shoot up by 200 to 400 percent over the past three years, according to insurance industry and police experts.

Even departments with few problems are experiencing rate increases of 30 to 100 percent. Now, insurers also are telling departments that they must change the way they police.



https://www.washingtonpost.com/inves...table-main-t-4

bad policing is an expensive proposition

[thethe]

What should the cops have done in that example?

Let someone speed away?

Is that actually your proposed solution?

[Tapate50]

Huge payouts on not at fault incidents are killing the insurance industry rate structure on everyone.

Lawyers are basically feeding themselves with demand letters only, and taking the settlement offers because people are too afraid of nuclear judgements.

[nsacpi]

What should the cops have done in that example?

Let someone speed away?

Is that actually your proposed solution?

More from the article:

Now, insurers also are telling departments that they must change the way they police.

In St. Ann, the impact has been profound.

St. Ann Police Chief Aaron Jimenez in St. Ann, Mo., in 2021. Jimenez had favored chasing all fleeing vehicles but curtailed the practice at the insistence of his department’s insurer because of pursuit-related damage and injury claims.

Since the retooling, which took effect in January 2019, the number of police pursuits annually has increased slightly, but crashes during pursuits have dropped: from 25 in 2018 with eight injuries to 10 in 2021 with three injuries, according to data provided by the department. So far this year, the department says, there have been three crashes with no injuries.

The forced changes prompted Jimenez to equip his patrol cars with new technology to help nab motorists who try to outrun police. Sticky darts containing GPS trackers are shot from the front of patrol cars onto the backs of vehicles that speed away, so officers can fall back and catch up with them later.

While dozens of arrests have been made using the GPS technology, overall arrests in the city have fallen more than 30 percent since the change. Jimenez attributes that drop primarily to officers’ inability to chase motorists for minor infractions. “If you’re a proactive police department and you go out there and you search for a crime, your stats are higher because you’re fighting crime, you’re chasing more cars, you’re making more arrests,” he said.

More generally I would make the argument that public policy (including policing tactics) should be informed by cost-benefit analysis. Chasing down people for minor violations very likely fails any sort of cost-benefit analysis.

[thethe]

So because a corporation has done a risk analysis you think its a good idea to let people speed away when being told to stop by a police officer?

This is the position you're taking?

Let me ask you this question...Why would someone risk a high speed chase if its only a minor infraction?

[nsacpi]

So because a corporation has done a risk analysis you think its a good idea to let people speed away when being told to stop by a police officer?

This is the position you're taking?

Let me ask you this question...Why would someone risk a high speed chase if its only a minor infraction?

If the chase policy is causing high costs to the community shouldn't it be curtailed?

[thethe]

If the chase policy is causing high costs to the community shouldn't it be curtailed?

What costs are being levied on the community by someone who is so afraid of a 'minor infraction' that they will resort to a high speed chase?

[nsacpi]

What costs are being levied on the community by someone who is so afraid of a 'minor infraction' that they will resort to a high speed chase?

The costs are the injuries caused by the chase policy and subsequent rise in insurance premia.

[thethe]

The costs are the injuries caused by the chase policy and subsequent rise in insurance premia.

I'm sure these were all upstanding citizens that decided to start a high speed chase due to a 'minor infraction'.

[thethe]

Wonder if this take was better or worse than the support for worse treatment of minorities by police officers due to the word usage of 'Dude'.