I watched this EXCELLENT video during our Leadership Academy. I will assume that those that really should watch this...will not.
Ok, so not the ENTIRE video applies to ALL INGOERS. Regardless, there is still great information to take away from it.What does Hollywood have to do with it? I can't recall the last time I evaluated the actions of LEO shooting based on what I saw from a Hollywood production?
Gawd. This is for the low-information idiots. Not INGOers. When was the last time an INGOer criticized a LEO shooting with the "Why didn't he just shoot the gun out of his hand?"
What does Hollywood have to do with it? I can't recall the last time I evaluated the actions of LEO shooting based on what I saw from a Hollywood production?
Gawd. This is for the low-information idiots. Not INGOers. When was the last time an INGOer criticized a LEO shooting with the "Why didn't he just shoot the gun out of his hand?"
Agreed, but I still don't believe it is all that applicable to INGO. Despite the bellyaching in the OP, there's very little actual cop bashing on INGO. There is a lot of healthy criticism of current policies of police work, and there is undoubtedly always heavy scrutiny of a shooting when the circumstances leave open room for doubt that the shoot was justified. But in those cases, with very few exceptions, INGO is usually very good about looking at the incident alone without applying ridiculous assumptions.Ok, so not the ENTIRE video applies to ALL INGOERS. Regardless, there is still great information to take away from it.
I don't believe this imfoation is anything new or unknown. It's really just common sense.
Um, the video was actually produced by the Force Science Institute Force Science Institute and based on studies, experiments, and science. What else should have been added that they missed to make this "fair" and 2 sided?The video is very professional. It must have cost a fortune for the Eugene Police Department . If I was going to work public relations for the PD, I would air this video every day. All the good stuff and none of the bad. The hired consultants only make one side of the case. That was what it supposed to be and that's what it is.
However, I would not claim this to be a fair treatment of the entire topic. I, for one, do not believe in self policing in any profession whether in real estate or LE. Having other LE agencies do it is the same thing. Without outside citizen involvement, a large part of the public will see those procedures as self serving and not to be trusted. I have worked in the Justice system most of my life and I am a proud supporter of the local gendarme. If we ever hope to bring the public back to being police fans, the process must be fair, neutral, objective, and open. Self policing may be fair, but it is in no way neutral, objective, or open.
There is a core of us that I will agree with you 100% do not need this. However, we have 30k+ members and quite a few pop up here and there in need of a little information. I don't think this was much of a pot stirring and I don't think it should be taken that way.Agreed, but I still don't believe it is all that applicable to INGO. Methinks this is really just OP's attempt to stir the freakin' pot.
Um, the video was actually produced by the Force Science Institute Force Science Institute and based on studies, experiments, and science. What else should have been added that they missed to make this "fair" and 2 sided?
My biggest problem with civilian review boards or similar is that most get their ideas of police work from TV and base our actions from that. I have no problem with INFORMED civilian review boards. Back during the Brandon Johnson incident, IMPD hung Piland out to dry, my friend and a great cop who did NOTHING wrong. It took a full blown hearing with witnesses and experts for Piland to retain his job. The entire case was racially charged and the administration was siding with the Johnson family (a family of criminals who I've had the pleasure of arresting before). After the Merit Board found Jerry not guilty, the Civilian Review Board found him immediately guilty (it was what the admin wanted) but since the Civilian Review Board had no authority, it meant little. They were an extension of the Chief and the Mayor...I have no faith in their judgement. You remove politics from it and I'll be on board. I'm still not sure what the bias is in the video. It really is the science behind our actions.Denny,
I got the Eugene Police Department from the bottom left of the video. It may have been just who posted it.
You may have missed when I said it may be fair. I have seen and participated in many fair reviews.
You are correct in that I don't think it is 2 sided. As long as officers are only reviewed by other officers, it can not be said to be neutral, objective or 2 sided. I know because I'm prejudiced.
I have been thrown off a jury because I said, because of my experience, I put more credence into what the officer was saying than I did the accused. That made me biased. Most officers will give more credence to a fellow officer's statements than the citizen's. This is not bad and I have copped a plea on it myself. What I speak to is the perception by the public of self policing. Do you disagree?
As to what can be done, I believe in outside entities participating in the reviews. I have been in departments where citizens were brought in and created a mess. Those instanced didn't change my mind about showing the public that an open objective review can be relied upon for presenting the facts without prejudice. Many people take a police review of the police as a coverup because of the review process and participants. This was highlighted in the video.
Looking forward to the day when LEO fans are dominant and trust in the process is restored.
Lost