Cops, healthcare professionals, and my thoughts on a disconnect.
A few of my friends are healthcare workers, they work with "behavioral individuals". My friends are well trained in "de-escalation", IE, they are attuned to what people really want when they are misbehaving, and are very good at giving it to them.
When my friends see videos of police fighting with people, restraining people, or shooting people, their reactions are quite predictable. "This could have been avoided", or "If I did this at my job, I would likely be in jail", or "wasn't there something less than "Center of mass until the threat is gone" that would have worked?
Under most circumstances, my friends are right, particularly the circumstances that my friends are trained for, IE, disabled people in a controlled environment. My friends can be pretty sure that there isn't a gun, or a knife in the mix with their residents. And, since these people are mentally handicapped to begin with, it really doesn't matter if this class can continue, or if any lesson is learned. It's *just fine* to have a student demand ice cream, disrupt the class, and give them the ice cream.It may even be best policy.
However, the role of a police officer is entirely different. Partly because role of the police officer is not just to get the particular situation over without harm, but also to discern if the individual they are dealing with needs to be in a controlled environment for the safety of the community. Additionally, it is the responsibility to get people *to* that controlled environment, by force if necessary.
Consider this circumstance: A man robs a liquor store, and a de-escalator is on the scene, rather than a police officer. The robber wants the money, and wants to leave. Is he going to leave without the money? No. So, the only reasonable choice for the de-escalator is to open the register and give him the money. Then the robber goes on his way. that's fine, right? After all, "money is less important than life", right? But what about tomorrow? The robber is still free, and was rewarded. Next time, the clerk is a cute girl, do we "de-escalate" again?
So, when the police get the report of the crime, they *must* bring about a very specific result, that being the suspect in the back of the car in handcuffs, or, if things go less well, in a hearse.
That's the fundamental disconnect. For the healthcare worker, the optimum result is harmony and peace. For the police officer, the only viable result is assertion of control. Those 2 profiles cannot meet.
When my friends see videos of police fighting with people, restraining people, or shooting people, their reactions are quite predictable. "This could have been avoided", or "If I did this at my job, I would likely be in jail", or "wasn't there something less than "Center of mass until the threat is gone" that would have worked?
Under most circumstances, my friends are right, particularly the circumstances that my friends are trained for, IE, disabled people in a controlled environment. My friends can be pretty sure that there isn't a gun, or a knife in the mix with their residents. And, since these people are mentally handicapped to begin with, it really doesn't matter if this class can continue, or if any lesson is learned. It's *just fine* to have a student demand ice cream, disrupt the class, and give them the ice cream.It may even be best policy.
However, the role of a police officer is entirely different. Partly because role of the police officer is not just to get the particular situation over without harm, but also to discern if the individual they are dealing with needs to be in a controlled environment for the safety of the community. Additionally, it is the responsibility to get people *to* that controlled environment, by force if necessary.
Consider this circumstance: A man robs a liquor store, and a de-escalator is on the scene, rather than a police officer. The robber wants the money, and wants to leave. Is he going to leave without the money? No. So, the only reasonable choice for the de-escalator is to open the register and give him the money. Then the robber goes on his way. that's fine, right? After all, "money is less important than life", right? But what about tomorrow? The robber is still free, and was rewarded. Next time, the clerk is a cute girl, do we "de-escalate" again?
So, when the police get the report of the crime, they *must* bring about a very specific result, that being the suspect in the back of the car in handcuffs, or, if things go less well, in a hearse.
That's the fundamental disconnect. For the healthcare worker, the optimum result is harmony and peace. For the police officer, the only viable result is assertion of control. Those 2 profiles cannot meet.