On Policing

[stormteller]

Having grown up in a county always known for police misconduct, I've given a lot of thought to potential police reform. I've never really spoken about it, though, perhaps because I assumed everyone else was on a similar level of thought. I will redress this lapse now.

I'm not going to pretend the following points are magic solutions. They're talking points, maybe starting points. What we need now is discussion on how to go forward, and to dismiss the assumptions we have made about how things should work. Some of the following points are already very similar to how things theoretically work, and just need to be enforced.

• The vast majority of police work does not require a firearm at any level. Furthermore, introducing a firearm into a situation increases the chance of some kind of violent outcome. Thus, it makes sense that police should not carry them in normal circumstances. Yes, this means they are at risk from random attacks, but a major part of the police ethos should be to protect others at their own expense. If a person cannot accept this risk, they shouldn't join the police. Efforts should also be made to mitigate these risks: if an officer has reason to believe an area or situation is dangerous, they should fall back and ideally get backup.
• An officer who fires a weapon should be suspended as a matter of course, for failing in their duty at a basic level. At the very least, they automatically commit disorderly conduct by doing so. This can be revoked if they are able to prove extenuating circumstances. This should apply even to armed response units (SWAT etc.), who should always attempt to use threat of force to the greatest possible extent before resorting to actual force.
• If a person dies in police custody or in the course of a police action, a homicide has occurred and someone goes to jail. Period.
• Police departments should be more compartmentalized according to their purpose. For instance, the most common thing I see police doing is setting up traffic blockades in the case of an accident or road work. This is fundamentally different work than patrolling or responding to calls, and it's silly to have the same individuals with the same equipment performing these disparate duties. I think it makes sense to have different sections, perhaps entirely different departments, for various duties such as traffic control, parking enforcement, crime prevention by patrol, response to nuisance calls etc., response to more severe situations like robberies with hostages, etc. These would have not only different outlooks, but completely different training and equipment. Police are already generally compartmentalized by purpose, but perhaps it needs to be taken much further.
• Communities and neighborhoods are capable of policing themselves. Organizations like the Neighborhood Watch do this, but they can be given municipal resources to help them deal with non-emergency situations without involving outside forces.
• If police have access to body cams, those are on as long as they are on duty. If the camera is off for any reason, the officer is AWOL until it is reactivated, needs to justify why it was off, and is subject to investigation regarding any conduct undertaken during that time.
• Regardless of their personal inclination, police have a professional incentive to lie: lying can make their jobs easier. Thus, it is necessary to not accept their word without evidence. Invocation of probable cause should be treated with suspicion.