This is the location for conversations that don't fall anywhere else on FlameFans. Whether its politics, culture, the latest techno stuff or just the best places to travel on the web ... this is your forum.

Moderators: jcmanson, Sly Fox, BuryYourDuke

User avatar
By Jonathan Carone
Posts
#621376
The first step would be to release prisoners who are in jail for marijuana crimes in states where marijuana has been legalized or decriminalized.

Another would be to transform our mandatory minimums policies. Over 260,000 people are in jail for mandatory minimum drug related offenses where the judge couldn’t even weigh in on how long the person should be sentenced. Nearly 50% of that number were couriers or other low level offenders.

We’ve learned a lot in the last 35 years. We can change the policies that obviously aren’t working.
rtb72 liked this
User avatar
By TH Spangler
Registration Days Posts
#621377
Changing the subject. Dow is down 600 pts, gas in NC is up 30 cents a gallon in 3 days? Hope this isn't a sign of things to come. :shock:
User avatar
By Purple Haize
Registration Days Posts
#621378
thepostman wrote: January 27th, 2021, 9:28 am There was an answer. Stop throwing so many people in jail for things that don't warrant it.

Also. This is for the federal system only. It doesn't change anything that the states are doing. Yet anyways.

There has been progress on the overcrowded problem in federal prisons in recent years. Starting with the Obama administration and continuing with the Trump administration.

The federal prison population fell from a peak of nearly 219,300 inmates in 2013 to 188,800 in April 2017, a nearly 14 percent reduction, according to BOP statistics. The decrease reflects a dramatic shift in federal policies away from stiff penalties for drug trafficking and other drug-related offenses in recent years. It also has mitigated overcrowding at BOP facilities – the inmate population, once at 37 percent overcapacity, is now at 13 percent overcapacity.
SOURCE
Yes moving forward you may have a point but that doesn’t answer today’s question
By stokesjokes
Registration Days Posts
#621379
It’s a long-term answer. You can’t just shut the prisons down tomorrow, but as the population goes down, you consolidate until everyone’s in publicly funded prisons instead.
User avatar
By thepostman
Registration Days Posts
#621380
@Purple Haize The EO doesn't shut prisons down today so we don't need a right now answer which is why I didn't provide one.
User avatar
By Jonathan Carone
Posts
#621381
The hope - at least mine - is that with the looming private prison shutdowns, state and federal legislatures will look at it as a problem they have to solve which will force them to do something. This is something that should be bipartisan and should be something everyone screaming unity can easily get behind. We need easy wins to start making progress on the whole unity thing.
By rtb72
Posts
#621383
Class of 20Something wrote: January 27th, 2021, 9:36 am I think the obvious answer is going to be, released. I think criminal justice reform needs to be in the style of a Continental congress. Everything is open for change all at once. Removing disparities in mandatory sentencing, differentiating crimes that we believe people can be rehabilitated from crimes where the person is effectively removed from soceity. Establishing trade schools in prisons.

My wild idea: If private prisons are a necessary component in the future, higher payments for prisons with low recidivism.
Mandatory minimums should be removed. For example....a person who gets caught for 28g (considered Trafficking in NC) of cocaine is subject to a man/min of 7 years...while a person who commits some assaults are subject to less than 2 years. Structured sentencing should be revamped and more utilized as the standard. This considers the specific crime, but bases the punishment on consideration of criminal history. If a person is a "habitual felon" they should be imprisoned for a period of time. Unfortunately, I'll be the first to tell you...it still often comes down to who has the money for a personal attorney versus court appointed/public defender as far as ability to get the most lenient sentencing. Structured sentencing also prohibits judges from getting crazy on punishment....which does happen sometimes.

I'm no advocate for drug violations...but over the past few years, I will say my eyes have been open to the fact that drug offenses are an area that sentencing does need a complete overhaul. I will also admit, when I first started working in LE I would not have entertained the fact that drug abuse was a mental illness...but I concede it certainly has to have a mental illness focus more-so than a law enforcement answer. Such reform, however, should not include legalizing illicit drugs.
User avatar
By Class of 20Something
Posts
#621386
There's quite a few of us with LE backgrounds. I'd say most would be huge advocates for social workers on shift in most PDs. It's a masters degree minimum job, pay it like it.

I am a major advocate for police reform. But I think most people get the cause and effect wrong. The brutality we witness is a symptom. But why is it happening?

Well, it's ultimately a symptom of how they're trained. The time spent training with a firearm combined with the time being taught the Use of Force model and what legally justifies lethal force, far exceed the training of every officer reaction below lethal force. And that's probably not a bad thing, outright. They absolutely need to know how and be trained well to implement the gravest response they may be required to take. But what would those hands on, non lethal, encounters look like of PDs had all officers train an hour of a mixed ground grappling martial arts before or after every shift? I'm talking about wrestling and jiu jitsu styles. No punches or kicks, no taser, baton, or OC. Make the expectation 180 hours a year of ground combat. That's just 3.5 hours a week.

Does that change the encounters? Is tolerating that some suspects might suffer broken arms a tolerable trade if officer involved shootings decrease?

Giving the officers more tools to use before lethal force will reduce the frequency of lethal force.
User avatar
By Jonathan Carone
Posts
#621389
I'd gladly trade broken arms or broken legs for lethal force. I obviously don't have an LEO background, but that was one of the best ideas I've heard for helping us move forward.
User avatar
By Class of 20Something
Posts
#621390
The issue is, that will cause a dramatic increase in police budgets. That's untenable to a large and loud group of people. But adding on 3-5 hours a week to every LEO and then compensating them for the additional knowledge and skills they're bringing to the job, having a space dedicated for it, and likely hiring a near full time instructor. That's a big ask. But I truly think that would have the most dramatic change in addressing the physicality of police encounters.
By stokesjokes
Registration Days Posts
#621392
In a related vein, I’ve actually had the opportunity to teach Mental Health First Aid as part of the police academy training here in Lynchburg. It’s something they are trialing and I think can help with de-escalating mental health calls or keep them from escalating in the first place.
User avatar
By Class of 20Something
Posts
#621393
stokesjokes wrote: January 27th, 2021, 2:58 pm In a related vein, I’ve actually had the opportunity to teach Mental Health First Aid as part of the police academy training here in Lynchburg. It’s something they are trialing and I think can help with de-escalating mental health calls or keep them from escalating in the first place.
Praise. I do fear that we are asking too much of our LEOs. Having to have essentially a counselors toolbox and at the drop of a hat a soldiers is pretty insane. Especially for how they're compensated.
Jonathan Carone, rtb72 liked this
User avatar
By RubberMallet
Registration Days Posts
#621395
I just think all these things should be done through congress. Because in 4 years, 1 stupid signature wipes away any progress. But I get it Congress is a mess. I mean who wants to bet that congress will bipartisanly act swiftly to curtail retail investors from messing with their buddies hedge funds. But will take forever for any other meaningful legislature.
User avatar
By Jonathan Carone
Posts
#621396
Class of 20Something wrote: January 27th, 2021, 2:33 pm The issue is, that will cause a dramatic increase in police budgets. That's untenable to a large and loud group of people. But adding on 3-5 hours a week to every LEO and then compensating them for the additional knowledge and skills they're bringing to the job, having a space dedicated for it, and likely hiring a near full time instructor. That's a big ask. But I truly think that would have the most dramatic change in addressing the physicality of police encounters.
If you could frame it right - investing in social work, deescalation instead of military equipment - then you can make it work. It’s all in the messaging.
By stokesjokes
Registration Days Posts
#621398
Class of 20Something wrote: January 27th, 2021, 4:22 pm
stokesjokes wrote: January 27th, 2021, 2:58 pm In a related vein, I’ve actually had the opportunity to teach Mental Health First Aid as part of the police academy training here in Lynchburg. It’s something they are trialing and I think can help with de-escalating mental health calls or keep them from escalating in the first place.
Praise. I do fear that we are asking too much of our LEOs. Having to have essentially a counselors toolbox and at the drop of a hat a soldiers is pretty insane. Especially for how they're compensated.
Yeah, police are asked to do too much. There’s a core of the “defund the police” movement that really wanted some good things there: let the police do policing and hire other people to fill their other roles. It’s too bad it got hijacked by bad messaging and extremists.
User avatar
By thepostman
Registration Days Posts
#621399
There are parts of the defund rhe police movement that are good but they lose me, and a lot of people with that phrase and their other more extreme messaging. We can't do a lot of the things we want by defunding the police but what we do need to do is using the money in a more appropriate way. I've talked to enough people in LE to know that there is a huge desire in that community for change. It is just the tough question of how we get there that hangs things up. Then we just get stuck in this cycle.

Tough problems rarely have easy/fast solutions.
By rtb72
Posts
#621401
Class of 20Something wrote: January 27th, 2021, 1:37 pm There's quite a few of us with LE backgrounds. I'd say most would be huge advocates for social workers on shift in most PDs. It's a masters degree minimum job, pay it like it.

I am a major advocate for police reform. But I think most people get the cause and effect wrong. The brutality we witness is a symptom. But why is it happening?

Well, it's ultimately a symptom of how they're trained. The time spent training with a firearm combined with the time being taught the Use of Force model and what legally justifies lethal force, far exceed the training of every officer reaction below lethal force. And that's probably not a bad thing, outright. They absolutely need to know how and be trained well to implement the gravest response they may be required to take. But what would those hands on, non lethal, encounters look like of PDs had all officers train an hour of a mixed ground grappling martial arts before or after every shift? I'm talking about wrestling and jiu jitsu styles. No punches or kicks, no taser, baton, or OC. Make the expectation 180 hours a year of ground combat. That's just 3.5 hours a week.

Does that change the encounters? Is tolerating that some suspects might suffer broken arms a tolerable trade if officer involved shootings decrease?

Giving the officers more tools to use before lethal force will reduce the frequency of lethal force.
My agency actually uses a Gracie style training regimen for part of our defensive tactics. However, taking less than lethal options away and going hands-on first is not the best practice. More injuries for both sides and it exposes the officer's firearm to CQB. The last place a cop wants to be is on the ground. The intent of less than lethal is to mitigate aggression within the Use of Force Continuum...which allows for lethal force under Graham v. Connor...which is the present and correct precedent. The problem is going to far when the threat has diminished or has not risen to the level counter acted by the LEO. LE has not done a good job of educating the public in part....the incident in Ferguson is a prime example. That was a "good shoot". Any situation an LEO goes into is potentially involving a deadly weapon....because the LEO brings it. If a subject takes action toward that weapon, regardless of whether they were initially armed...demonstrates an intent and thereby makes it a potentially lethal encounter that does have some justification by LEO UOF. Now...having social workers in LE would be huge...and I think well received in certain appropriate scenarios. LEOs today are expected to mitigate to degree in which they are generally not trained, and that is both a funding issue and a system issue.

My recommendation to those who feel there is a significant occurrence of excessive UOF in LE in general...which I do not agree with....go ride with a police agency. They allow "ride alongs" at a lot of agencies...you simply have to feel out a waiver. Lots of folks have had their eyes opened from a single ride along....what they heard and thought was turned 180 degrees on it's head.

*Addendum* My agency does these regularly and I would be happy to have any of you join us on an operation. Send my a PM and I'll provide you with the information and my personal cell phone. My district office is in Greensboro....I'd love to meet some of you.
Last edited by rtb72 on January 27th, 2021, 7:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.
By rtb72
Posts
#621402
Jonathan Carone wrote: January 27th, 2021, 5:26 pm
Class of 20Something wrote: January 27th, 2021, 2:33 pm The issue is, that will cause a dramatic increase in police budgets. That's untenable to a large and loud group of people. But adding on 3-5 hours a week to every LEO and then compensating them for the additional knowledge and skills they're bringing to the job, having a space dedicated for it, and likely hiring a near full time instructor. That's a big ask. But I truly think that would have the most dramatic change in addressing the physicality of police encounters.
If you could frame it right - investing in social work, deescalation instead of military equipment - then you can make it work. It’s all in the messaging.
AGain i ask...what is this military equipment you speak of. I suspect most people speaking to this are not truly sure of what types of equipment they are speaking of or how it is justified. I might add...the agencies that do such transfers are at minimal to no cost to the agency or municipality.
User avatar
By Jonathan Carone
Posts
#621406
I read that post in the middle of the night the other day while up with a kid and forgot to respond.

From everything I’ve read, the things covered in “military equipment” are things like tear gas grenade launchers, armored vehicles, and bayonets. I don’t think it mentioned anything about the bomb sniffing robots or protective things like that.
By tyndal23
Posts
#621407
rtb72 wrote: January 27th, 2021, 11:24 am
Class of 20Something wrote: January 27th, 2021, 9:36 am I think the obvious answer is going to be, released. I think criminal justice reform needs to be in the style of a Continental congress. Everything is open for change all at once. Removing disparities in mandatory sentencing, differentiating crimes that we believe people can be rehabilitated from crimes where the person is effectively removed from soceity. Establishing trade schools in prisons.

My wild idea: If private prisons are a necessary component in the future, higher payments for prisons with low recidivism.
Mandatory minimums should be removed. For example....a person who gets caught for 28g (considered Trafficking in NC) of cocaine is subject to a man/min of 7 years...while a person who commits some assaults are subject to less than 2 years. Structured sentencing should be revamped and more utilized as the standard. This considers the specific crime, but bases the punishment on consideration of criminal history. If a person is a "habitual felon" they should be imprisoned for a period of time. Unfortunately, I'll be the first to tell you...it still often comes down to who has the money for a personal attorney versus court appointed/public defender as far as ability to get the most lenient sentencing. Structured sentencing also prohibits judges from getting crazy on punishment....which does happen sometimes.

I'm no advocate for drug violations...but over the past few years, I will say my eyes have been open to the fact that drug offenses are an area that sentencing does need a complete overhaul. I will also admit, when I first started working in LE I would not have entertained the fact that drug abuse was a mental illness...but I concede it certainly has to have a mental illness focus more-so than a law enforcement answer. Such reform, however, should not include legalizing illicit drugs.
By all means, let’s all go the way of Seattle,SF,and now LA and allow 3 grams of any substance be a non arrest and watch the homeless “drug addiction” aka liberal “ homeless crisis” ( which gets billions in Federal $ ) to “fight”. That will happen ASAP nationally and let’s all revel in it...
By paradox
Registration Days Posts
#621408
How is he going to win back the trust of law enforcement and appease the radicals on the left the same time? That will be the real challenge for Biden. It's either/or. Which one will he choose?
User avatar
By Purple Haize
Registration Days Posts
#621409
Jonathan Carone wrote: January 27th, 2021, 11:13 am The hope - at least mine - is that with the looming private prison shutdowns, state and federal legislatures will look at it as a problem they have to solve which will force them to do something. This is something that should be bipartisan and should be something everyone screaming unity can easily get behind. We need easy wins to start making progress on the whole unity thing.
At least you tried to answer the question unlike Captain Barcolounger of the US Chair Force :D
User avatar
By Purple Haize
Registration Days Posts
#621410
It’s fine. Fine. Everything is fine. It’s fine

The comments are hilarious

User avatar
By TH Spangler
Registration Days Posts
#621413
With Bidens policies you might want to check into getting one of these :lol:

EVERYTHING YOU NEED (AND WANT) TO KNOW ABOUT CHINESE GREEN CARDS

https://www.ptl-group.com/everything-yo ... een-cards/


The “Foreigner’s Permanent Residence Card” will be renamed as the “Foreigner’s Permanent Residence Identity Card.” Similar to the Chinese Identity Cards, the new foreigner ID cards will have a chip embedded :lol: , in order to ease access to several Chinese services, such as purchasing train and air tickets, bank transactions, hotel check-ins, etc.

https://www.ptl-group.com/new-chinese-green-card/
User avatar
By Class of 20Something
Posts
#621416
@rtb72

I absolutely agree with everything you said. I wasn't meaning to suggest that the ground is where LE shoud want to fight, but rather that having a high probability of "winning" without lethal force is a good thing and would lead to fewer shoots. The public doesn't understand Intent Opportunity Capability articulation every time we say "good shoot." But it's second nature for us.
rtb72 liked this
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 33
Dondi Costin - LU President

Ive gone there a few times since moving to texas b[…]

There’s a cerebral side to the game, which M[…]

NCAA Realignment Megathread

Duke Gonzaga B12? https://larrybrownsports.com/co[…]

FlameFans Fantasy Baseball

We are on!!! Hope to see everyone tonight at 9:30[…]