What the H3ll is wrong with the Minneapolis Police?

[astonmartin708]

I'm not a labor law guy but I believe this might be difficult to accomplish. Labor law is federal for the most part. I don't see them being able to single out a particular union. I'm skeptical of Congress willingness to weaken labor law as it relates to unions even if they were able to limit it to public service unions. As such, it becomes a local issue between the City and it's police union.

I think it could be accomplished without getting too far into labor law itself. Just set up more effective avenues for punishing cops who are suspected of criminal offenses. The unions would try to stop it, but there's nothing that they could really do because it's not part of collective bargaining. They would argue that limits on their ability to restrain / detain someone would make their job harder... and they might be right. But, the state could always mandate that officers required more training prior to being allowed to patrol. Both of those items could be accomplished by state regulatory authority.

Here's the text of a Minnesota Police Union CBA in regards to discipline:

ARTICLE 9. DISCIPLINE
9.1 The Employer will discipline employees for just cause only and in accordance with State of
Minnesota Statutes relating to disciplinary procedures involving Peace Officers.
9.2 Discipline is intended to be corrective and will not be punitive. One of the following forms of
progressive discipline will be used:
a. oral reprimand;
b. written reprimand;
0. suspension;
d. demotion; or
e. discharge.
9.3 Written reprimands, notices of suspension, notices of demotion and notices of discharge which are
to become part of an employee's personnel file shall be presented in written form, read, and
acknowledged by signature of the employee. The employee and the Union will receive a copy of
such reprimands and/or notices at the time of implementation, At the request of the employee,
reference an oral reprimand shall be made void after one year and written reprimands shall be
removed from the file after two years, provided the employee has not been involved in progressive
disciplinary action.
9.4 Employees may examine their individual personnel file at reasonable times under the supervision
of the Employer.
9.5 Employees will not be questioned concerning an investigation that may lead to disciplinary action
unless the employee has been given the opportunity to have a Union representative of their choice
present at such questioning.
9.6 Grievances relating to discipline may be initiated by the Union at Step 2 of the Grievance
Procedure outlined in Article 6 of this Agreement.

 

[HuffyCane]

I'm not a labor law guy but I believe this might be difficult to accomplish. Labor law is federal for the most part. I don't see them being able to single out a particular union. I'm skeptical of Congress willingness to weaken labor law as it relates to unions even if they were able to limit it to public service unions. As such, it becomes a local issue between the City and it's police union.

Ding ding! Now you are learnin, boy-o. The same people calling for the police to change are the same people who know there can be no change or accountability without significantly weakening public employee union protection — their biggest single financial backers. So they trot out on stage and say “Get rid of the bad apples.” Then walk off the dais and take a fat check from the institution whose sole purpose is to protect said bad apples. You can’t be pro-police reform and pro-union. And you’ll never see an anti-union Democrat.

And that’s a root cause of the violence in itself. These kids are breaking things because they don’t feel the system works for them or is responsive to needed changes. So they blindly line up to vote Democratic after being told there’s hope and change if they cast their vote, but they are being lied to all along. They are being used. There’s more to being a Reagan Democrat than just being a social conservative working class Dem that sometimes votes republican over abortion or taxes. They sense when they are being lied to and cross over for straight talk, even if they know it might hurt their own interests. Don’t be so sure the riots hurt all republicans. Between the law order message and the “you’re being played if you think joe Biden is going to get tough on cops” you may see the Senate hold. You certainly won’t see the systemic change every basic white girl on Instagram is talking about if you vote for Biden. That’s for sure. You are actually more likely to get it from Trump who is no fan of unions and can leverage his law and order message into you clean up your cities, I’ll clean up the cops. Biden’s been taking their union money for forty years. You decide.

 

[astonmartin708]

I think it could be accomplished without getting too far into labor law itself. Just set up more effective avenues for punishing cops who are suspected of criminal offenses. The unions would try to stop it, but there's nothing that they could really do because it's not part of collective bargaining. They would argue that limits on their ability to restrain / detain someone would make their job harder... and they might be right. But, the state could always mandate that officers required more training prior to being allowed to patrol. Both of those items could be accomplished by state regulatory authority.

Here's the text of a Minnesota Police Union CBA in regards to discipline:

ARTICLE 9. DISCIPLINE
9.1 The Employer will discipline employees for just cause only and in accordance with State of
Minnesota Statutes relating to disciplinary procedures involving Peace Officers.
9.2 Discipline is intended to be corrective and will not be punitive. One of the following forms of
progressive discipline will be used:
a. oral reprimand;
b. written reprimand;
0. suspension;
d. demotion; or
e. discharge.
9.3 Written reprimands, notices of suspension, notices of demotion and notices of discharge which are
to become part of an employee's personnel file shall be presented in written form, read, and
acknowledged by signature of the employee. The employee and the Union will receive a copy of
such reprimands and/or notices at the time of implementation, At the request of the employee,
reference an oral reprimand shall be made void after one year and written reprimands shall be
removed from the file after two years, provided the employee has not been involved in progressive
disciplinary action.
9.4 Employees may examine their individual personnel file at reasonable times under the supervision
of the Employer.
9.5 Employees will not be questioned concerning an investigation that may lead to disciplinary action
unless the employee has been given the opportunity to have a Union representative of their choice
present at such questioning.
9.6 Grievances relating to discipline may be initiated by the Union at Step 2 of the Grievance
Procedure outlined in Article 6 of this Agreement.

And here is a section of state statute in Minnesota that might warrant re-examination.

Subd. 17.Civilian review.

A civilian review board, commission, or other oversight body shall not have the authority to make a finding of fact or determination regarding a complaint against an officer or impose discipline on an officer. A civilian review board, commission, or other oversight body may make a recommendation regarding the merits of a complaint, however, the recommendation shall be advisory only and shall not be binding on nor limit the authority of the chief law enforcement officer of any unit of government.

And here is another section of Minnesota statue that might be altered to make unlawful use of deadly force more punishable by prosecution.

Notwithstanding the provisions of section 609.06 or 609.065, the use of deadly force by a peace officer in the line of duty is justified only when necessary:

(3) to effect the arrest or capture, or prevent the escape, of a person whom the officer knows or has reasonable grounds to believe has committed or attempted to commit a felony if the officer reasonably believes that the person will cause death or great bodily harm if the person's apprehension is delayed.

 

[astonmartin708]

Ding ding! Now you are learnin, boy-o. The same people calling for the police to change are the same people who know there can be no change or accountability without significantly weakening public employee union protection — their biggest single financial backers. So they trot out on stage and say “Get rid of the bad apples.” Then walk off the dais and take a fat check from the institution whose sole purpose is to protect said bad apples. You can’t be pro-police reform and pro-union. And you’ll never see an anti-union Democrat.

This is just malarkey. That's like saying I can't want an auto manufacturer to succeed and still be a pro-union person. You can believe in the efficacy of certain rights that unions should have while still wanting to limit the union's ability to protect bad workers. It's not like I want unions to be all-powerful. I just want them to be able to secure fair wages for their members. I don't want the guy at GM who's drinking on the job to be protected by his Union even though costs the company money. But I also don't want the company to pay him unfairly or force him to work in unsafe conditions without hazard pay if he's an upstanding employee.

 

[URedskin54]

You certainly won’t see the systemic change every basic white girl on Instagram is talking about if you vote for Biden.

If rich white girl virtue signaling ended racism the last couple days would have stomped it out for good

 

[lawpoke87]

This is just malarkey. That's like saying I can't want an auto manufacturer to succeed and still be a pro-union person. You can believe in the efficacy of certain rights that unions should have while still wanting to limit the union's ability to protect bad workers. It's not like I want unions to be all-powerful. I just want them to be able to secure fair wages for their members. I don't want the guy at GM who's drinking on the job to be protected by his Union even though costs the company money. But I also don't want the company to pay him unfairly or force him to work in unsafe conditions without hazard pay.

Not sure I agree with your opinion here. The Minny police union has already come out highlighting George's violent past and criminal record in an attempt to defend it's members. Unions generally will defend their members whether they're in the right or not.

 

[astonmartin708]

Not sure I agree with your opinion here. The Minny police union has already come out highlighting George's violent past and criminal record in an attempt to defend it's members. Unions generally will defend their members whether they're in the right or not.

I understand that, and I never said the unions wouldn't come out in support of their members.... I just said that they shouldn't be legally able to protect their members from independent civilian investigation or prosecution when criminal activity (conspiracy, bribery, etc...) or the use of deadly force or force leading to long term debilitating injury is involved.

That is probably an idea that you'd have to fight with the union bosses over, but ultimately I think legislation governing that idea (and restricting the power of unions who deal in the administration of justice i.e. police or corrections officers) would be upheld by most courts.

 

[URedskin54]

Speaking of police unions resisting efforts at accountability. They may have a point about this oversight model's efficacy, but there isn't a model that they wouldn't oppose.

https://www.tulsaworld.com/news/loc...cle_8a3ab423-aa95-545c-934b-b5382ec4bf44.html

 

[HuffyCane]

I understand that, and I never said the unions wouldn't come out in support of their members.... I just said that they shouldn't be legally able to protect their members from independent civilian investigation or prosecution when criminal activity (conspiracy, bribery, etc...) or the use of deadly force or force leading to long term debilitating injury is involved.

That is probably an idea that you'd have to fight with the union bosses over, but ultimately I think legislation governing that idea (and restricting the power of unions who deal in the administration of justice i.e. police or corrections officers) would be upheld by most courts.

Except that will never happen because every Democratic member of Congress depends on union money to get elected or most log roll for unions to keep their committee assignments.

 

[HuffyCane]

Speaking of police unions resisting efforts at accountability. They may have a point about this oversight model's efficacy, but there isn't a model that they wouldn't oppose.

https://www.tulsaworld.com/news/loc...cle_8a3ab423-aa95-545c-934b-b5382ec4bf44.html

Yep.

 

[HuffyCane]

This is just malarkey. That's like saying I can't want an auto manufacturer to succeed and still be a pro-union person. You can believe in the efficacy of certain rights that unions should have while still wanting to limit the union's ability to protect bad workers. It's not like I want unions to be all-powerful. I just want them to be able to secure fair wages for their members. I don't want the guy at GM who's drinking on the job to be protected by his Union even though costs the company money. But I also don't want the company to pay him unfairly or force him to work in unsafe conditions without hazard pay if he's an upstanding employee.

That’s the way you feel, but that’s not the way money is raised and given to politicians. They don’t give money and the expect politicians to make exceptions in the laws. They are in the business of protecting all of their members good and bad. Carving out exceptions for bad ones means some good workers may be unjustly affected and it creates an environment where further restrictions may be tolerated. You see the same thing play out with the NRA, where they resist any type of restriction and the GOP refuses to budge, often just after saying reforms are needed.

People are fighting the wrong enemy here, I’m telling you.

 

[astonmartin708]

Except that will never happen because every Democratic member of Congress depends on union money to get elected or most log roll for unions to keep their committee assignments.

So the unions are going to start giving the money to who? They're not going to give it to a republican that's sponsoring bills against them. I guess politicians might have to look out for primary challengers... but I don't think this would be a blow to ALL unions as much as it was to public unions that require their members to, at times, use deadly force. If you're in a union that doesn't use deadly force this law should never effect you.

 

[Bendman]

Trump is a different beast altogether. No other POLITICIAN in my lifetime would have gotten away with the things Trump has said or done and still be able to get elected/hold office. If Reagan or Bush would have been recorded saying "You can grab them by the p*ssy...they just let you do it because your famous" and it got out, they would have left politics immediately

Current and former U.S. intelligence officials express dismay at the parallels between events at home and the signs of decline or democratic regression they were trained to detect in other nations. “The scenes have been disturbingly familiar to CIA analysts accustomed to monitoring scenes of societal unraveling abroad — the massing of protesters, the ensuing crackdowns and the awkwardly staged displays of strength by a leader determined to project authority,” Greg Miller reports. “Former intelligence officials said the unrest and the administration’s militaristic response are among many measures of decay they would flag if writing assessments about the United States for another country’s intelligence service. They cited the country’s struggle to contain the novel coronavirus, the president’s attempt to pressure Ukraine for political favors, his attacks on the news media and the increasingly polarized political climate as other signs of dysfunction.”

• “I’ve seen this kind of violence,” said Gail Helt, a former CIA analyst responsible for tracking developments in China, Malaysia and across Southeast Asia. “This is what autocrats do. This is what happens in countries before a collapse. It really does unnerve me.”
• Marc Polymeropoulos, who formerly ran CIA operations in Europe and Asia, said the clearing of Lafayette Square reminded him of what he reported on for decades from the third world: “Saddam. Bashar. Qaddafi. They all did this.”

Justice Department officials acknowledged that Barr personally issued the order to law enforcement officials to clear the streets around Lafayette Square before Trump visited the church. “On Tuesday, the administration offered conflicting explanations for the forcible removal of the protesters,” Carol Leonnig, Matt Zapotosky, Josh Dawsey and Rebecca Tan report. “The White House asserted that the crowd was dispersed to help enforce the city’s 7 p.m. curfew, although District police had not requested such assistance. The Park Police said that its officers responded after protesters began throwing projectiles. Other administration officials said the move to clear the crowd was part of a previously planned effort to extend the perimeter around Lafayette Square. … Black-clad officers and agents of the Secret Service’s civil disturbance unit stood by during the tense confrontation with protesters and then helped secure the emptied-out streets. Trump told an ally Monday after the visit that the Secret Service was not ‘thrilled’ about the idea of him visiting the church. …

 

[URedskin54]

More than the political donations aspect, voters prevent these changes. Republican voters typically back police officers and aren't going to vote for candidates talking about going after police. Democrats have several large employee unions that are important to them and drive voters, and they can't afford to be seen as eroding union rights or power.

 

[astonmartin708]

That’s the way you feel, but that’s not the way money is raised and given to politicians. They don’t give money and the expect politicians to make exceptions in the laws. They are in the business of protecting all of their members good and bad. Carving out exceptions for bad ones means some good workers may be unjustly affected and it creates an environment where further restrictions may be tolerated. You see the same thing play out with the NRA, where they resist any type of restriction and the GOP refuses to budge, often just after saying reforms are needed.

People are fighting the wrong enemy here, I’m telling you.

Well, something needs to be done and I'm not willing to hamstring ALL unions just because one union is killing people. This should have no effect on the NBAPA or the NFLPA, or the UAWU or the IBEW, etc... Politicians, IN THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY, are going to have to suck it up and fight some of their financial backers to get this change done... and Republicans are going to have to stop trying to push these "all lives matter" divisive gimmicks and start addressing the real problem that exists. There's work to be done on both sides.

 

[astonmartin708]

More than the political donations aspect, voters prevent these changes. Republican voters typically back police officers and aren't going to vote for candidates talking about going after police. Democrats have several large employee unions that are important to them and drive voters, and they can't afford to be seen as eroding union rights or power.

I totally agree and this needs to change at least long enough so some common sense legislation can be passed.

It would also necessitate having a commander in chief who's willing to break union strikes like Reagan did with the ATC's. But, doing it against cops would anger Trump's base.

 

[astonmartin708]

Speaking of police unions resisting efforts at accountability. They may have a point about this oversight model's efficacy, but there isn't a model that they wouldn't oppose.

https://www.tulsaworld.com/news/loc...cle_8a3ab423-aa95-545c-934b-b5382ec4bf44.html

Nice to see Bynum put this out there though. This is the kind of thing we need to see, though it might be small potatoes and not completely fix the problem. I hope he follows through.

 

[Gmoney4WW]

Trump is a different beast altogether. No other POLITICIAN in my lifetime would have gotten away with the things Trump has said or done and still be able to get elected/hold office. If Reagan or Bush would have been recorded saying "You can grab them by the p*ssy...they just let you do it because your famous" and it got out, they would have left politics immediately and gone and hid in some remote corner of their respective states. Gary Hart has an affair and immediately has to drop out, leaving Dems with Dukakis as their nominee (I love Dukakis but the dude had the personality of the concrete around Boston Common). John Edwards was another one. And the so called party of "family values" and "Christian morals" nominates a guy who has never exhibited either in his personal or professional life. They don't get to claim those any more until they start holding their candidates accountable the same way they want to trash anyone on the other side. Hell, John Dean lost the Dem nomination because of an exuberant scream at the podium after winning a primary state. He got trashed for not having a Presidential demeanor. Really? Current POTUS is wanting the US military to KILL AMERICAN CITIZENS EXERCISING THEIR 1ST AMENDMENT RIGHTS. But he doesn't care about the 1st Amendment at all because that didn't get him elected.

Current and former U.S. intelligence officials express dismay at the parallels between events at home and the signs of decline or democratic regression they were trained to detect in other nations. “The scenes have been disturbingly familiar to CIA analysts accustomed to monitoring scenes of societal unraveling abroad — the massing of protesters, the ensuing crackdowns and the awkwardly staged displays of strength by a leader determined to project authority,” Greg Miller reports. “Former intelligence officials said the unrest and the administration’s militaristic response are among many measures of decay they would flag if writing assessments about the United States for another country’s intelligence service. They cited the country’s struggle to contain the novel coronavirus, the president’s attempt to pressure Ukraine for political favors, his attacks on the news media and the increasingly polarized political climate as other signs of dysfunction.”

• “I’ve seen this kind of violence,” said Gail Helt, a former CIA analyst responsible for tracking developments in China, Malaysia and across Southeast Asia. “This is what autocrats do. This is what happens in countries before a collapse. It really does unnerve me.”
• Marc Polymeropoulos, who formerly ran CIA operations in Europe and Asia, said the clearing of Lafayette Square reminded him of what he reported on for decades from the third world: “Saddam. Bashar. Qaddafi. They all did this.”

Justice Department officials acknowledged that Barr personally issued the order to law enforcement officials to clear the streets around Lafayette Square before Trump visited the church. “On Tuesday, the administration offered conflicting explanations for the forcible removal of the protesters,” Carol Leonnig, Matt Zapotosky, Josh Dawsey and Rebecca Tan report. “The White House asserted that the crowd was dispersed to help enforce the city’s 7 p.m. curfew, although District police had not requested such assistance. The Park Police said that its officers responded after protesters began throwing projectiles. Other administration officials said the move to clear the crowd was part of a previously planned effort to extend the perimeter around Lafayette Square. … Black-clad officers and agents of the Secret Service’s civil disturbance unit stood by during the tense confrontation with protesters and then helped secure the emptied-out streets. Trump told an ally Monday after the visit that the Secret Service was not ‘thrilled’ about the idea of him visiting the church. …

Due wholly to the fact of the Republican party sticking it's ass up in the air and letting Trump f**k them, with their undying support to just about every thing Trump does. This protect the party from Trump's base thing, has turned the Republican party from what it was, into the Refascbican party.

Any bit of what gave the Republican party it's name and values has been obliterated on many levels. Any bit of a republic with conservative values is dying a quick death by anybody's standards. What the party laying down in support of him has done in just over 3 years is quick indeed. And it will be worse during his second term. He will feel he has the mandate to do anything he wants, and unless they suddenly sprout a backbone, Republicans will not only allow it, but allow it with efficacy.

 

[astonmartin708]

When even Mitch McConnell comes out against this... I think it's the protesters that ultimately won the day.

News on what looks like some action from Congres:
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/01/...SWHJxgdrfT7JrFOqqWYtlniWArxqVRPOFfxM_QoKZnAS8
There are quite a few talking points from Dems, but a few indipendents and republicans supporting reform as well, specifically to the military equipment transfer program and to reforms to qualified immunity laws for police.


Seems like the only people continuing to legitimately be a-holes are the people in the whitehouse.

 

[URedskin54]

Welcome back WATU9

 

[Gmoney4WW]

Welcome back WATU9

Bendman or a sarcastic comment on aston in the role of...?

 

[astonmartin708]

Bendman or a sarcastic comment on aston in the role of...?

That's what I was wondering?

 

[URedskin54]

Bendman or a sarcastic comment on aston in the role of...?

Bender

 

[Gmoney4WW]

Bender

I got ants in my butt, and I needs to strut!

 

[URedskin54]

What to make of this? Is this like how polls show everyone thinks congress is terrible, except for their own congressman?

https://www.monmouth.edu/polling-institute/documents/monmouthpoll_us_060220.pdf/

 

[TU_BLA]

Seems like the only people continuing to legitimately be a-holes are the people in the whitehouse.

You know, Trump was part of the crew in Spaceballs.

 

[astonmartin708]

Wait, so they lumped very and somewhat together? That's not a great statistic. I can theoretically say I'm somewhat satisfied in that my house hasn't been broken into, but not very satisfied because they killed my neighbor while he was mowing his lawn.

Seems like there should be a better breakdown.

Anyway... I just saw a statistic from a cop in Ft. Lauterdale who shoved a protester who wasn't doing anything and he's now in trouble. He's had 50+ occurrences of drawing his weapon in 4 years on the force. Is that a normal number? Like, is it normal for a beat cop to pull his weapon once a month? It does feel like cops are awfully quick to pull their gun on people these days.

 

[TU_BLA]

What to make of this? Is this like how polls show everyone thinks congress is terrible, except for their own congressman?

https://www.monmouth.edu/polling-institute/documents/monmouthpoll_us_060220.pdf/

If you haven't seen Chris Rock's take on it, he makes a good analogy. Look it up if you haven't seen it.

I would say most people feel their local police forces, on a whole, do a good job and appreciate them. We're talking 1% of officers nationwide who pull a Derek Chauvin and kill a guy for no good reason. And 95% of the news about cops on TV is about the 1% doing something heinous. You get 5% of the stories about cops like Popsey Floyd who go into the community and most of the people in his sector know him by name.

 

[URedskin54]

Wait, so they lumped very and somewhat together? That's not a great statistic. I can theoretically say I'm somewhat satisfied in that my house hasn't been broken into, but not very satisfied because they killed my neighbor while he was mowing his lawn.

Seems like there should be a better breakdown.

Anyway... I just saw a statistic from a cop in Ft. Lauterdale who shoved a protester who wasn't doing anything and he's now in trouble. He's had 50+ occurrences of drawing his weapon in 4 years on the force. Is that a normal number? Like, is it normal for a beat cop to pull his weapon once a month?

There is a full breakdown in the link. Just seems odd for a situation where people are happy or at worst ambivalent about their local cops to result in what we've seen.

 

[TU_BLA]

Seems like there should be a better breakdown.

I'd be shocked if that was the only question asked. I'd like to see what some of the other questions were. I'd like to see a question like "Have you personally witnessed a police officer use excessive force that you were not made aware of by TV media, newsprint, or social media?" That would be a question which if the participant answered "Yes" to, would influence their feelings.

The problem with the way the media report on these polls is they only look at big picture, when the little snap shots really tell a much more accurate and true story.

 

[astonmartin708]

There is a full breakdown in the link. Just seems odd for a situation where people are happy or at worst ambivalent about their local cops to result in what we've seen.

There's also a stat that asked have you a relative ever felt like you've been harrassed by a cop and ~28% of people say yes. That's an awfully large number. Only 32% answered that had been in a situation where a cop kept them safe. So we have relatively comparable numbers of people being harassed and protected.

 

[URedskin54]

There's also a stat that asked have you a relative ever felt like you've been harrassed by a cop and ~28% of people say yes. That's an awfully large number. Only 32% answered that had been in a situation where a cop kept them safe. So we have relatively comparable numbers of people being harassed and protected.

Interesting thing about that is that people making > 100k were most likely to say they had been harassed. Though all income groups had similar numbers.

 

[astonmartin708]

Interesting thing about that is that people making > 100k were most likely to say they had been harassed. Though all income groups had similar numbers.

To be fair, I would probably say people are more likely to feel that they've been harassed due to the authoritative nature that cops often have to adopt, and people probably don't quite realize how much effect the police's presence has on their personal safety.... however; you'd hope those numbers were a little farther apart. I don't think 25% of the police force is bad, but it points to a larger number of "bad guys" than people like to make it out to be.

 

[TU_BLA]

There is a full breakdown in the link. Just seems odd for a situation where people are happy or at worst ambivalent about their local cops to result in what we've seen.

Thanks...I was quick on my post. So Trump supporters support him and don't really waver. No one thinks Congress is doing a good job. The approval of police depts. seems to directly correlate to the number of people who have not been harassed by police or directly treated unfairly by the police.

BIG TELLING NUMBER: 92% of the general population think that racism/discrimination is systemic and a problem. This should be enough to get Congress to act in a bipartisan way. Seriously, those are overwhelming numbers. It's also pretty overwhelming that roughly 3/4 of those polled and likely representative of the country's sentiment, feel that the protests nationwide are justified.

What does it tell you that 64% of the respondents are white. 69% of the total respondents do not have a college degree... (almost equal in the age, political affiliation if affiliated, and gender breakdowns). I'd be interested to know what part of the country the poll was given or is it a random sampling of emails across the country? I'd like to see them focus on individual Congressmen/women in their home states and how likely voters feel about their reps on the issue of addressing racial discrimination and prejudices.

 

[TU_BLA]

Interesting thing about that is that people making > 100k were most likely to say they had been harassed. Though all income groups had similar numbers.

And those were probably the soccer moms who got pulled over for speeding and talking on the phone in their behemoth SUVs.

 

[astonmartin708]

Thanks...I was quick on my post. So Trump supporters support him and don't really waver. No one thinks Congress is doing a good job. The approval of police depts. seems to directly correlate to the number of people who have not been harassed by police or directly treated unfairly by the police.

BIG TELLING NUMBER: 92% of the general population think that racism/discrimination is systemic and a problem. This should be enough to get Congress to act in a bipartisan way. Seriously, those are overwhelming numbers. It's also pretty overwhelming that roughly 3/4 of those polled and likely representative of the country's sentiment, feel that the protests nationwide are justified.

What does it tell you that 64% of the respondents are white. 69% of the total respondents do not have a college degree... (almost equal in the age, political affiliation if affiliated, and gender breakdowns). I'd be interested to know what part of the country the poll was given or is it a random sampling of emails across the country? I'd like to see them focus on individual Congressmen/women in their home states and how likely voters feel about their reps on the issue of addressing racial discrimination and prejudices.

I'm pretty sure we had ~90% approval of marijuana deregulation for decades and we're still seeing a snail's pace.

 

[URedskin54]

I think it would be interesting for them to poll what % of people who have ever had a cop draw a gun on them. I think the number would be absurdly high

 

[aTUfan]

I was profiled when I was a teenager.

 

[TU_BLA]

I'm pretty sure we had ~90% approval of marijuana deregulation for decades and we're still seeing a snail's pace.

Part of that is the long held stigma that marijuana is a gateway drug and addictive (it is not really either). Another factor in play are lobbyists for private prison corporations. They get paid a per prisoner $$$ amount. The prison corp. is going to get a minimum guaranteed amount whether the facility is empty or full. States don't want to fork over $ for nothing...so they keep them full. Marijuana, especially 2nd or 3rd offenses are easy targets.

 

[astonmartin708]

Some very interesting PEW statistics from a few years ago (2017) on the likelihood of a cop firing their weapons.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/01/...SWHJxgdrfT7JrFOqqWYtlniWArxqVRPOFfxM_QoKZnAS8

Males are more likely than females to have fired one (even when accounting for differences in number of people who are desk jockeys). Same goes for Caucasians. They're more likely to have shot their weapon on duty than their minority counterparts. Same goes for people who are veterans... they show a higher propensity for firing their weapons on duty.

Most interestingly.... police in areas with more moderate crime rates are LESS likely to have fired their weapon than are cops in areas with low crime rates.

There are also some stats on cops propensity for support of policing / firearm policy reform based on if they've fired their gun or not.