zlacker

>>colawa+(OP)
There is something even MORE important to be released and that is the police training manuals and materials which the NYPD have been hiding from FOIL requests for over a decade now.

To all New Yorkers: You are currently NOT ENTITLED to see the methods and techniques taught at the NYPD academy.

Requests are being denied on these grounds: "Deniable records include records or portions thereof that: (e) are compiled for law enforcement purposes and which if disclosed would: iv. reveal criminal investigative techniques or procedures, except routine techniques and procedures;"

>>school+Uh
Very likely they're using military psychological training. The rules of engagement they adopt against citizens don't seem that different from those used by soldiers in enemy territory. The complete lack of empathy towards human life reminds of the depersonalizing of the enemy that helps soldiers remain efficient and detached while they slaughter their "targets". For that matter, even more important than the manuals are the speeches by their instructors; I would like to see the videos and what indoctrination techniques they use during training. A cop can't turn himself into 9/10 of a psychopath just by reading books. And of course I would push for mandatory drugs and steroids abuse tests for all of them.

>>square+mp
This post is at odds with the fact that the military teaches stricter rules of engagement than police forces. There may be a culture problem in the force but this post is hysteria.

Police deal with violent criminals who have no regard for police life; in fact often they are explicitly against police. They're going to learn techniques appropriate for dealing with such people. Some of those techniques will be violent and resemble "military" tactics, but that's only because the military also deals with violent adversaries.

>>mtgp10+Mr
The problem is that these violent criminals are in the extreme minority; while certainly police need to be trained to handle them, they also need to be trained to handle the other 99% of the people they will encounter, who are not violent. But they aren't, so they revert to treating everyone as if they were a violent criminal fractions of a second away from attacking them. That's why we have the problem of police brutality in the first place.

>>kelnos+8L
The majority of victims of police brutality (at least deaths by police, of course there are other forms of police brutality but killings by police is what the current conversation is about) are violent criminals. Of the ~1000 people killed by police in 2019 538 were armed with a gun, 159 with a knife, 60 with a vehicle, and 63 with another weapon. 41 were unarmed, 23 had a toy weapon, and 49 is unknown. [0] The majority of people that cops interact with overall are not violent criminals, but the majority of people subject to the type of police brutality which is overwhelmingly controlling the conversation (i.e. killings by police) are violent criminals.

[0] https://www.statista.com/chart/5211/us-citizens-killed-by-po...

>>metrok+OU
Given US gun culture, I would not immediately classify "has a gun/knife" as "violent criminal". And even for people who could potentially be violent, how many of those police shootings involved a suspect that had actually drawn their weapon and/or was behaving aggressively with it? And if we're talking about self-reporting by cops, I don't think we should take their assessment of the situation at their word without some sort of corroboration.

Regardless, even if the police killed some 1000 armed people during a year, so what? 1000 is certainly a tiny sub-1% fraction of total interactions. If anything, you're only supporting my assertion that the vast majority of people the police have to deal with are non-violent and can be dealt with using non-leathal force, or little to no force at all.