Police and Mental Health Training

  I believe law enforcement agencies need to increase mental health training for police interventions. Approximately 10% of all police interactions involve a citizen with debilitating mental health issues; the mental illness issues not only increase the chances of police interacting with people, but also escalate the risks.  Persons with manic or psychotic symptoms may break laws or appear dangerous or threatening to others, and depressed persons may demonstrate an intention to self-harm, and police facing people having a mental health crisis may respond in ways that harm the disturbed person.  Currently, I’m only aware of three prevention/response models used in regards to handling mental health crises: the Crisis Intervention Team (CIT) Model, the co-responder model and mental-health based responses.

CIT training is not mandated, it is a purely volunteer oriented program. The training in this model consists of 40 hours of coursework wherein mental health conditions are recognized, in addition to suggestions on how to de-escalate tense situations. Role-playing is done to get a feel for the environments that the officers in question may be up against. The offers can also refer citizens for treatment if they feel that they need it. I personally feel like mental health training should be mandated. I think that if we had the training, we could avoid a lot of issues that turn into horrible situations. 

A fairly recent example would be the Sonya Massey case. Sonya’s mother called into the Sangamon County Sheriff’s department on July 6th, 2024. Apparently, Sonya was having a mental breakdown but the department was not informed of this fact. The situation was not handled correctly, the situation escalated and Sonya Massey was shot and killed by a deputy. Body cam footage was revealed, and while she did hold a pot of hot water that might have been interpreted as a “threatening” movement, the deputy did not need to threaten to throw water in her face. She apologized and ducked before he shot her 3 different times. The entire situation could have been avoided with more training regarding how to handle mental health issues. This was just one example but there are plenty more. For example, police were present here in Springfield when paramedics killed Earl Moore Jr., who was suffering from alcohol withdrawal and hallucinations. And a Chatham police officer shot Greg Small, Jr. after his mom called for help when he was suffering a mental health crisis and running around with a knife (threatening to self-harm, not threatening others).  Mental health training should be mandated, not optional.

The co-responder model allows the situation to be handled by a mental health professional on site with them collaborating with the police rather than the local police department handling everything alone. Yet, this method has raised some concerns by the police officers, as some of them think this is not as effective as the police officers handling the situation themselves. The question is, is it effective with the population? There needs to be input from the community and family members as well as tests on this method. Without looking at all the data, we do not have all the facts and do not know how effective it actually is. One question that needs to be asked is if by adding another player into the occasion, are we hurting the officers’ egos? Staffing has also been an issue as the availability of mental health professionals may be lacking. This is because of the hours needed for these calls and the burnout that the stressful encounters can cause. These issues especially may be inflated due to the federal funding freeze brought on by Elon Musk and the Trump administration. I could go on and on about that but I digress.

The mental health based responses model involves mental health professionals who are not sworn officers to assist with the calls coming from individuals who are experiencing mental health crises.  These “community service officers” (as they are called) are able to provide crisis intervention as well as social services to the population, while also diverting them from further involvement with the criminal justice system. However, while this model resulted in the most amount of crises dissolved on the scene, it also led to the most arrests. More information would be needed to see why the arrests increased during this time but as the crises were dissolved at the scene this method somewhat worked. Once again, data would need to be collected to determine how effective it actually is from those involved.

Mental health crises are no joke, and situations tend to escalate quickly when they are not handled properly. I know from experience that even minor bouts of anxiety are seen by some officers as an unnecessary inconvenience. A few years ago I was in a car accident and I got hit by a pickup truck. The truck hit my little Toyota so hard that it turned around in the complete opposite direction on the side of the road. I was having a panic attack, and having some trouble breathing. The officer at the scene told me that my emotions were unneeded and that I had to get over them quickly so that I could give a statement. My only thought process was: if that was the response to me, what are they saying to others with more serious bouts of mental issues? Therefore, I will say once again that mandatory mental health training needs to be implemented and that the amount of training needs to be enough to see some tangible results.

Work Cited

ICJIA | Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority. (n.d.). https://icjia.illinois.gov/researchhub/articles/responding-to-individuals-experiencing-mental-health-crises-police-involved-program

I am also often wondering about this issue. Police departments typically cost about 20% to 30% of a city operating budget (when benefits and retirement pensions for retired police are added to current costs of maintaining a force).  I believe the national average is 2.4 sworn officers for every 1,000 residents.  What intrigues me are studies showing that police may only spend less than 5% of their time thwarting property crime or violent crime or catching perpetrators of those crimes, and mostly police are doing other things.  Could we perhaps divide the police force into two groups: one group would spend 20% to 50% of their time stopping crime and catching criminals, and another group would do the mental health interventions and many of the other things that police are doing?  What would happen to crime and public safety if we had 1.4 sworn officers for every 1,000 residents, but had 1 community services officer for every 1,000 residents, and all these community service officers were trained in mental health, conflict resolution, emergency medicine, and legal issues (like police)? Would that make us safer?  

As state and federal governments aren't adequately serving persons with mental illness, it seems to me that cities and counties need to step up, and perhaps city and county budgets should allocate about 4% or 5% of their revenue toward hiring persons who can deal with people in mental health crises, or caseworkers who can help people who are prone to the complications that come with serious mental illness. This might require local governments to trim 1 or 2 percentage points of their operating budgets from infrastructure, law enforcement, fire departments, libraries, and parks, so there would be some decrease in spending for those vital local government services, but would the resulting improvements in mental health care and interventions with people in mental health crises provide a benefit that would offset the loss of force size in fire and police departments or the decrease in money allocated for libraries or infrastructure?  I suspect that this would be a wise use of local public investment, but without good research and some good examples, I'm left guessing this, rather than able to claim that I know with certainty that it is true.

I have heard that crisis intervention teams and alternatives to traditional police responses have been effective in places like Portland, Maine, and Eugene, Oregon; but I'm not sure about Nashville, Tennessee; and there are controversies about whether social workers can participate in coercive enforcement of the law. 

Student Editorial in favor of federal program providing de-escalation training for local law enforcement

  At some point in our lives, most of us will need assistance from law enforcement. Unfortunately, there is a general feeling in most of society that officers are not doing their jobs appropriately, and instead of having faith that police will be helpful, people fear police will re-victimize them. To address the dismay much of the public feels towards law enforcement, we must understand where it comes from. Implicit biases that result in unlawful traffic stops and arrests, excessive use of force, and an inability to understand how to properly handle those with mental health crises are just a few areas that have led to the disdain that many individuals feel towards police officers. These incidents are a direct reflection of ineffective training for law enforcement in de-escalation techniques and—seeing as officers are trained in this area the least—it is no wonder that some officers are incapable of doing their jobs judiciously.

Officers are mandated to take training in defensive tactics, firearm handling, and de-escalation techniques. However, there is a major imbalance on length of time in these categories. While the median for defensive tactics training officers receive is 49 hours and 58 hours of firearms training, recruits only receive a median of 8 hours of de-escalation training. The emphasis on defensive tactics and firearms training is undoubtedly crucial, but it may contribute to the extreme reaction from some officers that results in excessive force or civilian deaths. Extensive de-escalation training protects not only the public but the law enforcement agency.  It would add additional protections to police officers to be able to conduct themselves in a manner that does not immediately have to result in violence or excessive force, saving the public from tragic fatalities and allowing law enforcement to avoid lawsuits that stem from police mistreatment of civilians. 

Though de-escalation training is not a new concept, we must bring attention to deficiency in that aspect of police officer trainings. De-escalation tactics should be the forefront of police training to establish the need of understanding and empathy from officers when dealing with civilians. If the public feels that they are being treated as human beings by these people who hold so much power rather than criminals who do not deserve any compassion, we can begin to rebuild our trust in law enforcement and the justice system. Not only would an increase in these trainings benefit the public, but police officers may be able to be seen in a much more positive light.

We must demand a federally funded and mandated de-escalation training program for all officers that allows for continued training every year. We need to rebuild the public’s ease of mind and our trust in law enforcement, creating a harmonious relationship and bringing back the safety we need to feel within law enforcement. Without more emphasis on de-escalation training, society can continue to look forward to continued dread when it comes to our need for police officers in any situation.  

Resources

https://www.rstreet.org/research/exploring-de-escalation-training-programs-impact-and-resourcing/

https://peacefulleadersacademy.com/blog/police-de-escalation-statistics/#:~:text=A%20survey%20of%20over%20280,49%20hours%20of%20defensive%20tactics.

https://peacefulleadersacademy.com/blog/positive-impacts-of-police-de-escalation-training/

https://cops.usdoj.gov/de-escalation_training_act#:~:text=The%20Law%20Enforcement%20De%2Descalation,%3B%20(ii)%20safely%20responding%20to

The emphasis on defensive tactics is usually justified as a job safety issue. People working in law enforcement don’t want to be killed on the job.  But, really, how many police are killed at work (and not killed at work in traffic fatalities)? Over the past ten years, law enforcement deaths reported by the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund have ranged from 118 in 2023 to 660 in 2021.  This confounds “fatal injuries” with homicides, as according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the rate for homicides is much lower (ranged from 26 in 2024 to 64 in 2021).  As I tell my students, about 50 law enforcement are killed (murdered) during their work each year, but police kill about 1,100 each year.  Now, are police violently attacked?  Sure, all the time.  In the two-year period 2021-2022 there were 6,680 non-fatal injuries inflicted upon police by persons who assaulted them that were significant enough that the law enforcement person had to take at least one day off from work. I presume these were law enforcement personnel on duty, and we’re not including off-duty law enforcement people who get beat up in taverns or domestic disputes. 

I had a relative, recently returned from two tours of duty in Vietnam, who didn’t like the way a couple police were bullying someone in a bar, and got into a fight with them, which he won.  I believe he spent some months on the San Francisco Bay (in San Quentin) as a result. I don’t think that sort of thing should be counted as an assault on officers in their line of work, since bullying guys in bars while off duty isn’t really what law enforcement officers are paid to do.

What we need is for some social workers and police officers to put together a standard two-day eight-hour training system with a follow-up 2-hour session held months after the initial two-day dose where police learn de-escalation and conflict resolution techniques. Then, we need to study interactions with the public that people who’ve had the training experience in the year(s) following the training, and see whether the training has improved the experiences on the job for those officers, both in terms of their self-reported experiences and by examining their record of experiences in high-conflict situations.  It would be a wonderful intervention and study, and if we could get dozens of different trainings tested all at about the same time and could determine that some of these were especially effective, then we could implement this federal program of paying for them, as you have suggested.  What I fear is that we might just spend money on training that has little influence on police behavior.  Currently, we already spend all those hours on defense training and firearms training, and I’m pretty sure that much of that training has never been studied to see whether it makes law enforcement personnel any safer.  

Recent surveys concerning police include 

the CATO Institute’s work from Emily Ekins “Policing in America: Understanding Public Attitudes Toward the Police”

According to the study presented by Ekins, only 12% of Hispanics, 13% of European Americans, and 19% of African Americans expressed “unfavorable” views toward police. While those are modest percentages, they aren’t really very small, and that represents a lot of people. Only 54% of African Americans and 57% of Hispanic Americans were “definitely” willing to report crimes to the police (over 40% were not). Compare that to 78% of European American who would report a crime. Americans with African heritage have been suspicious of police for a long time. Ekins reports that in 1970 only 43% of Black Americans had a favorable view of police, and in 2015 that number was about the same (slightly lower) at 40%.  This was a CATO Institute study, so it’s no surprise that there are obvious mathematical errors in the reported survey results, but I think the general trend that wealthier people have more positive attitudes about police is confirmed, even for Blacks, where those earning over $60,000 per year had 48% with favorable views of police, whereas only 41% of those earning less than $30,000 per year had favorable views (at all income levels, Black Americans had higher than 40% favorability rates for the police, so I don’t understand how Ekins reports that only 40% of African Americans have favorable views of the police). 

The CATO study showed that 84% of Americans oppose civil asset forfeiture (where the police can take your property and keep it if they suspect you might have used it in a crime, even if you haven’t been convicted of a crime); and 77% would prohibit police from using profanity with citizens; 68% wanted police to have more training on how to deal with confrontations; 79% wanted agencies outside the police force to investigate allegations of police wrongdoing; and 89% wanted police to wear body cameras. 

The survey showed that 39% of African Americans reported knowing someone who had been physically mistreated by police, and that figure was much higher than for European Americans (18%) and Hispanics (27%).  

Another study discussed by the Council on Criminal Justice in 2020 found that 91% of Black American adults believe that police treat black people less fairly than white people. Most Americans want to hold police more accountable, and want a federal database to track law enforcement personnel accused of misconduct. Most people also want police to live in the communities where they work. About nine out of ten Democratic Party voters wanted major changes in policing, whereas only about 14% of Republican voters wanted such changes. 

A Gallup Poll asking how much confidence people have in the police shows Americans have never had particularly strong confidence: the highest ever recorded between 1993 and 2024 was about 64% (in 2004), and the lowest ever measured was about 44% (in 2023).  The rate of confidence in 2024 was 51%, which is historically low, about the same as it was in 1993, 2014, and 2021, and higher than only three of the lowest confidence years (which were 2020, 2022, and 2023). 

Low confidence in the police relates to a low level of confidence Americans feel for all their major public institutions. Americans have the most confidence in small business (68% with “a great deal” or “quite a lot” of confidence) and the military (61% with confidence). The police came in third with about 51% having a great deal or quite a lot of confidence in them.  Higher education and the medical system are the fourth place institutions with only 36% of Americans having much confidence in those, and from there, it goes down. Americans have the least confidence in big business (16%), television news (12%), and Congress (9%). The criminal justice system, at 21%, is an institution Americans don’t trust much either.

A Pew Trust poll (Pew is among the best sources for polling and surveys) showed that in December of 2018 about 30% of Americans had “a great deal of confidence” in police to “act in the best interests of the public”, but by December of 2021 that had fallen to 20% who had such Pollyannaish opinions.

Student wants Mental Health Crisis Training for First Responders

  I believe that first responders should undergo mental health crisis training. I believe this because there are so many circumstances in which this training could be crucial. Police officers in particular are faced with situations such as potential suicide attempts and/or people who could be having mental health episodes. They need someone who is going to be understanding and well trained on how to handle such situations. If first responders are not well-educated on how to handle persons who are experiencing suicidal or psychotic episodes, the resulting interactions could be traumatic for all parties involved. 

Unfortunately, people struggle with mental health on a daily basis. Sometimes, even those with proper training cannot prevent a suicide attempt. So, those who are going to be responding first should definitely have adequate training to mitigate the chances of violence or suicide from being higher in an encounter with a distraught or disoriented person in crisis. It is almost impossible for there not to be trauma and guilt associated with every suicide committed. If every first responder is well educated on how to respond well, they can at least have the comfort of knowing that they did everything in their power to prevent it. 

It would be a protection for everyone involved, and since it is a training that has already been established, it would not be hard to implement it in the police and first responder’s training. I also think that police officers and first responders need to be frequently checked up on especially after traumatic events happen to make sure they are mentally stable. They do not have to maintain a tough exterior. Time taken off and therapy should be a given after experiencing severe situations, especially one as severe as a successful suicide. 

Most police departments, sheriff departments, and fire departments in Illinois have serious training requirements, and have all their staff engage in on-going training to keep up their skills and build their expertise. Suggesting that professionals in these occupations have a certain number of hours of theory and simulation practice to enhance their ability in handling people who are suicidal or suffering a mental health crisis makes sense. That training would not be too difficult to implement, in the sense that this sort of training could be incorporated into existing training programs.  After the two deaths in 2022 where emergency medical technicians essentially killed persons they were supposed to help (Leonardo Guerrero killed in Chicago on August 31st and Earl Moore Jr. killed in Springfield on December 18th) I looked into the training that EMS workers must have, and I read the minutes and agendas of the advisory board that advises the Department of Public Health on certification of EMS staff and ambulance services in Illinois (there is an administrative code for emergency services and it dictates the level and scope of training for EMT and EMS system professionals). I had my students join me in sending letters to the members of the Emergency Medical Services Advisory Council urging them to mandate training that would help EMS workers avoid the sort of burn-out and demoralization where they would become abusive against people in mental health crisis or intoxicated people.  I spoke with people who worked as first responders, including Kainan Rinaberger (president of Springfield Firefighter Local 37) about the issue. 

Leo Guerrero and Earl Moore Jr. both had problems with mental illness and substance addiction. Police and EMT workers who encountered them did not treat them as they should have done. I can think of other examples. Greg Small, Jr. (of Chatham, Illinois) was suffering a mental break-down related to schizophrenia, and he had a knife in his hand, so his mom called for help, but officer Adam Hahn saw that Greg had a knife and would not drop the knife when ordered to do so, so when Greg approached Hahn, Hahn shot him several times. The Sangamon County State's Attorney Dan Wright charged Greg Small, Jr. with aggravated assault for approaching Officer Hahn with a knife in his hand, but Greg was found not guilty by reason of insanity. The fact that Officer Hahn hadn't received specialized training in dealing with a person in a psychotic crisis holding a weapon led to Greg Small suffering four gunshot wounds and Officer Hahn becoming a public example of incompetence. Dan Wright said he had to bring charges so that the courts could order Greg to get mental health treatment he needs.  

Generally, what I gather is that first responders are, as you suggest, traumatized through their work.  I’m told firefighters tend to encounter two or three dead persons each month, and I suppose the EMT workers and police would see a similar number.  Any encounter with a victim of an accidental death, a suicide, or homicide, or even just a natural death can be traumatic, but imagine encountering such situations on nearly a weekly basis!  And a significant number (although a small minority of all cases) of persons who need emergency medical or police protection will be hostile, abusive, or even violent against their rescuers and helpers. It can wear down people.  In Springfield, the police and firefighters are well-trained, and I think that some of them would accept referrals to professional counseling as a way to help them cope with the stresses of their jobs. As for the EMT staff in the private ambulance services, that is often a transitional job for young people who aren’t old enough to become firefighters or police, and the pay is very low, the training requires dedication, and the job can be dangerous and stressful.  

It seems to me that law enforcement professionals facing the anti-police bias widespread in the community (and sometimes well-founded on experiences with unprofessional or brutal/corrupt police) and dealing with regular exposure to traumatic situations and people engaged in anti-social or threatening behaviors could easily turn some fraction of the workforce into an us-versus-them mentality where suspicion and contempt would inform their interactions with the public.  Not only do police, firefighters, and EMT professionals need help dealing with the traumas and stresses of their job, they need idealistic rituals or processes to help them commit themselves to their missions. They need help feeling the support that comes from actually committing to service to others, and respect for human rights. 

Without help and training, first responders may easily dehumanize difficult patients and members of the public (e.g., persons freaking out and having a suicidal attempt, or just generally disrupting the community as they suffer from severe intoxication or a florid psychotic episode). What do we do with people who wander around in a busy area during a community event screaming and shouting threats and obscenities and generally making a nuisance of themselves as they act in a disorganized fashion?  The impulse to treat such people harshly, locking them up and removing them from the community, may appeal, but harsh treatment can exacerbate the problem. You can see how mental health professionals help the angry and violent man (Todd) threatening the doctor in the documentary "Bedlam" (you'll watch it later this semester). 

Student is disturbed by police brutality

 Police Brutality has been on my mind for quite a long time. Minority groups are being targeted the most when it comes to these issues, and yet America finds it as an issue within’ the group and not the police. After watching Frontline: Policing the Police 2020, 

I can’t stop thinking about how this really has been going on for a lifetime and not just as a 2020 thing. I knew discrimination existed towards the minority groups because it’s been going on everyday and even if it’s not being seen, it’s happening somewhere, whether it’s in America or another country, it’s happening. It got a lot more serious this year because of George Floyd, but no matter what, there is still no justice. 

Can we go back in time for a minute? I know this doesn’t have anything to do with police, but if we look at the Emmitt Till case, the two men who beat him, they didn’t get sentenced to life; they didn’t get charged; and yet later, we find out that the woman died? That’s injustice right there. [Carolyn Bryant Donham, who made a false accusation against Emmitt Till, did not die (she could still be alive, for all I know)]

If we look at Rodney King, he got beat by police officers and why? If we look at Oscar Grant, where is his justice? We have so many people in this world who deal with police brutality, and I honestly could name them, but it’ll take up my whole paper. I have a friend who died because of Police Brutality. His story didn’t make it worldwide, but my city was truly hurt when this occurred, living in Peoria, we would never think such a thing would happen and it did. 

I honestly didn’t know Newark, New Jersey was dealing with such a tremendous Police Brutality, and when something was finally going to be done to stop it, Donald Trump said “no.” He really said that Police Officers should not be careful when putting “criminals” in the car and then the people dressed in military clothes in the background clapping proudly. That is definitely not okay and if they think it’s okay, it’s because they’ll never know how it feels to be a minority in those types of situations. I know this is supposed to be Police Brutality, but I’m just expressing how I feel overall about these types of situations. 

I don’t think this will ever end just because our country is being led by a President who doesn’t really care about anyone, except for those that are on his level. The election is giving me hope that Joe Biden hopefully does find a way to stop these Police Brutalities, but if Trump wins again, there most likely won’t be any changes and it will end up getting worse. 

I have had conversations with friends and students in law enforcement, and family members who have been in law enforcement, and with criminologists who are friends.  I think that we are devoting a lot of resources to a system of justice and police and corrections that should be protecting us and making us safe, but it is not really doing this effectively or efficiently.  I am not sure that reforms will be able to solve the problem. I think my cousin George Ives addressed this well over a hundred years ago when he pointed to the fact that too few people really want to understand why crime occurs and then create systems to prevent crime.  Most people are happier to create and sustain a system devoted to finding persons who commit crime and then punishing them. This is a devastating decision, because we could save far more money and lives by putting more resources into preventing crime, rather than putting so much into the system we have now.  And yet, I do not know how we will make the transition. 

I agree with your perception that there is a widespread and deep problem of police and prosecutors being unfair. It is worth acknowledging that there are many good people in law enforcement who are well-intentioned and doing the best they can, but making that observation does not really help move us toward a solution to the problem at hand; that our overall policing and prosecution and corrections system is failing us. 

It is probably also just hair-splitting to point out that many abuses by police that are attributed to racism are probably more centrally caused by brutality and a general disregard for the rights of citizens in the police officers.  That is, many police may be just as likely, or perhaps even more likely, to kill white Americans than African-Americans. This is argued by some who say that there are far more police interactions with African-Americans, largely because police mainly interact with poor persons, and African-Americans have a higher poverty rate (18.8% compared to 9.1% for white Americans). I think this argument as been rebutted by Ulrich Schimmack and Rickard Carlsson’s analysis of fatal use of force against non-suicidal young men who are not mentally ill (lots of fatal use of force by police against white Americans involves police killing older guys who are suicidal or suffering from serious mental illness). They have confirmed that police officers are more likely to shoot younger Black men who are non-suicidal and not suffering from a mental illness. And yet, there are some serious debates about how much we can attribute police use of force to racism and how much we can attribute to the sort of bad policing and police brutality that we could all be subject to, regardless of our race. I know there are many studies where criminal attributes and crime attributes have been controlled, and these show that judges and juries and prosecutors all give out harsher sentences to Black Americans compared to white Americans. It is difficult to argue against those facts.  But, if we are facing two serious problems: widespread bad policing and widespread prejudices in law enforcement workers and prosecutors, then do we really need to argue much about which is worse or which problem needs to be addressed first?  Both problems are serious, and both need to be addressed immediately.

For psychological reasons, I do not think Donald Trump would have been interested in transforming our law-enforcement system.  His father instilled so much anger in him, that the retribution and punishment model of approaching the world seems highly central to his core values. Biden may be different, but I wonder at this ability, or the ability of his Vice President, to bring together an alliance of criminologists, law enforcement professionals, mayors, and leadership in the Department of Justice to give us the revolution in our approach to crime that could significantly improve the situation.  I fear we are stuck with incremental reforms that are unlikely to make substantial changes.  

A student is fed up with discrimination

Throughout the last few weeks, in most of classes, we have been talking about the unfair treatment of African Americans in America today. In particular, the classes have been discussing the over incarceration rate of African Americans in prisons compared to White Americans along with police brutality issues. This is a very significant issue in todays society, and is one that makes me very upset because the inhumane treatment of Americans still happening in 2020 is just not right. Hearing the facts about how African Americans were treated in the 1950’s time period, and surrounding time periods, and how similar they are being treated today in some areas is just dumbfounding and infuriating to me. 

I feel as though there needs to be more restrictions and a stronger watch on certain states where authorities are still blatantly discriminating against people of color. There have been states in the past few years, and possibly still this year, that have laws and actions in place to prevent people from voting at polls during election times and going into certain parts of town because of police brutality. There are states and cities all over the country that have areas where police brutality is a major problem, and these places are allowed to get away with this brutality without any consequences. There are areas where police get away with using excessive force on certain people, simply because those people have Black/dark skin. The police claim that Black people who even ask why they are being pulled over are resisting and therefore using unnecessary force and get away with. Police also harass and pull over Black people more than white people simply under the excuse that the Black person was “suspicious.” Many cops also have a tendency to pull a gun more often and sooner when dealing with Black people, regardless if they are kids or adults, than they do or would with white kids and adults. This is not right that in the county that takes pride in its citizens having freedom, a large percentage of its population lives in constant fear of those who are supposed to, and swear to, defend and protect all Americas from harm and danger. 

I believe that the federal government should step in and put a stop to this brutality and racism, as it is infringing on these people’s lives that are being affected by it. Innocent people are still dying because of their skin color, or at least experience violence in some form or another, and this is a huge compromise to their safety. If state’s government won’t do anything to stop the racist actions still happening, or worse are even the reason for it, then I think the federal government needs to implement policies and actions that will stop these practices from being allowed. I also think that society as a whole needs to grow up and move on from the old ways of thinking, and stand up for the injustices that are taking place and realize that all lives matter. No one should die or be hurt because of their skin color, and even more is the fact that in the land of the free it should not be tolerated and allowed to still continue happening. I also do not feel that white people should be allowed to get away with claiming self-defense when they have murdered an innocent Black person, including the cops who shoot and kill unharmed people because they were black. The laws and biases that allow for a grown white person to claim he shot and killed a black child under self-defense because the white person felt the kid was “dangerous,” even though he was unharmed and minding his own business, and got off with this claim even after a police dispatcher told him he needs to leave the kid alone is just not right. 

For me, knowing that kids are not getting a good education, if any at all, because of their skin color, and are instead being thrown out on the streets or straight into jail is just not humane. America is still abandoning its own kids because of a centuries old thought that skin color makes someone a monster and not a human. The prison systems are overflowing with inmates, most of which are Black Americans, as a result of the system that is currently set up to help White American kids and adults succeed but make Black American kids and adults fail. The system from the bottom is still racist in way to many areas of the country, and is designed to make Backs fail and therefore push them towards a life of crime and prison. In 2020 America still suffers from the same problems that it had 100 years ago, even after all the progress that has been made and all the fighting for the rights of blacks over the last 50+ years. It is time that it stops, and I truly hope that enough people will it see it this way and stand up for what is right; even if it is only little by little.

Comment

Around the time you wrote this, we had to read portions of the Justice Department’s report on the police and courts of Ferguson, Missouri. That report, and your essay, report on the very real problem we have. There are many persons in law enforcement and the courts who are unbiased, who are idealistic, and who work against prejudices and racism. But, as they are not causing problems, we give less attention to those, and focus instead on the transgressions that need correcting.  That report on Ferguson should inspire anyone who reads it to take action to improve community relations with police forces.  More people ought to read this report.  Here are excerpts—sentences and notes I took as I read it:

Ferguson’s law enforcement practices are shaped by the City’s focus on revenue rather than by public safety needs.

The result is a pattern of stops without reasonable suspicion and arrests without probable cause in violation of the Fourth Amendment; infringement on free expression, as well as retaliation for protected expression, in violation of the First Amendment; and excessive force in violation of the Fourth Amendment.

City and court officials have adhered to these court practices despite acknowledging their needlessly harmful consequences.

This evidence of bias and stereotyping, together with evidence that Ferguson has long recognized but failed to correct the consistent racial disparities caused by its police and court practices, demonstrates that the discriminatory effects of Ferguson’s conduct are driven at least in part by discriminatory intent in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. 

Restoring trust in law enforcement will require recognition of the harms caused by Ferguson’s law enforcement practices, and diligent, committed collaboration with the entire Ferguson community.

City and police leadership pressure officers to write citations, independent of any public safety need, and rely on citation productivity to fund the City budget.

There is no indication that anyone considered whether community policing and public safety would be better served by devoting five overtime officers to neighborhood policing instead of a “revenue pipeline” of highway traffic enforcement. 

Ignoring the central fact that they had handcuffed a man and put him in a police car despite having no reason to believe he had done anything wrong, a sergeant vigorously defended FPD’s actions, characterizing the detention as “minimal” and pointing out that the car was air conditioned.

When the man then extended his identification toward the officers, at their request, the officers interpreted his hand motion as an attempted assault and took him to the ground.

FPD’s suppression of speech reflects a police culture that relies on the exercise of police power—however unlawful—to stifle unwelcome criticism.

FPD officers seem to regard ECWs as an all-purpose tool bearing no risk. But an ECW—an electroshock weapon that disrupts a person’s muscle control, causing involuntary contractions—can indeed be harmful.

The punitive use of force by officers is unconstitutional and, in many cases, criminal. 

The video makes clear, however, that the man never tried to stand—he only writhed in pain on the ground.

Finally, FPD does not perform any comprehensive review of force incidents sufficient to detect patterns of misconduct by a particular officer or unit, or patterns regarding a particular type of force.

Alongside its divisive law enforcement practices and lack of meaningful response to community concerns about police conduct, FPD has made little effort in recent years to employ community policing or other community engagement strategies.

When implemented fully, community policing creates opportunities for officers and community members to have frequent, positive interactions with each other, and requires officers to partner with communities to solve particular public safety problems that, together, they have decided to address. 

Another officer told us that officers cannot “get out of the car and play basketball with the kids,” because “we’ve removed all the basketball hoops—there’s an ordinance against it.”

Student advocates for legalization of marijuana

Dear State Representative Norine Hammond, 

      rephammond@macomb.com

My name is [I removed the student's name] and I have lived in your district all my life. I was raised in Beardstown, Illinois but moved to Bath, Illinois three years ago. I have never written to you before, but I have come to know your politics through, [name redacted], a close family friend.  On March 1, 2018 the Illinois Senate passed the State Bill 2275, also called the Marijuana Legalization Referendum Act, with a vote of 37-13. The measure now heads to the House of Representatives for consideration. The Marijuana Legalization Referendum Act is a simple question on the next voting ballot, asking voters if they support legalizing recreational marijuana for people 21 and over. I would like to discuss some of the pros of legalizing recreational marijuana with you.

The first argument for legalizing recreational marijuana is the possible revenue boost. State and local governments are currently struggling with rising costs and decreased revenue; many are looking for creative ways to help increase income to pay for everything from new parks, road repairs, to funding schools. It is believed that marijuana legalization could be the windfall in the form of new taxes that could be applied to its distribution and sale. For example, in Colorado, analysts suggest that taxing the drug could raise between $5 million and $22 million annually. The job industry is also growing as marijuana is becoming more of an above ground type of industry with respected companies stating to investigate possibilities for growth. This legalization can generate quite a bit of income for marijuana consulting companies whether they are helping with growing or producing a butane free wax which has become popular recently. The possibilities are endless for economic growth.

I also want to discuss the possibility of a more effective criminal justice and law enforcement system. The legalization advocates claim this move will provide police officers more money and time to go after criminals committing other crimes, such as violent cases. Legalization advocates also argue that legalizing recreational marijuana could create wiggle room in the criminal justice system, that would then allow judges and prosecutors to focus more on the violent crimes, thus freeing space in our overly crowed prison systems. There was a study that estimated that nationwide legalization would save the government $8.7 billion annually. 

Spending less money supporting organized crime is also a good argument in favor of legalization. Legalizing recreational marijuana cuts off an important revenue steam for a large amount of illegal drug trade. Legalization advocates claim that by making the substance less profitable for the criminals, it will provide a decrease in the violence associated with the trade. The result could save lives while taking pressure off law enforcers. 

The last point I am going to discuss is the safety controls legalizing recreational marijuana could provide. When a person is buying marijuana off the streets, there is no way for them to know what or if dangerous substances are cut into the drug. Although current legalization efforts do not address safety issues, they do create a framework for safety control systems, which would work to eliminate some of the risks from smoking a substance potentially laced with toxic ingredients and would reduce the risks coming from smoking illegal marijuana. 

In conclusion, I am asking for your support of State Bill 2275. I feel this would be a positive change for the State of Illinois. Thank you for your consideration and for all you do for the betterment of Illinois.

Respectfully Submitted,

[Student in SWK-355 Social Welfare Policy and Services Course]

Student is distressed by the problems with law enforcement and prisons

Many of the topics we are going over now are extremely interesting. There is a strong realization that to be able to help, or advocate, for someone it is important to understand how the system functions. While I feel that there is still much of the information I haven’t quite yet grasped, I feel confident enough that I could find the information if I needed to. People in the social work program, I feel, will greatly benefit from this class. I know that it is a subject that can be difficult to grasp, but I think everyone is benefiting from this class (even if they make it sound like they aren’t). 

Reading about the prison system was a real eye opener. I know that with every business, government or non-government, you will see corruption. The depths of corruption are another matter. While reading the undercover story about the prison you begin to realize that if it is happening there, then chances are it is happening everywhere. Everyone, prisoner or not, should have basic rights. I know that prison isn’t a place that should be fun but programing benefits not only the prisoner but the entire staff at the prisons. The prisons, I feel, are just making more work for themselves when they deny prisoners an outlet. All prisons should have programing to let them expel some bottled up energy. Private prisons should not be making an obscene amount of money either. It seems that goes against every ethical standard that exists.

The problem with excessive police force is something that I think everyone knows about but is still too blind to see. Ferguson is a prime example. The system is flawed. I also still fail to see the logic behind their actions. I know that they were giving excessive citations to raise more money for the city. When you look at the total cost of housing (in jail) those who cannot make bail or pay their fines, and compare that to the potential income from their fines, the city isn’t coming out ahead are they? I feel like people who make the “rules” are not seeing the big picture; they see only potential dollar signs.

I do feel like I have a grasp on the problems that exist. I can see where the money is coming from for the array of programs offered by local, state, and federal programs. The waters are still a little murky on how the government functions. I can look at it on paper and still not fully understand it. I think that my generation, and especially the ones after me, find it overwhelming to think that they could change any of these laws or policies. I am especially guilty of that. This class has definitely expanded my knowledge on the subject of social welfare.

At the state level I am certain that you can participate in changing laws. Some of the bills in the Illinois State House this semester that our professional organization (NASW) is supporting are likely to pass, but if the students will let their State Representatives and State Senators know about those bills, and educate them about how those bills are beneficial, then I think that could make a significant difference.  

The Justice Department’s report on how the police department was operating in Ferguson, Missouri will horrify any reader who cares about justice and human rights. I do wish more people would look at that report or any of the excellent summaries of it. Our society suffers from a continuing reliance on harsh penalties and prison sentences, and our prisons and jails are not working to rehabilitate prisoners.  The monstrous activities described in the historical survey by George Ives seem to to reflect a set of continuing problems: one of these is the human nature tendency that makes people embrace a sadistic and righteous attitude toward punishment, sometimes directed at children, but nearly always directed at persons accused of (or found guilty of) crimes. The other problem is that  people imagine a horrible “criminal” in which the deviance and criminality of a person become their defining features (no doubt some people we imprison deserve this stereotypical generalization, but it must surely be a small minority of the 2.2 million people we keep locked up). It’s a form of dehumanization we use to justify our penal system’s orientation toward punishment rather than rehabilitation. It seems to me similar to the dehumanization and sadistic glee some Americans have when they speak of “being tough on welfare cheats” and “immigrants” when in fact they mean (but would not say aloud or admit to themselves) that what they really detest are the poor and the sick and the people who are made “different” by their disabilities or limitations. There is a fear of failure in the souls of many people, and so the condemned prisoners and the “failures” in life (paupers) are a psychological threat to such persons, and I do believe a kind of terror (or lack of love, at least) animates their animosity.  I’m not a member of any Christian congregation, but I’ve read the Bible, and it is clear to me that the moral teachings of Christianity require, demand, and insist upon charitable behavior towards prisoners.  

I will quote my cousin in closing:

Built on the model of the deity of Darkness, we find the villain of the novels and plays, in which either the authors have not followed human nature’s strange and many-motived workings, or, as is much more probable, they have exaggerated for effect and contrast. Thus the conventional villain is of course utterly bad, loves sin for sweet sin’s sake with fine disinterestedness, and is consigned to utter damnation, to the intense and very natural satisfaction of the indignant audience, and the great credit of the play or story.

Next to what we may call the petty devil of the melodrama stands out the “Criminal” of popular imagination, who is largely the creation of people who generalised without knowledge and imagined without thought; and he is almost as much a scarecrow of the fancy as was that other most unpleasant individual the “Economic Man.” This quite imaginary sort of person, one who should or would go about always contriving crimes and villanies, if he were not “deterred” therefrom by the terrific penalties that were attached to them, all the grim working of which was to be kept before him by their infliction on detected people. And every crimson tragedy the Law set forth, and every consignment of its captives, though to a doom far worse than death itself, was always justified upon its day of doing, by one well-worn, all-extenuating plea: that though such sights were sad yet they were salutary, because “the criminal” was then looking on, and he would slink away and be deterred.

The case of Officer Liang and Akai Gurley

In class, we recently had a discussion over the relationship between African Americans and police officers within the United States. Many of my classmates had notions regarding this topic that I agree with, while some did not. Because of this, my second reaction paper will cover the relationship between African Americans and police officers in the United States, as well as ideas conceived by classmates on how to repair this relationship to ensure the well-being of both African Americans and police officers.

The discussion stemmed from a classmate bringing awareness to the case of Peter Liang, an Asian American cop accused of shooting and killing an unarmed African American man. According to journalist Fuchs, November 20^th of 2014, officer Peter Liang entered a stairwell with his partner, Rafael Ramos, for a “vertical patrol” ( Fuchs, 2016).  During this patrol, Liang heard a noise that frightened him, fired his gun, the bullet ricocheted off a wall, and struck an unarmed Akai Gurley.  Though, Akai Gurley was shot by the bullet, he was able to knock on a resident’s door and tell the resident to call 911.  The 911 dispatcher detailed how to give CPR,  however, neither police officer performed CPR on Gurley. Instead they are quoted to have  argued over calling for help while Gurley “lay dying” (2016).

Gurley, in fact, died as a result of his injuries. As a result, in February of 2016, Liang  was convicted of second-degree manslaughter, assault, and reckless endangerment, criminally negligent homicide, and a count of official misconduct (2016). The one count of official misconduct stemmed from Liang not performing CPR on Gurley. In response to this count, Liang stated that he felt unqualified to perform CPR, as he did not practice CPR at the Police Academy, and his instructors gave those training answers to the exams (2016). In response to Liang’s conviction, the Asian American community was divided by those that supported the conviction and those that did not.

Those in support of the conviction argue that “police violence” which stems from systemic racism will continue not combatted (Guillermo, 2015). However, some groups argue that the murder of an unarmed African American man by an Asian American and the conviction of the Asian American police officer was used as a scapegoat. These groups contend that if the police officer was a European American then he would not have been convicted, as many have been before.

It is from this idea that some of the Asian American groups have, that if Peter Liang had been a white police officer he would not have been convicted that the class discussion stemmed. Because I cannot speak for any member of the Asian American community, it can be inferred that many groups in support of Liang, believe that because some European American cops or European Americans, in general, are not punished has harshly as people of color or cops that are of color when convicting the same or similar crimes, there is an importance placed on the lives of European Americans that is not placed on the lives of people of color. This importance is perpetuated in both the private and public spheres, more specifically and in this case of Liang, in jobs that are deemed uniformed service or public safety service.

From this idea that the legal system fails to punish white cops as it does cops of color who commit the same or similar crimes, that my classmates began to give ideas on how to repair this system. Some inferred that the reformation of the legal system begins in the Police Academy – that certain incentives be given and that requirements to become a police officer are lengthened. I believe that both of these conditions could result in individuals being more equipped to fulfill their duties as a cop without feeling as if they had the capabilities to abuse the power that is instilled in the job title.  Also a furthered education, possibly promoting individuals obtaining a secondary education, would also be another benefit as the individual would have additional knowledge along with what is learned in the Police Academy.

Aside from what can be done to ensure that individuals become police officers who will not abuse their power, classmates also argued that there should be ways for miscommunications and harsh feelings between African Americans and police officers to be resolved. One way to resolve these issues could be programs that allow one-on-one interaction between the two communities which could also disprove any prejudice or bigoted notions one community may have towards the other. This could also be done with other minority groups and police officers, as well as non-minorities and police officers.

In class, my peers also offered their stances on how they believe African Americans should respond to police officers. These responses seemed to stem from the idea that cops are going to act upon racist, bigoted, or discriminatory notions or may have a superiority complex. While some cops may act upon these notions, some will not. Because of this, I was confused on my classmates’ stances, as I perceived it as them believing that African Americans should believe that when pulled over or approached by a cop they should act submissively due to the cop possibly having these kind of beliefs – submissively as in not objecting to any wrongful treatment they may be subjected to.

There were also comments made on acting African Americans making sure they act respectful to police officers. This is definitely needed, but I believe this should be promoted with all individuals, not just cops. These ideas were easier to digest than the ideas suggesting that an individual allow wrongful treatment by a cop by not speaking out, simply because they are a cop. This not only promotes the continuation of unlawful abuse by cops, but allows for animosity to grow between police officers and the public. 

Overall, I really enjoyed this in class discussion and the different stances that my classmates’ had, whether I agreed with them or not. As for the case the encouraged the discussion, I think that certain subgroups within communities are vying for solidarity within themselves and their community and are willing to come together for any reason – whether it be good or bad. I strongly believe that this case, more specifically, the murder of an unarmed minority would also not be such a taboo topic if there was not varied treatment of individuals who have the same job title. By working with both police officers and various communities affected by police mistreatment or anger these groups may have, matters like this could be resolved without contesting the worth of another’s individual’s life.

References

Fuchs, C. (2016, February 11). NYPD Officer Peter Liang guilty of second-degree Manslaughter in Akai Gurley killing. NBC News. Retrieved from http://www.nbcnews.com/news/asian-america/nypd-officer-peter-liang-guilty-second-degree-manslaughter-akai-gurley-n516796 

Fuchs, C. (2016, February 23). Chinese community divided over NYPD officer's indictment. NBC News.  Retrieved from http://www.nbcnews.com/news/asian-america/chinese-community-divided-over-nypd-officers-indictment-n306946 

Guillermo, E. (2015, April 28). Police violence will repeat itself': Asian groups call for accountability. NBC News. Retrieved from http://www.nbcnews.com/news/asian-america/police-violence-will-repeat-itself-asian-groups-call-accountability-n349601

In this case an innocent person is dead, and the person responsible for that death ought to face punitive consequences.  It seems clear that the death was not intentionally caused, but officer Liang had his gun out of its holster and pulled the trigger when there was evidently no need, and that seems to justify the charge of second-degree manslaughter and criminal endangerment. The fact that Officer Liang did not offer assistance to the man he had mortally wounded seems to justify the official misconduct charge, and perhaps also the criminally negligent homicide. So, it seems to me hardly any fair person could object to these charges being made, and since I haven’t read the court transcripts or attended the court processes, I will just have to trust that the verdicts were fairly reached.

So far, I think there isn’t really any room for dispute, although I suppose some might argue for charges of less serious crimes, or more serious crimes, depending upon their dispositions.  I think the agents of the state tend to make the harshest and most serious charges they can possibly make, because built into the system is the assumption that there will be some sort of plea-bargain and the accused defendant will admit to a lesser charge and spare the state the cost of the full prosecution. 

By the way, CPR usually does not save lives, but it is a criminal injustice for two law enforcement officers to fail to provide the first aid assistance when they have accidentally shot someone, or even intentionally shot someone. 

Should police officers be charged with crimes when they commit crimes?  Of course they should be.  Are police officers frequently given the benefit of the doubt and allowed to get away with justifications for their decisions and actions, and thus escape prosecution and punishment for terrible decisions, reckless incompetence, and criminal behavior?  Yes, probably so.  There is always a problem of “who will police the police?” and this is an inherent crisis in every act of state violence.  The state (largely through its police and military functions) holds a monopoly on the right to use violence, but the use of violence is always a serious matter, and states tend to use more violence than necessary, partially because the people who are allowed to use the violence frequently are frightened, or brutal, or over zealous in their caution to prevent any injury that could be inflicted upon them.    

If police of one ethnic background are treated differently from police of another ethnic background, is this a violation of moral principles?  Yes, certainly it violates the principle that all should be treated equally under the law.  Do European-American police commit reckless acts that get innocent people killed?  Of course they do, and these acts of violence are sometimes recorded and made public.  Are they always prosecuted and punished when they do these horrible things?  No, sometimes they are not, although sometimes they are.  The fact that police are sometimes not prosecuted or punished when they, through incompetence or misconduct or brutal recklessness kill people who ought not to have been killed, is a social problem.  The solution to this problem is to more frequently and fairly prosecute and punish police who deserve prosecution and punishment.  

But, do we always know when police have acted in a way that deserves prosecution and punishment?  No, we cannot always know.  Sometimes actions that seem terrible may be justified and excused.  Sometimes actions that seem excusable and justified may really be terrible and worthy of prosecution and punishment.  There will be ambiguity in many cases.  When there is ambiguity, bias can infect the decision-making processes, and that means European-American police may get the benefit of the doubt (a preference for being very selective and avoiding errors of sensitivity) while Asian-American or African-American police may be held to higher standards (a preference for tolerating more errors of selectivity and avoiding errors arising from not being sensitive enough).

However, bias is something that influences probability, and in single cases, I doubt we can really know if bias is working its devilry. We know there is bias when we can show patterns or probabilities that are tending toward unfair differences for members of groups.  If three or four European-American police are given a benefit of the doubt and one Asian-American officer is prosecuted and convicted, we do not have a large enough sample to be certain whether bias is at work.

So, what is the proper response when bias may be causing an injustice, but we are not certain whether it is?  Sometimes we ought to protest and make a loud noise about the potential for bias and the real threat of bias, even when we are uncertain that bias exists, because it would be an injustice to wait for better evidence of injustice.  Other times, we ought to wait and see, and delay our protest until we are more confident that we can demonstrate a pattern of bias or injustice.  How do we make that decision?

The mixed feelings about the death of Akai Gurley and the conviction of Officer Liang is probably rooted in the mix of complicated moral issues.  Police do seem to have a bias against African-Americans, and this bias certainly has caused some deaths of innocent African-Americans and African or Caribbean immigrants. That’s an outrageous injustice.  Sometimes police are not prosecuted or punished when they ought to be, and that another insult to our sense of justice.  Officer Liang may have been made a scapegoat, and may have suffered greater punishment than he deserved, in an attempt to diminish the public outrage over the behavior of many European-American police who had committed similar or worse acts of homicidal incompetence, and if that is so, then that is yet another tragic injustice that might reasonably stir up our hot indignation.

The problem comes, I think, in comparing relative injustice.  Here is an injustice that seems clear, and here is one with ambiguity, so should I disparage the injustice shrouded in a veil of uncertainty in a comparison to the injustice that is clear and evident?  Here is an injustice that seems worse to me, and here is another injustice that seems not as evil to me.  Should I dismiss the smaller injustice and point instead to the greater injustice?  Here again, we have no clear moral certainty.  Yes, some injustices are much worse than others, and we ought to put greater effort into correcting those greater injustices.  But sometimes the relative level of misery and injustice is approximately similar, and then, what is the point, what is the objective, what is the goal of using our minds to discriminate between which violation of the good is the worse?