EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 2415
| Forum Index > Closed |
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please. In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. | ||
KwarK
United States44442 Posts
| ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States24505 Posts
On October 16 2015 11:45 KwarK wrote: The deliberate policy of taking vets who are PTSDed as fuck and used to walking streets where everyone in plain clothes is an enemy trying to kill them and letting them work out their issues on American streets probably needs changing too. And yes, that is a real policy. Yeah that's another part if you're a ptsd suffering vet you can skip much of the training/requirements. The irony being that even in a foreign country, which we are at "war" with, the military has stricter policies than the police about using/carrying firearms. | ||
|
hunts
United States2113 Posts
On October 16 2015 11:40 GreenHorizons wrote: Citizen 19y.o.+, GED/HS diploma (not always a requirement), clean background check (you haven't been caught), 0-18ish weeks (full-time) of training, and 2 multiple choice tests, is about it for most departments in the US. It can be more or less depending on the size of the department, desirability, etc... To put that in perspective that's less than it takes to be a plumber or manager at McDonald's nowadays. Having a close friend that tried to join a PD, an associates or higher was also required, as well as a very thorough background check, having investigators look around you house, and then a physical, and a 3 or so hour interrogation with a lie detector. | ||
|
Nyxisto
Germany6287 Posts
| ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States24505 Posts
On October 16 2015 12:31 hunts wrote: Having a close friend that tried to join a PD, an associates or higher was also required, as well as a very thorough background check, having investigators look around you house, and then a physical, and a 3 or so hour interrogation with a lie detector. Yeah, as I said it varies from department to department. It's still a job like everything else in that degrees still improve your chances/choices. For clarity, we're talking about generic associates or bachelors too, they don't have to pertain to policing in any way, though again, that helps. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
On October 16 2015 12:38 Nyxisto wrote: 18 weeks? holy cow police training here takes 3 years. I needed more time to get my drivers license Perhaps therein lies the answer along with other reforms. | ||
|
IgnE
United States7684 Posts
| ||
|
Velocirapture
United States983 Posts
On October 16 2015 13:24 IgnE wrote: You don't have to be a genius to do police work. In fact it's probably a detriment. Most police work is boring. I have always felt that most work is like this. If everything is going according to plan then practically any work is easy. We don't spend a decade educating our best and brightest to be surgeons because "by the numbers" surgery is so complicated. We do it because in the cases where something goes wrong we need them to be able to troubleshoot the problem and fix it quickly or we end up dead. In my experience it is a lot more common that a job is requesting a college degree when it should be done by a trained high school graduate but in this instance I wish police academies were more akin to other professional schools like law school or medical school. | ||
|
IgnE
United States7684 Posts
| ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States24505 Posts
On October 16 2015 14:14 IgnE wrote: So you think the solution is to get smarter, more educated people doing policing? If only we had an unlimited supply of smart, educated people. I don't think it's an intelligence issue (mostly anyway) it's a training issue. You don't have to be a genius to be good at your job but you do need training/practice. Far too much of that takes place on the streets and ends up in situations like where that one cop shot a guy in his own apartment building because he didn't know what he was doing. There's standard setting and other aspects too. | ||
|
KwarK
United States44442 Posts
| ||
|
Simberto
Germany12080 Posts
On October 16 2015 14:19 GreenHorizons wrote: I don't think it's an intelligence issue (mostly anyway) it's a training issue. You don't have to be a genius to be good at your job but you do need training/practice. Far too much of that takes place on the streets and ends up in situations like where that one cop shot a guy in his own apartment building because he didn't know what he was doing. There's standard setting and other aspects too. Indeed. I just looked up what it takes to become a cop in Germany. Similar to the Netherlands apparently. For basic coppery, you need either a medium high school diploma (School system in Germany is a bit different, we have three types of high schools depending on how smart you are) or a lower high school and a finished job training. Then you have to take multiple entrance exams, a physical, a written and an oral one. At which point your three year education starts. Finally there is another set of exam at the end of that. I do not know how hard exactly those exams are though, i did not find information on that initially. As it turns out, people are better at their job after 3 years of training as opposed to 18 weeks. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On October 16 2015 14:14 IgnE wrote: So you think the solution is to get smarter, more educated people doing policing? If only we had an unlimited supply of smart, educated people. Basically my view. Police departments compete with a lot more attractive options for what even IgnE might consider an ideal candidate for a police officer. Today you might even have a rational basis for not applying to some inner-city positions knowing previous earned reputations, stereotypes, and (if white) anti-white/halfwhite police officer violence. I don't aim to throw a red herring here, just one other issue with attracting certain ideal candidates. At some level, you wish to employ city employees/private-under-contract workers to collect and haul trash, knowing maybe the best candidates don't apply or (in this case) want out rather quickly. On October 16 2015 14:23 KwarK wrote: An interrogation with a lie detector together doesn't sound odd at all. Is there a reason you make an immediate connection to Tarot cards? I grant you that requiring instead a pet cat in the room during interrogation might have as much a conditional effect.The lie detector bit is odd too. Do they also have prospective officers draw Tarot cards? | ||
|
Karis Vas Ryaar
United States4396 Posts
On October 16 2015 14:47 Danglars wrote: Basically my view. Police departments compete with a lot more attractive options for what even IgnE might consider an ideal candidate for a police officer. Today you might even have a rational basis for not applying to some inner-city positions knowing previous earned reputations, stereotypes, and (if white) anti-white/halfwhite police officer violence. I don't aim to throw a red herring here, just one other issue with attracting certain ideal candidates. At some level, you wish to employ city employees/private-under-contract workers to collect and haul trash, knowing maybe the best candidates don't apply or (in this case) want out rather quickly. An interrogation with a lie detector together doesn't sound odd at all. Is there a reason you make an immediate connection to Tarot cards? I grant you that requiring instead a pet cat in the room during interrogation might have as much a conditional effect. lie detector tests literally don't work and are inadmissable in court. regarding cops I'd love to see more educated people being cops but the problem is you don't need an education to be a cop and if they suddenly raised the requirements to be a police officer they'd be short a lot of police officers. | ||
|
cLutZ
United States19574 Posts
On October 16 2015 14:14 IgnE wrote: So you think the solution is to get smarter, more educated people doing policing? If only we had an unlimited supply of smart, educated people. Nah. The #1 qualification for being a good police officer is not wanting to be a police officer. That is the problem with the profession. | ||
|
IgnE
United States7684 Posts
| ||
|
Ghostcom
Denmark4783 Posts
| ||
|
corumjhaelen
France6884 Posts
Fun thing is that I agree with a cLuTZ post, and with notesfromunderground. "How did we do before police ?" is a good question. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States46692 Posts
(CNN)Republican front-runners Donald Trump and Ben Carson are threatening to pull out of the next Republican primary debate if the hosts don't agree to their demands. ~ http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/15/politics/trump-carson-cnbc-republican-debate-threaten-pullout/ In a letter to CNBC, which is hosting the next debate, the two candidates said they would not participate in the Oct. 28 debate "if it is longer than 120 minutes including commercials and does not include opening and closing statements." Early Friday morning, Trump tweeted that CNBC had agreed to limit the debate to two hours. "Fantastic news for all, especially the millions of people who will be watching!" Trump said. Thursday, in a conference call between Republican National Committee officials and top advisers to the presidential campaigns, Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski had said that Trump would consider skipping the debate if his terms were not met. Top aides to Senators Ted Cruz and Rand Paul also insisted that the debate feature opening and closing statements, with Paul aide Chris LaCivita saying at one point that CNBC could "go f--- themselves" if they weren't willing to agree to those terms, according to two sources on the call. The demand for opening and closing statements reflects the candidates' interest in getting their messages out unchallenged. The demand for a two-hour debate comes in the wake of CNN's decision to extend the previous GOP debate to three hours, leaving some of the candidates visibly exhausted. But were CNBC to agree to a two-hour broadcast, including commercials, with opening and closing statements, it would limit the actual debate time to less than 90 minutes -- a short period of time considering that 10 or more GOP hopefuls are likely to appear on stage for the main event. One source who was on the call said it was clear from Lewandowski's remarks that Trump had no interest in participating in the CNBC debate, which will be held in Boulder, Colorado. In a statement, CNBC said, "Our goal is to host the most substantive debate possible. Our practice in the past has been to forego opening statements to allow more time to address the critical issues that matter most to the American people. We started a dialogue yesterday with all of the campaigns involved and we will certainly take the candidates' views on the format into consideration as we finalize the debate structure." Trump took to Twitter on Thursday to protest the terms of the debate. "The @GOP should not agree to the ridiculous debate terms that @CNBC is asking unless there is a major benefit to the party," he wrote. If they concede to Trump's demands, then he shows more power. That's a win for him. If they say Fuck you (as they should), then he doesn't have to stand on stage and make it more obvious that he's an idiot. Plus, he'll get sympathy. That's a win for him too. The demands don't seem absurdly unreasonable, but to approach the conversation with a threat is pretty unprofessional. Honestly, the best move is for the hosts to simply respond with something like "Sorry, but we don't negotiate | ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10989 Posts
They have been negotiateret! | ||
| ||
