
Why Are Police Officers More Dangerous Than Airplanes? - dankohn1
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/11/opinion/sunday/traffic-stop-police-accident.html
======
ColinWright
My wife's uncle is a trained engineer, worked in a high-level mergers and
acquisitions division of a well-known company, and is an aerobatics pilot. He
says that the reason flying is so safe compared with any other form of
transport is because of the ubiquitous and relentless use of check-lists, and
the deep investigation of every incident. After each incident the check-lists
are re-visited to see if the causes could be prevented. The investigations are
carried out by independent bodies with their only aim being to find the truth.

When I wondered out loud once why such an approach isn't taken for other
services and industries, a friend of mine - born forty with cynicism to spare
- said "Rich people fly."

Perhaps the same approach to incidents in the maritime environment, and
incidents involving the police, isn't taken because somehow the people most
affected are seen as somehow not really worth the time and effort. It's not
the rich people, the people in power, who are affected.

I really hope that's not true, because if it is, nothing will change.

~~~
geggam
Once you go full cynic you start thinking govts are created to protect the
wealthy and wars are instigated to generate more wealth.

Then they call you a conspiracy nut so society ostracizes you and ignores your
observations

~~~
smokeyj
Airlines are accountable to the market. Cops are accountable to their ego.

Soon as you figure out someone's motivation their actions become obvious.

Edit: if precincts got paid based on customer satisfaction we'd see an
overnight change making the police force unrecognizable. Crazy how money do
that.

~~~
oneplane
Regarding the money aspect: for someone living in western Europe, the police
budget and income system in the USA seems crazy. How could they possibly do
that they are supposed to do (uphold the law) with a system that forces them
to select their actions based on the money it will generate for them.

~~~
smokeyj
"Upholding the law" is such a subjective idea. An officer can uphold the law
by running a speed traps and earning the department more money. They could
alternatively do difficult investigatory work looking into violent crimes that
would deliver more value to the community. If a community is the employer of
officers it seems strange that officers would be held accountable to anything
besides the needs of the community.

Developers live in a world of scrum, points, and delivering value. I think
whoever pays for the officers salary should be the "product owner" of the
police department.

~~~
mitochondrion
"I think whoever pays for the officers salary should be the "product owner" of
the police department"

Like what, the local governor/censor/consul/manor lord?

------
Animats
Few police departments are into internal self-improvement. When they get
better, it's usually due to heavy pressure from the outside. Sometimes getting
a new police chief from the outside helps. But there's no institutional
oversight system to make them better.

Some top cops, such as Bratton, have written autobiographies. Improving a
police department is mostly hard work, management controls that measure
results, better training, firing a few underperformers, and common sense.

Traffic stops are a big problem.[1] About 5000 US cops a year are injured
during traffic stops, usually by other traffic. About 7 cops per year are shot
during traffic stops. The big risk to cops is being run over, not being shot.
Some training materials don't get this.[2]

[1]
[http://www.forcescience.org/trafficstop.html](http://www.forcescience.org/trafficstop.html)
[2]
[http://resources.learningforlife.org/exploring/lawenforcemen...](http://resources.learningforlife.org/exploring/lawenforcement/study/tstop.pdf)

------
microcolonel
Because airplanes are very, very safe.

That said, police could definitely do a better job. Body cameras may have to
be always-on (but queried only for relevant portions, or if the officer is
dead) at some point. Currently they seem to be off at crucial times in an
encounter.

------
elmar
Americans are eight times more likely to be killed by a cop than a terrorist.

[http://www.mintpressnews.com/us-police-killed-
nearly-9000-ci...](http://www.mintpressnews.com/us-police-killed-
nearly-9000-civilians-since-911/218381/)

[http://www.businessinsider.com/death-risk-statistics-
terrori...](http://www.businessinsider.com/death-risk-statistics-terrorism-
disease-accidents-2017-1)

~~~
acranox
If you exclude 9/11, it's got to be a lot higher. Killings by police are
constant, whereas terror attacks are spiky. Like, in the past 10 years, what
percentage of days included at least one killing by the police, vs. killing by
terrorists.

The "eight times" statement is just referring to causalities over a time
period, which I think end up over-representing the true danger from
terrorists. The businessinsider link does a pretty good job to addressing that
point.

------
Tomsredwagon
The next you want to think that a police officer may have been too on edge,
consider this
[https://www.liveleak.com/view?i=cb7_1502405948](https://www.liveleak.com/view?i=cb7_1502405948)

~~~
jMyles
A liveleak video depicting a single graphic anecdote is about as far from
useful data as a piece of multimedia can be.

~~~
somenewacc
This is an example, that you should consider as a possibility.

~~~
calvano915
It's possible the officer's approach to the situation/suspect contributed to
causing the result. Perhaps use a whole different approach (less aggressive
and more conversational), or tase the guy sooner, or back off until you have
backup before continuing the encounter. The outcome might've been the same
regardless, and the cop did not deserve to get shot, but cops need to realize
that just issuing commands aggressively may not be the best approach and the
job may require more nuance especially given the target demographic.

------
peterwwillis
Because planes don't walk around carrying guns and a head full of bias and
fear? Because police officers are not multi-million-dollar engineering
marvels?

What editor fell asleep and allowed this to be posted?

------
sjg007
Broken tail light, speeding and other infractions should just be automatic
tickets from a dash cam on the squad car or a speed camera. Same with illegal
lane change or carpool violations. They can be mailed to the registered owner.

~~~
Lunar_Lamp
Perhaps, but I think that this misses an important aspect of those first few
examples: safety.

The reason that people are pulled over for speeding, broken tail lights and
illegal lane changes are so that they can be convinced to remedy the situation
and make things safer. The punishment is not meant to be the only outcome of
the incident.

You may well be correct (after all, static speed cameras exist, and apparently
have an effect), but personally I'd want to see a fairly detailed analysis to
convince me that you are correct.

~~~
sjg007
People speed, drive with broken tail lights and illegal overtake or change
lanes all of the time. Only a small fraction of those offenses are captured by
law enforcement. In making a stop, we are trading the safety of the public in
general against the safety of the driver and officer from the interaction.

------
momomat
Wait ... this context is bs. There is an entire human element driving this
data. The police interacting with other people. If the driver of every car was
a predictable machine then then this is just as preventable as flying. Pilots
interact with machines not people. And there are a good number of those 1000
that die that deserved to die and thankfully we have brave people to go after
those crazys. This is police hate and criminal pandering with such vague
statememts. Is this hacker news or an antifa forum?

~~~
thinkfurther
> Mr. Bell hired his own investigators. They contend that it all began with
> faulty equipment: Officer Erich Strausbaugh’s holster caught on a cable
> dangling from one of the cars’ side-view mirrors, so that when he tackled
> Michael, he felt a powerful tug on his belt. Assuming that the young man had
> grabbed for his weapon, he called out to his partners, “He’s got my gun.”

And then they lied about it. What is brave about that, in this case? Yes,
there are uncountable cops doing untold amounts of great "work" (I put it in
quotes not to belittle it, but because I think it's more noble than that). I
even think the "blue shield" does serve a valid purpose a lot of times, but
it's when it's abused that is the problem. And that _is_ a problem.

Here's an idea how actual guts might look like:

[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK2652/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK2652/)

> This chapter examines reporting of health care errors (e.g., verbal,
> written, or other form of communication and/or recording of near miss and
> patient safety events that generally involves some form of reporting system)
> and these events’ disclosure (e.g., communication of errors to patients and
> their families), including the ethical aspects of error-reporting
> mechanisms. The potential benefits of intrainstitutional and Web-based
> databases might assist nurses and other providers to prevent similar hazards
> and improve patient safety. Clinicians’ fears of lawsuits and their self-
> perceptions of incompetence could be dispelled by organizational cultures
> emphasizing safety rather than blame. This chapter focuses on the assertion
> that reporting errors that result in patient harm as well as seemingly
> trivial errors and near misses has the potential to strengthen processes of
> care and improve the quality of care afforded patients.

Looking a relative in the eye and telling them their loved one is dead because
you made a honest or even careless mistake -- now THAT is bravery. I don't
know if anyone is actually _doing_ that just because it's in the guidelines
who wouldn't also do it if it wasn't -- but do similar guidelines at least
exist for police? Because if you swap out some words, all of that could be
said about police work, too.

It doesn't get much more hateful than lying about someone you killed. After
that comes defending such incidents, then there is a big gap, and _then_ comes
"all cops are pigs" on the hate scale. That doesn't justify the latter, but I
don't know what moral high ground you think you're posting from.

> And there are a good number of those 1000 that die that deserved to die and
> thankfully we have brave people to go after those crazys

A "good number" would be 1000. What "good number" do _you_ have in mind? If
it's even just 999 or less, would _you_ swap with one of the innocent people
who got killed? And why do the others "deserve to die"? Because it has to be
that way, in your mind, or because you looked at the individual incidents?
Wouldn't they deserve even more to get disarmed and do their sentence or
whatever?

------
jaclaz
I am a bit perplexed by the "new technology":

>The students created a smartphone app, called Virtual Traffic Stop, that
allows him to do just that. After the officer pulls a driver to the side of
the road, he would use the app to start a video chat with the driver as a
first point of contact, allowing him to observe whether the driver seemed
mentally ill or dangerous, notice clues in the interior of the vehicle and
review identification documents.

Just to name one, I don't have usually a smartphone, or a switched on
smartphone, when driving, and the police officer should have a way to find and
call my phone number, which not necessarily is linked to the car license
plate.

And this data would be interesting:

>In some cities, when you roll through a stoplight, a camera catches you in
the act, and a few weeks later you receive a ticket in the mail. Data suggests
that this automatic system is far cheaper than “human” ticketing and reduces
pedestrian deaths. And a camera can’t kill people.

Undoubtedly it is cheaper, the point is how much it contributes to safety.

I confess that I received one of those tickets (the fact that a large number
of people received one since seemingly the municipality put the camera _and_
shortened to the bare legal minimum - possibly even less than that - the
yellow light time is another thing).

Frankly after 2 1/2 months I didn't even remember to have gone through that
particular traffic light/intersection, I paid the fine and that was it.

By contrast a couple of times that police stopped me, even if they at the end
resolved to not fine me, they "stopped my driving" right there, so if I was
doing something - if not illegal - "border line" with dangerous they actually
prevented me from continuing doing it, by forcefully inserting a "pause".

~~~
Anechoic
>Just to name one, I don't have usually a smartphone, or a switched on
smartphone, when driving, and the police officer should have a way to find and
call my phone number, which not necessarily is linked to the car license
plate.

Sure it's a flawed idea, but may result in better ideas. For example, what
about integrating that technology into the car itself? Yeah there are problems
to be overcome (doesn't help with cars already out on the road, needs to
account for spoofing and 4th Amendment considerations), but it is an
interesting direction.

~~~
jaclaz
I don't think that those aspects you mention, i.e. retrofitting existing cars,
spoofing/hacking of the devices and 4th amendment (or similar privacy Laws
where applicable) issues are so trifling.

The idea in itself may be good but the technology hypothized seems "way off".

I would find more doable that police corps were issued a remotely contolled
camera (think of a small robot or drone) capable of crawling (or flying) in
front of the windshield of the stopped car and show to the officer the inside.

~~~
kybernetikos
Yeah, this seems like a good idea and pretty doable. Every police car could
have a drone that would be useful in a variety of situations. In a traffic
stop, it could take off from the roof of the police car and land on the
windscreen of the stopped car. A small screen can relay instructions to the
driver while he is filmed.

With the prices of quite powerful drones coming down so dramatically, this
might even be a cost effective way to save lives, while at the same time
giving police an extra tool for lots of situations, not just traffic stops.

I wonder if there's business potential in making roof mounted drones that can
land on windshields. Ideally, it could also record sound by latching onto the
windshield and detecting vibrations with some sort of contact or laser
microphone but I'm not sure how realistic that would be
([https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00542-015-2795-x](https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00542-015-2795-x)
looks like a start).

~~~
jaclaz
I was thinking more along the lines of something like this:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Hornet_Nano](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Hornet_Nano)

Or of the micro-bugs/robot spiders in Minority Report, I mean the idea is that
the police officer can see inside the (already stopped) car, to give orders
he/she can shout or use the microphone and loudspeaker, that all patrol cars
have, I believe, in the US.

There is always an issue with language, maybe, but the idea of the small
screen with text assumes that the stopped driver can see it properly (imagine
an older chap that reaches for his spectacles ...).

~~~
kybernetikos
That is a very cool drone. I doubt that it needs to be so small though. I was
thinking of something like a customized mavic pro. Automatic position keeping,
person tracking (potentially both officers and suspects) and automatic
navigation to particular locations, plus the ability to operate reasonably
well in high winds and perhaps cost too argue for something a bit larger and
heavier.

In most countries, ability to read street signs is part of the requirement for
a drivers license. Reaching for spectacles isn't as threatening if the police
are back sitting in the patrol car anyway, and there are always edge cases -
how do police interact with deaf drivers now? (edit: just checked, seems like
they get shot disproportionately often...)

But yeah, maybe the screen (which could include glyphs as well as text, or
multiple languages) wouldn't work. I'd need to experiment to see what sort of
size you could get away with and how reliably you could make sure it was
visible. Of course having a screen doesn't preclude the use of loudspeaker
either.

~~~
jaclaz
>In most countries, ability to read street signs is part of the requirement
for a drivers license.

Older people tend to develop presbyopia, they can see and read signs alright,
i.e. they drive normally without correction lenses but they need them to read
at "windscreen distance".

At least at the time my father managed to collect a fair number of speed
tickets, claiming that he couldn't see properly the speedometer.

As a side note, "in most countries" traffic stops ending up in a shooting or
more generally people shot by police are much more rare than in the US.

The (unofficial) numbers reported on this Wikipedia page:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_firearm_use_by_country#...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_firearm_use_by_country#Comparison_of_countries)

are impressive.

------
mnm1
The only justice at this point that can equalize the situation is an eye for
an eye. Cops that kill innocent people are guilty of murder and should be
executed. The death penalty should apply to all public officials, cops and
prosecutors especially, when they murder someone like in this story. They
should be held to a _higher_ standard than everyone else in society, not
lower. Without an independent investigation and _extremely harsh_ punishments,
this situation will never even begin to be fixed. I'm tired of all this
apologizing for police murders. We need to fix the incentive system, which now
incentivizes police to not care and shoot first. These days, when I read about
police being killed, I feel no empathy. At least the score is somewhat evened
out. After all, I'm certain police feel no empathy for the innocent people
they murder. I can't feel empathy for people in a profession whose stated goal
is only their safety at the expense of anything and everyone else, people that
society entrusts with great power for the greater good. If they can't be
public servants and shoulder such responsibility, they should find other jobs
before they murder innocent people. I fear police more than I fear anything
else. It's a rational, justified fear in the US. This is definitely not
justice. This is definitely not serving. This is definitely not protecting.

~~~
IanDrake
Do you know anyone who is a cop?

Let me tell you about my buddy's first week on the job as a police officer in
what most would consider a small town with low crime. Keep in mind that prior
to this he was a school teacher.

On his second day, a single-car car accident. Three young girls in the car,
one had her brains hanging out of her head, one was halfway through the window
mangled, bloody and dead, and the third was thrown from the vehicle and was
"fucked up pretty bad". He said he could see her ribs where the skin had been
torn away. Drunk driver, speeding, no seat belts. Guess who gets to deals with
that shit?

A few nights later, a woman calls the police on her husband. He's a vet with
PTSD and she tells the cops he took his guns and wanted to kill a cop.

An APB is put out on his car but before the police found it there was a call
about a guy walking around in a park with a riffle. So the police surrounded
the park and went hunting for the guy. Now my buddy, who a year ago was
teaching kids in a prep school is walking through the woods where a trained
soldier is looking to kill him. At the same time, 15 police officers are all
converging from different vectors and trying not to shoot each other in the
confusion.

After searching the woods they find his parked car and surround it. They can
see him sitting in the front seat and tell him to put his hands up. He never
complies. He never complies because he's already blown his brains out.

My buddy got to see that too. Can you imagine what dealing with this stuff
does to your mind?

It gets better. When they get to his wife's house to tell her that her husband
is dead she says "Good, how?" Perplexed my buddy said "He shot himself in the
head in his car." Her response: "The car? That fucking bastard".

Can you imagine?

I live in a nice place. I had no idea this kind of crap goes on. This didn't
even get a mention in the paper.

My point is, you don't know what the police do on a daily basis. And you don't
even know how much you don't know.

There are no superheroes out there, but most cops are the closest things we
have to them.

You should totally join. It sounds like you'd make it all look easy.

~~~
mnm1
How does any of this justify murder and covering up a murder? I never said the
job was easy. I said cops should be held to higher standards than everyone
else in society because they are public servants who have the power to kill.
Your argument boils down to cops have a hard job therefore they should be held
to a lower standard and allowed to get away with murder. That's just
injustice. Other societies are able to control their police. Why can't ours?

~~~
rhino369
Very few of police shootings are straight up murder. The ones that were
unjustified are usually criminally negligent homicide.

Cops really aren't held to a lower standard. They are held to the same
standard, except they aren't required to retreat from a dangerous situation.
Instead, they are forced by their job to confront it.

Other professions that deal in high risk don't really face much criminal legal
prosecution either. Doctors who kill their patients accidentally rarely face
jail.

The country does a terrible job training and preparing them for it. Another
big issue is that cops have a pretty reasonable fear that suspects will be
armed, which police in other countries don't really face.

