
Why So Many Police Are Handling the Protests Wrong - epistasis
https://www.themarshallproject.org/2020/06/01/why-so-many-police-are-handling-the-protests-wrong
======
awillen
I feel like some upfront setting of expectations would really, really be
helpful here. If you're planning to arrest people after curfew, explain that
in clear terms: "Our curfew is at 8pm, so we will start asking groups to
disperse at 7:30. At 8pm, no large assemblies will be permitted, and police
will begin arresting people in large groups at that time. We understand some
people will engage in civil disobedience, and if they are cooperative with the
police, they will be arrested peacefully. If any protesters start taking
action that endangers police (e.g. throwing bricks or running at police
unexpectedly), they will be met with force and arrested. Because it can be
difficult for police to determine the perpetrator of violence, additional
crowd control tactics such as tear gas may be used, so we strongly encourage
you to self-police and prevent any violence towards police. After 8pm there
will be a 30 minute grace period for those who are not gathered in groups but
are in the process of heading home. At 8:30pm, anyone who remains on the
street will be detained."

I think it would really help both in terms of outcomes as well as the
perception of police if they gave this kind of clear description of what's
going to happen. As it stands now, the curfews aren't enforced with any kind
of regularity, so they just cause confusion.

~~~
jdavis703
A much simpler policy would be to have no curfew at all.

As someone who has participated in protests for 5 out of the last 6 days and
was tear gassed, I can tell you that protestors are much more peaceful when
the cops keep a distance. Once the armor shows up and the tear gassing starts
protestors get angry.

~~~
awillen
I also agree with this. It seems like in the majority of cases at this point,
the curfew does nothing but create unnecessary conflict. It almost creates an
objective for protesters - to be serious about what they're protesting, they
need to stay out after the curfew.

I think curfews do have a place when there's massive looting happening and the
police need the streets clear so they can prevent it, but there hasn't been
enough looting in several days to justify curfews.

~~~
fennecfoxen
The case that will be made is that the curfew has _caused_ the reduction in
looting, by sending the most nonviolent protestors home and making it easier
to distinguish those looting.

~~~
awillen
Except there are still extremely large protests in DC/NY/LA after curfew but
the looting appears to have stopped.

~~~
fennecfoxen
While I decline to specifically endorse that logic at this time, I don't think
it is necessarily is in conflict with your observation. The crowd dynamics of
protestors protesting after curfew and of that of looters may be quite
different: one crowd, versus many smaller groups dispersed in the city,
spreading out, with a mix of protesting and opportunistic looting (sometimes
in the same group and sometimes not).

------
mc32
Problem is backing down. When you’re in a heightened state of alertness and
your body has primed you for fight/flight, it’s hard for either side to calm
down. Even in domestic disputes where people know each other and at least
think they’ve “loved” each other and care. It’s hard to back down.

So seeking confrontation is the problem from both sides. Some people want to
protest, some want to confront. And the police prepare for worst case ...
which means confrontation which escalates...

Then you have opportunists who just want a fight .

~~~
walls
If only there were some kind of training that could help peace officers
maintain the peace... Oh well, guess this is as good as we can do.

~~~
mc32
Training helps. But it’s hard to overcome instincts.

Domestic abusers (not always people prone to violence) are sent to classes and
often get in the same situation again, even after training and knowing the
legal consequences.

~~~
cududa
Military seems to do relatively decent job at training that compared to cops,
and it's not like the cops are down the barrel of guns. Just water bottles and
some bricks

~~~
082349872349872
US military also has "up or out".

------
082349872349872
Odd that tacticool US police, despite copying the look, don't attempt to learn
how the US military behaves:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23347453](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23347453)

"2-54. Scalable effects concepts are a measured approach in response to a
crowd gathering. By recognizing a use-of-force policy, soldiers must be taught
and understand that they use the minimum force necessary. Without the
appearance of a graduated response, the gathering crowd may consider actions
as excessive, causing a possible escalation of hostilities or violence."

Then again, even within the LE world, the information is available, eg
[https://www.chirontraining.com](https://www.chirontraining.com)

~~~
gowld
Meanwhile, at your local PD, they are learning how to protect the "sheep"
(that's you, civilian) under the method called, and I swear I am not making
this up, Killology.

[https://www.killology.com/](https://www.killology.com/)

~~~
082349872349872
Shouldn't that be Phonosology?

Miller has some thoughts on the sheepdog metaphor:
[http://chirontraining.blogspot.com/2017/11/sheepdogs.html](http://chirontraining.blogspot.com/2017/11/sheepdogs.html)

(he has thoughts on lots of things, up to and including how to deescalate when
one is amped on adrenaline. I sometimes think that in a more just world, he'd
have been an academic intellectual, but am glad that in ours, he choose his
parents poorly, and wound up working in law enforcement —due to a financial
glass ceiling— otherwise we'd probably have no one who is both familiar with
the problems LE practitioners face and has the inclination to theorise upon
how the approaches might be improved)

------
adamsea
From the article:

'Couper, the creator of the Madison Method, said, “It’s this whole attitude
of, ‘We keep order because we kick ass, and it’s us against them.’ (...) We've
got to root those people out and say, ‘Look, this is the job that we expect.
This is how a democracy is policed. If you can't buy into it. I'm sorry. You
just have to find another job.’”'

------
unethical_ban
> Disproportionate use of force can turn a peaceful protest violent, research
> shows.

I would like to RTFA soon, but just glancing at this, I'll agree with it. I
thought to myself that if I were a peaceful protester that got a real taste of
police brutality like I've seen online, I would make _sure_ I was out every
day, and I would be a lot more angry than I am as someone who "just" cares
about civil rights.

------
sleepysysadmin
Humans are social beings. Quarantines, unemployment, essential workers under
additional stress and social isolation are all creating a far more tenuous
situation than say last summer. Flipside, Police who have had to deal with
people fake sneezing on them and avoiding the virus; still working everyday
because they are essential. They are on edge.

Now add in the fact that governments have used the virus as a way to shutdown
protests. Hong Kong? Gaza? Albania? Sudan? Yellow vests? BLM? Venezuela?

Unprecedented amounts of unemployment means people can get out and protest and
they've been couped up for how long? They'll be getting out to protest.

We are in the spring, wait until the summer and fall. It's going to be huge;
and then the US election happens between turd sandwich and giant douche.

------
thomascgalvin
There are an array of reasons.

1\. The "broken windows" fallacy taken to its extreme:

> The broken windows theory is a criminological theory that states that
> visible signs of crime, anti-social behavior, and civil disorder create an
> urban environment that encourages further crime and disorder, including
> serious crimes.

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

Police see themselves as the "thin blue line" between chaos and social order,
and believe that they must put down and resistence, immediately, decisively,
and violently.

But, this _is_ a fallacy. In NYC, for example, major crimes _fell_ when the
NYPD stopped is "proactive policing" policy.

[https://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-
proacti...](https://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-proactive-
policing-crime-20170925-story.html)

2\. Militarization. The police are no longer trained to "protect and serve;"
they're trained to occupy and battle. They see citizens as the enemy, and
treat them as such. They are being told to "dominate the battlespace," which
is what you say about an enemy you want to destroy, not a community you want
to protect.

This extends to their equipment, as well. There are too many SWAT teams, too
many tanks, too many tools of violence, and when you have those tools, they
_will_ be used. Part of this is because of government budgeting - if you don't
use it, why should they give you more money - and part of this is because we
have fetishised violent police action.

A lot of this started with _COPS_ , but "police being action heroes" is an
entire genre of reality TV now. You can find videos of the police officers
gleefully destroying buildings because a suspect _might_ be inside.

3\. Personal immunity. Police face no repercussions for their actions. If a
police office targets the wrong house, tosses a flashbang into a baby's crib,
and shoots the mother ... nothing happens. There is no justice, there is no
recourse. Police are violent because they _can_ be violent, with impunity.

This is driven in large part by police unions, who make it essentially
impossible to fire a police officer, even for the worst behavior.

4\. Personality. The job of police officer attracts the kind of person who
should not be a police officer. People who want power over others, people who
want a license to use violence, simply cannot be trusted with that power.

This issue is greatly compounded by the above points; if you take someone with
violent fantasies, give them military grade weaponry, teach them that their
neighbors are an enemy who will murder them with the slightest provocation,and
tell them that they will never face any consequences for their actions, what
do you expect to happen?

~~~
dls2016
The only thing I would add is police abuse of steroids.

------
wayneftw
Police handle many things wrongly. I just got back from the store where I held
the door open for a police man as he entered... and he wasn't wearing a mask.

I waited until he got out and I asked him "No mask?" to which he replied
"Why?" and I said "The sign says No Mask, No Service" (and everybody else was
wearing one) and this asshole replies "I wasn't buying anything." I laughed at
him and drove off.

~~~
flyGuyOnTheSly
So you began your interaction by holding the door open for another human
being, and you ended it a few minutes later by confronting them about a
personal choice of health and safety, thought them to be an asshole, and
laughed at them due to their response?

And you're so proud of that interaction that you are posting it in a comment
on HN right now?

For all you know the officer was called into the store for an urgent matter.

Be kind to others, and you'll lead a much happier and fulfilling life.

~~~
wayneftw
> So you began your interaction by holding the door open for another human
> being, and you ended it a few minutes later by confronting them about a
> personal choice of health and safety, thought them to be an asshole, and
> laughed at them due to their response?

Yep. It's not a personal choice though... it's well-known that wearing masks
prevents the spread of disease.

How is it that you are ignorant of this fact?

> And you're so proud of that interaction that you are posting it in a comment
> on HN right now?

That's what you got out of that?? Okay...

You seem to be having trouble differentiating a plain description of a brief
interaction with a cop who was clearly in the wrong with "pride".

> For all you know the officer was called into the store for an urgent matter.

Too urgent to take 2 seconds to put a mask on for everybody's safety???? When
he wasn't running into the store? That's not urgent...

Sorry buddy, but you're clearly wrong. Perhaps you should re-think your
position.

> Mind your own business, be kind to others, and you'll lead a much happier
> and fulfilling life.

I'm white, I live in a great neighborhood, I got a huge house, a pool, a boat,
3 cars, my job is very fulfilling, I make 6 figures working full-time from
home doing something I love... my family is wonderful, I have hobbies,
friends, I travel... thanks for your concern, but I'm not sure how much
happier I can get, lol ;)

I'm honestly doing so well and my life is so easy that I feel guilty at times.

Sorry that you got triggered by this. Perhaps you should consider taking your
own advice? Please do... thanks.

~~~
flyGuyOnTheSly
Not triggered, just flabbergasted at your insistence that thinking another
person was the asshole after you called them out for not adhering to your own
worldview.

Obviously you know you were in the wrong, which is why you just wrote so much
defending your position. So I'll leave it at that.

Enjoy your huge house and 3 cars. I am glad that they make you happy.

~~~
wayneftw
Scientific facts are not a worldview. Saying so is _awfully ignorant_.

My state has also mandated that everybody wears masks in public places, so
it's actually against the law right now...

Care to keep going? I'll be right here...

~~~
flyGuyOnTheSly
No not at all. You are obviously right.

Enjoy your cars! :)

~~~
wayneftw
Well, I listed a lot of other things besides cars that make me happy - not
sure why you're focusing on that, as if someone enjoying cars is a bad
thing...

Mostly I enjoy having a nice conversation. Thanks so much for making this a
pleasant one.

~~~
flyGuyOnTheSly
Enjoy your pool and boat then.

You listed primarily material things that make you happy which made me feel
poorly for you.

Laughing at and judging total strangers then bragging about it on the internet
though... my bad... you sound like a real nice wholesome human being!

Maybe you'll feel even better if you call 2 random strangers an asshole on the
internet tomorrow, or 4?!

Good luck! You're gonna need it!

~~~
wayneftw
Actually, about half my list was non-material things - friends, family,
fulfillment, etc..

You're just focusing on the material things because you want to think bad
things about me, since _you 're quite obviously a miserable person_ and you
want everybody to feel that way.

Not gonna happen friend :) It's too nice of a day today!

> Laughing at and judging total strangers then bragging about it on the
> internet though...

Cops are public figures. Bragging did not happen, an interaction was plainly
described. You can keep trying to twist it... enjoying your downvotes I guess?

You almost ended on a pretty good note, but I see that not having the last
word is going to be a challenge for you...

Honestly, I have no problem continuing to respond to your delusional comments
in an effort to help you adjust your ego and your incorrect views. I'll check
back in a few hours.

(EDIT: I'm just wondering - as such a good wholesome, moral person as you are
- is this what you call "minding your own business"?? Trying to ram your
opinion down some random persons throat? For 2 days?? As I ponder this... yes,
I laugh - that's a given when confronted with such a high level of
neuroticism, but I'm also actually thankful for all the entertainment that
you've provided to me.)

------
toyg
The analysis assumes the police actually wants to de-escalate things and they
are just mis-handling protests. That's not necessarily true.

------
sillywalk
Beating/gassing/terrorizing peaceful protesters en-masse, is THE POINT.
Especially when so many cop unions are totally unaccountable, and run by
cowardly authoritarian sadists. Brown shirts for Trump.

Who are the rioters? The cops.

------
4636760295
The police don't exist to protect the general public, they exist to protect
rich people and their property. Politicians know this, and they allow the
police to project an aura of fear because it helps them maintain control of
the population with a relatively small force.

The US is a plutocracy: it's a country governed largely by the rich, through
lobbying, gerrymandering, and a constant information war to convert the least
intelligent voters to their side. There's a reason why people who are bad at
evaluating facts objectively and often believe in conspiracy theories, and
also those who are rich, tend to vote for one particular side.

~~~
danaris
Maybe this is how it _is_.

Most of us believe it's not how it _should_ be.

And it's definitely not what the _law_ says it is.

~~~
082349872349872
Be careful with asking people to do what the _law_ says.

King (Martin, not Rodney) said[1] "[a]ll we say to America is to be true to
what you said on paper".

Kennedy suggested[2] a world "where the strong are just and the weak secure
and the peace preserved".

If he were alive today, I'm sure JFK would have half a mind to ask "how could
you elect such a schoolyahd president?"

[1] [https://kinginstitute.stanford.edu/king-
papers/documents/ive...](https://kinginstitute.stanford.edu/king-
papers/documents/ive-been-mountaintop-address-delivered-bishop-charles-mason-
temple)

[2]
[https://nationalcenter.org/KennedyInaugural.html](https://nationalcenter.org/KennedyInaugural.html)
(incidentally, Earl Warren has an interesting history; he once became Governor
of California by winning _both_ the D and R primaries)

~~~
danaris
I mean, yeah, obviously the law is not a perfect guide to what is moral or
just.

My point was that in many cases, the police _are not even making it up to that
standard_. They are breaking the law and their own rules in order to punish
the protesters for daring to challenge their (the police's) perceived right to
be above the law.

------
umvi
Just like you should drive defensively, you should protest defensively too. A
pair of ballistic-grade safety glasses for starters would go a long way (the
kind industrial workers use to protect their eyes from flying ball bearings).
I keep reading stories about reporters losing eyes to rubber bullets, when it
is completely preventable.

~~~
delusional
Drive defensively, but if a drunk driver hits your car and kills you, it's
still their fault.

Wear safety glasses, but if a police officer hits you and takes out your eye,
it's still their fault.

I agree with you that wearing safety gear might be a great idea. That still
says something terrible about the American police system, and it shouldn't be
necessary.

