• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

How Police In Ferguson Should Have Handled Crowd Control

T

TheDemSocialist

Gradualist
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 13, 2011
Messages
34,951
Reaction score
16,311
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Socialist
Good law enforcement officers know better than this. Mike Masterson is Chief of the Boise, Idaho Police Department and a 40-year veteran of law enforcement. He began his career in Madison, Wisconsin, during an era of widespread student protests. In his own words, Masterson helped manage protests and mass gatherings ranging from “antiapartheid demonstrations and dismantling of shantytowns on capitol property to an annual alcohol-laden Halloween festival.”In a 2012 article for the FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, Masterson laid out the conclusions reached by law enforcement agencies around the world who’d researched the best way for police to interact with a crowd that has the potential to become disruptive. The answer: police should do more or less the exact opposite of what they have done in Ferguson.
According to Masterson, the “leading scientific theory of crowd psychology,” which was developed by British researchers studying soccer hooliganism, “maintains that crowd violence escalates if people think police officers treat them unfairly.” Related research advises police that “group members comply with the law when they perceive that officers act with justice and legitimacy.”
Research also supports the “Madison Method of Handling People in Crowds and Demonstrations,” which emphasizes that police best promote the public order when they respect the legal rights of citizens. As Masterson explains,
This approach begins with defining the mission and safeguarding the fundamental rights of people to gather and speak out legally. The philosophy should reflect the agency’s core values in viewing citizens as customers. This focus is not situational; it cannot be turned on and off depending on the crisis.
Law enforcement agencies facilitate and protect the public’s right to free speech and assembly. When officers realize they are at a protest to ensure these rights, they direct their responses accordingly, from planning to implementing the plan. Officers must have a well-defined mission that encourages the peaceful gathering of people and uses planning, open communication, negotiation, and leadership to accomplish this goal.
​
Compare this model to the events in Ferguson, where a Missouri state senator complained that she was tear-gassed while she was peacefully protesting the Brown shooting, where a St. Louis alderman who has chronicled the events in Ferguson on Twitter was arrested Wednesday night for allegedly joining an “unlawful assembly,” and where two journalists were arrested and assaulted by police for the apparent crime of being in a McDonald’s.
Click to expand...


Read more @: How Police In Ferguson Should Have Handled Crowd Control

They did the exact opposite of what they should of done. Instead of responding with restraint, they responded with abuse, and violently, and therefore incited more violence
 
The police are too militarized and are over reacting not just in Ferguson but all over the country, imo.


Many of these small rinky dink police departments in rural states sucked up a lot funding after 9/11 that should have gone to larger metro areas where the threat of terrorism was more credible. They bought themselves SWAT equipment and lessons, tanks, newest weapons, etc.....when really their biggest threat locally was domestic abuse and animal cruelty.


It makes me wonder if sometimes the police don't deliberately provoke situations just so they can try out their latest gear.
 
Last edited:
Moot said:
The police are too militarized and are over reacting not just in Ferguson but all over the country, imo.


Many of these small rinky dink police departments in rural states sucked up a lot funding after 9/11 that should have gone to larger metro areas where the threat of terrorism was more credible. They bought themselves SWAT equipment and lessons, tanks, newest weapons, etc.....when really their biggest threat locally was domestic abuse and animal cruelty.
Click to expand...

Bwaaaaaaaaaaaaa Haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa ....She said rural state. Lady you don't know squat about whereof you speak. Geesus...
 
A lot of cops will receive a supeana (sp?) for their dashboard cameras and then they will say it wasn't on. Or they have deleted the data, and there really isn't anything you can do about it. Cops basically want to do whatever they wish, and to be protected at all times. They don't want to be held accountable for their actions. They also lie in their police reports, because they can. Our judicial system protects cops so much that they are able to do whatever they wish. The St. Louis police chief said he believed the shooting was justified. He is obviously saying this to protect the cop, because when you hear the eye witness testimony the cop should be sent to prison.

Cops disregard personal rights all the time, and they even take advantage of people who do not know their rights. I hope this will force the nation to do something about this, because it has to stop.
 
HogWash said:
Bwaaaaaaaaaaaaa Haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa ....She said rural state. Lady you don't know squat about whereof you speak. Geesus...
Click to expand...

hardy har har......


Missouri_population_map_%282000%29.png



Looks pretty rural to me.
 


:censored
 
Moot said:
hardy har har....




Looks pretty rural to me.
Click to expand...

hardy har har...

How's California look to ya? There is more green and yellow there than Missouri.
 
Last edited:
HogWash said:
hardy har har...

How's California look to ya? There is more green and yellow there than Missouri.
Click to expand...


California looks extremely urbanized and densely populated up and down it's entire western coastline and full of sub rural red necks and meth addicts inland. How does it look to you?
 
Moot said:
California looks extremely urbanized and densely populated up and down it's entire western coastline and full of sub rural red necks and meth addicts inland. How does it look to you?
Click to expand...

Yes ...around L.A., S.F. and S.D. Other than that it's 800 miles of RURAL coastline. Then there is the Death Valley in the desert, the Napa Valley (rural grapes, lettuce and other farmers) and the northern mountains...bordering...get this NEVADA which is one big 'rural' state.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom