[sudo-discuss] Hack Tha Police

[Sonja Trauss]

+++++++ one million. Aside from the social aspect of having police live in
your city is an economic one: Oakland is poor, it's cant afford to be
sending money to other cities in the form of high salaries. The $200,000
cops make should be taxed here and spent here.
I'm from Philadelphia where no city employees are allowed to live outside
the city. It used to be the case in CA that cities could make rules like
that, but now there is a state law prohibiting cities from doing that !!
State law or no, the city could maybe decide to prioritize hiring and
promoting candidates that live in Oakland. Idk if that is illegal.


On Monday, May 13, 2013, Andrew wrote:

> Given OPDs record, I don't think adding more police will solve anything.
>
>
> http://www.insidebayarea.com/breaking-news/ci_23151173/oakland-police-too-quick-fire
>
> What we need is a residency requirement  In order to work for the Oakland
> Police Department you need to live in Oakland. You can even live in the
> hills if you don't want to mingle with the common folk. But coming in to
> work from Concord to try and police a community that struggles
> with extreme poverty and broken social services is not right.
>
> --Andrew
>
>
> On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 6:41 AM, Marina Kukso <marina.kukso at gmail.com>wrote:
>
> hey eddan and others who are following this, it would be great if we could
> add details about the current situation with the police chief to the wiki:
> http://oaklandwiki.org/Three_Police_Chiefs_in_Three_Days
>
> - marina
>
>
> On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 5:21 PM, GtwoG PublicOhOne <g2g-public01 at att.net>wrote:
>
>
> YOs-
>
> It's well known in cog sci & experimental psych, that adverse scrutiny
> causes a decline in many human performance measures.  This should come as
> no surprise: trying to accomplish any task becomes more difficult when
> someone in the background is laughing at you, saying you can't do it,
> finding fault, and ready to impose some kind of penalty for mistakes.
>
> It's also the case in employment situations: employees who are under
> adverse scrutiny tend to make more mistakes on the job.  Some attention
> that would otherwise be focused on the primary task, is diverted to being
> aware of the boss who might suddenly impose a punishment.
>
> So here we are in the robbery capital of America, with our police
> department in a logical double-bind (damned if you do, damned if you don't)
> between four conflicting demands:
>
> a) stop the crime wave, b) but do it with 1/4 to 1/3 fewer officers than a
> comparable-sized city should have, c) and don't go overboard on suspects,
> d) all of this while we keep you under adverse scrutiny.
>
> So is it any surprise that OPD isn't functioning as it should?
>
> The first response of a culture with deep roots in puritanism is to assert
> moral righteousness and seek to punish.  This is true in our response to
> crime, and it's also true in our response to police misconduct and other
> faults of LE agencies.  These dynamics can become more extreme when their
> underlying causes are more extreme: Oakland has a long history as a violent
> town, and America has a long history as a violent culture.  Our popular
> entertainment ceaselessly offers up a river of gore for our "viewing
> pleasure."
>
> So, a few modest proposals:
>
> One:
>
> A major source of crime is in systematic denial of opportunity to urban
> youth, beginning with inadequate education, followed by no access to
> college, systemic unemployment, and no opportunities for small business
> start-ups.  What's needed here is reform on all three fronts.
>
> One thing that can be done from the community level, is microenterprise
> development: helping people get started in small business that employ a up
> to a half dozen people.  Very often this takes relatively little capital,
> but much hands-on to educate people who are seeking to start
> microenterprises, and work with them over time to help them succeed.  When
> it succeeds, it has a multiplier effect: it also attracts conventional
> capital to an area, as a "good bet" for more conventional small business
> startups.
>
> Two:
>
> The fact that Oakland needs to hire approx. another 200 officers, is also
> an opportunity for a culture change at OPD.  An incentive structure should
> be put in place to hire officers who have 4-year college degrees in any
> field that's even remotely relevant, including history and the social
> sciences.  The same incentives should be offered to current employees of
> OPD: including payment of tuition as well as higher pay upon completion of
> a 4-year degree.
>
> If that sounds unrealistic, add up the cost of the crime itself, and
> compare to the cost of a college-educated police department.
>
> There's one other change that might bring in more candidates from
> backgrounds that are more suitable to the realities of the Bay Area.  This
> is going to sound like a liberal stereotype, but none the less the
> reasoning is sound:
>
> At present, OPD rejects any applicant with a history of illegal drug use,
> and fires any employee who tests positive for illegal drugs.
>
> --
> -------
> Andrew Lowe
> Cell: 831-332-2507
> http://roshambomedia.com
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sudoroom.org/pipermail/sudo-discuss/attachments/20130513/df2f1213/attachment.html>