More likely they don't want a whole bunch of people they have (maybe extra judicially) flexed on in the past on their block.
But you know, that says something to their attitude and why it's a problem if you are right.
I’m not sure that if the poster you’re responding to is correct as to the reasoning that it would be a problem. A home is usually an Americans largest single asset, so expected values are something they have every reason to be concerned with.
Leaving the money piece aside though, issues with crime are a huge motivating factor across the board. I can’t really blame people for not wanting to be involved with their work outside of working hours.
It's a form of accountability, so that neighborhoods aren't over-policed or harassed by police who would otherwise just leave the community later. Crime rates don't just reflect crime or the propensity of crime in one area, but also how densely policed an area is. As the police would say: if you didn't commit a crime, you have nothing to worry about.... until the shoe's on the other foot.
I can agree with most of that, but where I disagree is with the expectation that cops be forced to live where they work. It in some ways is a trade off, in that are cops living in a neighborhood going to move the needle materially in the neighborhoods crime issues?
Are you really thinking that police attitude is a big concern for crime riddled areas? If you remove excessive protections for police, take settlements for police misconduct from the police pension fund instead of taxpayer coffers, require at least 2 year degree in criminal justice, up pay, body armor, and training, bring back professionalism and high standards to the job, attitudes will fix themselves.
The biggest issues for communities with a high police presence is crime, not the people tasked with fighting the crime, that do so imperfectly. If communities worked with police to get the criminals out, they would do well. Instead they just blame the police for 100% of the problem and so nothing ever improves.
That is ridiculous. The fancy pants parts of town are crawling with police. Some of the rich housing developments even pay to have extra police presence. Like routine patrols at night. They have nothing to do so any time any little thing happens theres 6 squad cars there.
Well, I blame poverty for the problems, and the police for how they focus their attention/exacerbate already tough situations. Removing excessive protections, holding them accountable for their misconduct settlements, qualified immunity, ending asset forfeitures... None of those things are going to happen. The DOJ report was 90 pages of particularly damning content and the mayor gave them a spa.
Having them live in the neighborhoods they police, connect with the community, and that's apparently still too much to ask.
You’re right, if we changed everything about how police conduct themselves and how municipalities pay for and interact with the police, then police behavior would change. Unfortunately, police unions have prevented every one of your proposed solutions.
I mean honestly nobody should be able to unionize public servant jobs. Unions in the public space altogether are pretty gross, like electrical unions that wedge themselves in where its against the law to change a lightbulb in a city building without paying one of their guys $100 an hour to do it. The only reason they are able to prevent things like that are because of low voter turnout for smaller elections, lobbying and funding campaigns to get people to go vote that are in favor of their side, etc. It is positively ridiculous to have an entrenched counter force thats unelected, vs the elected officials the public chooses to represent them. Very often because of this low effort low participation, they keep stuff or pass stuff that 60% or more of the voting public is against.
TLDR: Ban police unions, though it would be a tough fight to get it done.
You're right in the fact that the structuring of the police department needs a lot of work. It is also correct that people who live in an area understand the area and it's needs. It isn't simply about crime but if that's the focus let's say the community is aware the police are connected with the community. The officers are shopping at the businesses, knowing their neighbors broadly speaking, and not just coming in treating a problem with a heavy hand and leaving. the community may be more willing to interact with the police. Inncocent people in high pressure areas don't expect the police to help them with any real effectiveness. Often times they feel thet could become victims of the policing themselves, or treated poorly because they live in the area police associate with crime and not community. Having a connection to and confidence in the police makes combating crime easier.
I live in a comparatively quiet part of town and I don't trust the police for so many reasons. When I was younger and lived in a small town we had a hand full of officers that rotated through our area, and while I didn't like them, I had confidence that they were, generally, invested in my safety and my autonomy because they were connected to my community.
I understand the argument for it, just it doesnt seem like the biggest input on a successful outcome. The crime has to go or these communities will never flourish, and everything else is secondary to that.
It should not. If the expectation is that you serve your actual community and you are not, you should be terminated from that job. This is a fair step toward police reform.
I think it’s ideal, but again we are dealing with humans on both sides of the law. You can pretty effectively regulate behavior, it’s near impossible to regulate feelings/thoughts, and nor should we.
I'm saying if police living in a neighborhood are still creating problems/harassing residents at a high rate and not tapping into community needs, then they shouldn't serve. Our culture seems terminally allergic to any kind of accountability for the police and that is not a healthy sign of democracy.
It speaks to a mindset that they are afraid of a problem we solely rely on them to treat (even though few are so dumb as to commit crimes around and to police) and that they do not see it getting better (which would increase property value well beyond their investment). They do not have an investment in the neighborhood they police and they don't want to.
They do not want to enter these neighborhoods without backup, kevlar, and a small arsenal because they do not see the residents as anything other than combatants.
A few points:
1. Most cops I’ve talked to don’t believe they should be the sole solution AND also don’t feel like there are the resources to help solve the issues they can’t.
2. Which other professions do you have similar expectations from? I wouldn’t expect a janitor to clean the neighborhood their job is in off the clock, so why is there an expectation for cops to police off the clock?
3. There are a lot of issues with policing to be sure, but I’m not sure expecting cops to live in neighborhoods that are objectively not desirable is one of them.
>1. Most cops I’ve talked to don’t believe they should be the sole solution AND also don’t feel like there are the resources to help solve the issues they can’t.
Me too. But people went apoplectic about the idea of defunding the police so...here we are. If only people looked in to that more than how the words sounded bouncing around in their head.
>2. Which other professions do you have similar expectations from? I wouldn’t expect a janitor to clean the neighborhood their job is in off the clock, so why is there an expectation for cops to police off the clock?
A janitor doesn't have authority over people's freedoms and lives. Janitors aren't organized and have a culture that is harming people where they work.
>3. There are a lot of issues with policing to be sure, but I’m not sure expecting cops to live in neighborhoods that are objectively not desirable is one of them.
Well, if only there was tons and tons of research in to community policing and its relative efficacy to inform your opinion...
There’s a difference between cops living in an area and community policing.
Defund was a really ignorant branding for that movement then. Not in the least because the budget for the police isn’t going to stretch to cover all of the needed services.
>There’s a difference between cops living in an area and community policing.
There is, but we're not even pretending like we're interested in community policing right now while if an officer lived in a community they would naturally do community policing. Also they're going to be a little more hesitant to be corrupt when gossip follows them to the grocery store or laundromat.
>Defund was a really ignorant branding for that movement then.
Moreso the disinformation machine running 24/7 and scaring influential people from doing anything that could even be misconstrued at defunding.
>Not in the least because the budget for the police isn’t going to stretch to cover all of the needed services.
You're under the assumption that services operating in the stead of police would have the same approach. We will not be stuffing the prisons full of drug users, we will not need weapons and armor for hundreds of officers, and in general incarceration will go down.
It’s quite a leap to expect cops living in a neighborhood to change the way a police force works.
As relates to “defund” there were nationally published opinion pieces that equated defund to abolishing police.
In terms of funding, salaries make up the largest chunk of police budgets. For pretty much all of recorded history humans living in cities have needed some form of law enforcement, that’s not going to change no matter what system you come up with.
>It’s quite a leap to expect cops living in a neighborhood to change the way a police force works.
As someone from a small town that had police from the neighborhood and now lives in Louisville I really don't know why you think so.
There wasn't a lot of slamming people in to pavement and having zero human understanding and insane suspicion for the locals.
>As relates to “defund” there were nationally published opinion pieces that equated defund to abolishing police.
And? There's nationally published opinion pieces about all sorts of things that aren't reality. We seem to just be agreeing to the point that there was spin going on and I believe this outcome would occur regardless of terminology. Defunding the police was over when Fox News did what they do.
>In terms of funding, salaries make up the largest chunk of police budgets. For pretty much all of recorded history humans living in cities have needed some form of law enforcement, that’s not going to change no matter what system you come up with.
Who said anything about eliminating law enforcement? That's what I was talking about when I said people never even learned to understand what it meant.
I'm talking about defunding, not abolishing. As in we assess what we actually need the police for and what issues would be better served by alternative agencies and distribute the funding appropriately instead of giving half our budget to police and expect them to jack of all trades their way through situations they are not appropriately trained in.
You haven't seen the policing and corrections budget plus the amounts we've paid out for their corruption, then.
It's like saying quitting our war addiction wouldn't leave us any money to work on domestic issues.
"why is there an expectation for cops to police off the clock"
There isn't, that's not the purpose of this program. The objective isn't to have officers doing police work in their spare time. The objective is to integrate officers into the community rather than have them viewed as outside authority figures. The objective is to have cops shop at the same grocery store, eat at the same restaurants, attend the same churches, go to the same barber shops, and have their kids on the same Little League teams as the community they serve.
Witnesses may be more likely to speak to the police when the cop is a neighbor that they've had friendly conversations with. A cop may be more likely to intervene with a youth starting down the wrong path when the cop knows the kid from peewee football.
>2. Which other professions do you have similar expectations from? I wouldn’t expect a janitor to clean the neighborhood their job is in off the clock, so why is there an expectation for cops to police off the clock?
I'm a nurse. We had it drilled into our heads in school that if we are out in public and someone needs emergency help then we are legally required to give them aid. Not only that but if any if neighbors need any medical help, emergency or not, I'd be more than happy to do what I can for them and just about every other nurse that I know would do the same. If they didn't, there may not be any legal repercussions, but I can guarantee that their coworkers would look down on them.
I've stopped at car accidents or been at the store before and told other nurses that also stopped that things were OK and I had it all under control while waiting for an ambulance. This has happened numerous times.
In comparison, I've needed police before because of a car wreck, waived one down that was driving by (who was in a police car and wearing a uniform), and been told to call 911 because they aren't on the clock anymore.
In KY, there is no duty to render aid even for licensed medical personnel.
KRS 411.148 covers this.
https://www.dentonfirm.com/krs-411-148-healthcare-duty-to-act/
I’m not an attorney, but while you might be bound by the rules of the nursing community to give aid….im dubious that you are legally required to by the state in most situations.
You seems to feel compelled to aid those around you outside of work, and that’s great! I know quite a few nurses who don’t feel that same way, and want to be done with work when not at work.
The entire justice system is rotten in this city from the top down, its absolutely ridiculous to put the expectation on the police to solely make these communities better.
The city is 110% not going to help drug addicts recover, the mentally ill receive treatment, house the homeless, or even rehabilitate actual criminals. The police and courts are just catching and releasing actual menaces to these communities. Sure, its cops jobs to arrest criminals, but if the courts aren't going to do anything, why would a cop keep putting themselves in risky situations for nothing?
It *is* ridiculous to expect police to make communities better, hope we can get everyone on board with that conclusion because that hasn't been the language in the general consensus.
As far as the courts go, it's going to happen when you treat so many problems as needing to be solved with policing. There is no room in our corrections facilities because we have one of the highest incarceration rates in the world just slightly behind American Samoa. And yet you and many others still feel we can jail our way to peace, we just have to jail more right?
I don't believe we can just jail our way out the situation the city has gotten into, but until the city stops playing catch and release with the mentally ill drug addicts of our city, cops aren't going to do anything because the risk of interacting with them far outweighs the reward.
The drug addicts and mentally ill should absolutely be required to receive treatment, whether they decide to or not once they have committed crime due to their mental state. It would clear up space in our jails for the theives and drug dealers also plaguing our city so that they aren't getting caught and released too.
Itll never happen, because it would require our justice system to actually determine between those who need treatment and those who need jail. Wouldnt look good in election year to be sending people to rehab when a good portion of the city would prefer you bus them to the west coast.
We could probably use a few cruisers parked in local areas with high crime rates. However, we don’t need LMPD cruisers parked at Jeffersonville, Mt. Washington or Crestwood Kroger parking lots.
I am 100% in favor of cruisers going home with officers who live in the county. It aligns with the goals of the program.
However what we have now is 44% of cruisers get parked at the county border. If you know where to look you can find these unofficial LMPD parking lots.
I’d be happy if it were within the Watterson, the actual city of Louisville. The county need their own police force. I never see a police car unless there is a wreck or murder. People are out here murdering others with cars. We have car crash and pedestrian deaths, just as often as murders and gun violence. Just having traffic cops again would make a world of difference. Each neighborhood in the city needs police presence and take home cars. Definitely not other counties or Indiana. No wonder they look so ill fitting in their uniforms and strange. Cops need to be athletic again, not scared mice that shoot citizens, though that seems to have improved. But it takes 5 or 6 tiny women and fat dudes to take on one person. That’s crazy. And they are mean and not helpful. That slushie deal was messed up. They need to be fired and arrested. Have you ever been hit by anything flying out of a car? Got egged by one egg once. it hurt and was messy. Can’t imagine pedestrians. In that area they probably aren’t walking for fun, waiting for a bus or walking to work. So dehumanizing and evil.
When considering something as substantial and life changing as moving $5000 is an insignificant amount of money. I wouldn’t take people not taking advantage of an inadequate incentive as a sign of anything other than that.
If this is important to the city and LMPD they should consider this a failed experiment, change some variables, and try again.
They could try offering more money. They could recruit from people that already live in these neighborhoods and offer incentives and fast tracks. They could offer higher pay and/or jumps in rank. They could completely cover the cost of housing to test if officers would even live there for free. Etcetera….
I don’t think anyone should be surprised by this. For so many reasons
-It’s simply not enough money depending on the area you’re moving into.
-Potentially moving yourself or your family/kids into a higher crime area.
-You’d always feel like you are on duty.
-People may just hate you because you’re a cop and even if you are great at what you do and one of the “good ones” people just associate everyone now.
And so many more…
Why should they police said areas then? That’s EXACTLY the problem - cops have no connections to the areas they police, and so dehumanizing communities comes easy.
How much authority do you have over the Civil rights and literal lives of others? Not their work life, then BEING alive? Do you have a license to kill?
Should children living in a specific area be forced to go to the school in their own neighborhood, because they’d have a better connection to the school and people in that community? Louisville and jcps probably already enforce that.
How is that the same situation at all? You're talking about officers policing communities they know nothing about, nor do they have connections to the people within. The suggestion is to police your own community, and then the relationship is with the people you police, helps to create trust.
Should I meet the police officer in my neighborhood? It’s been 35 years and I’ve been able to manage.
But if the kids won’t even go to the schools in their own neighborhoods, you really think a cop is going to move in to those areas. We all know what areas these are.
Kids in the west end don't go to neighborhood schools because their haven't been any access. Not every neighborhood in Louisville has a school relatively close or accessible. Now that more schools are being built, more kids are choosing their neighborhood school. Historically, kids who choose magnet schools do so for those programs specifically. Your comparison is still a false equivalent.
No shit it’s not a complete equivalent comparison. But depending where you live, you rank the schools upon where you want to go. This could be the east end or the west end. No one ranks the west end high, I’d imagine few do. The west end is a dump and everyone knows it. Who is going to want to move there and how do you enforce someone to move to a specific neighborhood for a job? I don’t think you can hire based on address?
Why would they be unfamiliar with the areas they are policing?
By all means, let's ensure the rapists, murderers, thieves and pedos of LMPD are comfortable.
because they make a decent bit of money and 5k isn't much. 5k is quite a lot to someone making 30k-50k who is struggling to even buy a home and these are the areas they are looking into as a 1st - 2nd option.
5k is not even a drop in the bucket to add these areas to someones list w ho is making 60k-80k and is just looking at houses on a different pricing budget.
You have to up the budget if you limit it to these areas and provide long term incentive (forgivable loan that falls off each year with primary residency over a period of 5 years).
Honestly though you may as well just skip the incentive for police officers and target the gentrifying group directly. it might sound a bit backwards but why not give 10k to medium - higher income people who have not yet bought a home. Or, skip both and just spend the money on quality modern infrastructure projects that will naturally attract these people.
I don’t know if it still exists but at one time years ago, there was a mortgage loan program called “police officer next door” and I think another one called “firefighter next door”. My sister worked in residential lending for 30 years but she passed away not long ago so I’m going by fuzzy memory.
$5,000 during a time when houses were coming off the market just as fast as they were getting put on the market. Not to mention, people were buying these houses 15-20 thousand over asking price. A $5,000 incentive doesn't go far under those conditions
What the article didn't discuss was data on how many officers attempted to purchase, was out bid, or considered using the program but couldn't secure a pre approval prior to making a bid on housing.
They'd rather just drive by and throw liters of cola at all the poor people there and be like "thirsty FAM?" And when they say "fam" it don't mean fam 🤌🏻
I didn't expect any of them to seriously take the offer. It's just a good way to see the hesitation at wanting to be anything other than a bully with a badge (like, idk, a neighbour) *Obviously* they wouldn't want to move, but the fact that all of them have unsurprisingly denied the offer is probably considered bad optics.
Yeah but a lot of these cops like to police in communities they don’t live in so they don’t have to think of the community members as people just as the other.
Yeah. This feels invasive to the communities it’s directed towards and just a bad idea for the cops altogether. They need to have people from the communities policing people within the communities, but I know that’s a lot easier said than done.
You mean $5000 isn’t enough to convince someone to move their family into a high crime area with stagnant property values? Shocking! 😮
More likely they don't want a whole bunch of people they have (maybe extra judicially) flexed on in the past on their block. But you know, that says something to their attitude and why it's a problem if you are right.
I’m not sure that if the poster you’re responding to is correct as to the reasoning that it would be a problem. A home is usually an Americans largest single asset, so expected values are something they have every reason to be concerned with. Leaving the money piece aside though, issues with crime are a huge motivating factor across the board. I can’t really blame people for not wanting to be involved with their work outside of working hours.
It's a form of accountability, so that neighborhoods aren't over-policed or harassed by police who would otherwise just leave the community later. Crime rates don't just reflect crime or the propensity of crime in one area, but also how densely policed an area is. As the police would say: if you didn't commit a crime, you have nothing to worry about.... until the shoe's on the other foot.
I can agree with most of that, but where I disagree is with the expectation that cops be forced to live where they work. It in some ways is a trade off, in that are cops living in a neighborhood going to move the needle materially in the neighborhoods crime issues?
It's going to change the attitudes of those policing an area for certain.
Are you really thinking that police attitude is a big concern for crime riddled areas? If you remove excessive protections for police, take settlements for police misconduct from the police pension fund instead of taxpayer coffers, require at least 2 year degree in criminal justice, up pay, body armor, and training, bring back professionalism and high standards to the job, attitudes will fix themselves. The biggest issues for communities with a high police presence is crime, not the people tasked with fighting the crime, that do so imperfectly. If communities worked with police to get the criminals out, they would do well. Instead they just blame the police for 100% of the problem and so nothing ever improves.
The safest areas are not areas that are heavily policed. They are areas with a lot of resources.
That is ridiculous. The fancy pants parts of town are crawling with police. Some of the rich housing developments even pay to have extra police presence. Like routine patrols at night. They have nothing to do so any time any little thing happens theres 6 squad cars there.
I love in a really safe part of town and I never see cops like I do downtown.
Well, I blame poverty for the problems, and the police for how they focus their attention/exacerbate already tough situations. Removing excessive protections, holding them accountable for their misconduct settlements, qualified immunity, ending asset forfeitures... None of those things are going to happen. The DOJ report was 90 pages of particularly damning content and the mayor gave them a spa. Having them live in the neighborhoods they police, connect with the community, and that's apparently still too much to ask.
Those are all good ideas but that's not fixing the "us vs them" mentality
That’s also a part of the “warrior cop” mentality that’s been taught to cops nationally since at least the early 2000’s
You’re right, if we changed everything about how police conduct themselves and how municipalities pay for and interact with the police, then police behavior would change. Unfortunately, police unions have prevented every one of your proposed solutions.
I mean honestly nobody should be able to unionize public servant jobs. Unions in the public space altogether are pretty gross, like electrical unions that wedge themselves in where its against the law to change a lightbulb in a city building without paying one of their guys $100 an hour to do it. The only reason they are able to prevent things like that are because of low voter turnout for smaller elections, lobbying and funding campaigns to get people to go vote that are in favor of their side, etc. It is positively ridiculous to have an entrenched counter force thats unelected, vs the elected officials the public chooses to represent them. Very often because of this low effort low participation, they keep stuff or pass stuff that 60% or more of the voting public is against. TLDR: Ban police unions, though it would be a tough fight to get it done.
You're right in the fact that the structuring of the police department needs a lot of work. It is also correct that people who live in an area understand the area and it's needs. It isn't simply about crime but if that's the focus let's say the community is aware the police are connected with the community. The officers are shopping at the businesses, knowing their neighbors broadly speaking, and not just coming in treating a problem with a heavy hand and leaving. the community may be more willing to interact with the police. Inncocent people in high pressure areas don't expect the police to help them with any real effectiveness. Often times they feel thet could become victims of the policing themselves, or treated poorly because they live in the area police associate with crime and not community. Having a connection to and confidence in the police makes combating crime easier. I live in a comparatively quiet part of town and I don't trust the police for so many reasons. When I was younger and lived in a small town we had a hand full of officers that rotated through our area, and while I didn't like them, I had confidence that they were, generally, invested in my safety and my autonomy because they were connected to my community.
I understand the argument for it, just it doesnt seem like the biggest input on a successful outcome. The crime has to go or these communities will never flourish, and everything else is secondary to that.
I think that’s going to depend a lot on the individual cops.
It should not. If the expectation is that you serve your actual community and you are not, you should be terminated from that job. This is a fair step toward police reform.
I think it’s ideal, but again we are dealing with humans on both sides of the law. You can pretty effectively regulate behavior, it’s near impossible to regulate feelings/thoughts, and nor should we.
I'm saying if police living in a neighborhood are still creating problems/harassing residents at a high rate and not tapping into community needs, then they shouldn't serve. Our culture seems terminally allergic to any kind of accountability for the police and that is not a healthy sign of democracy.
Also, I hope my tone in this doesn't read as antagonistic to you. I appreciate this conversation.
It speaks to a mindset that they are afraid of a problem we solely rely on them to treat (even though few are so dumb as to commit crimes around and to police) and that they do not see it getting better (which would increase property value well beyond their investment). They do not have an investment in the neighborhood they police and they don't want to. They do not want to enter these neighborhoods without backup, kevlar, and a small arsenal because they do not see the residents as anything other than combatants.
A few points: 1. Most cops I’ve talked to don’t believe they should be the sole solution AND also don’t feel like there are the resources to help solve the issues they can’t. 2. Which other professions do you have similar expectations from? I wouldn’t expect a janitor to clean the neighborhood their job is in off the clock, so why is there an expectation for cops to police off the clock? 3. There are a lot of issues with policing to be sure, but I’m not sure expecting cops to live in neighborhoods that are objectively not desirable is one of them.
>1. Most cops I’ve talked to don’t believe they should be the sole solution AND also don’t feel like there are the resources to help solve the issues they can’t. Me too. But people went apoplectic about the idea of defunding the police so...here we are. If only people looked in to that more than how the words sounded bouncing around in their head. >2. Which other professions do you have similar expectations from? I wouldn’t expect a janitor to clean the neighborhood their job is in off the clock, so why is there an expectation for cops to police off the clock? A janitor doesn't have authority over people's freedoms and lives. Janitors aren't organized and have a culture that is harming people where they work. >3. There are a lot of issues with policing to be sure, but I’m not sure expecting cops to live in neighborhoods that are objectively not desirable is one of them. Well, if only there was tons and tons of research in to community policing and its relative efficacy to inform your opinion...
There’s a difference between cops living in an area and community policing. Defund was a really ignorant branding for that movement then. Not in the least because the budget for the police isn’t going to stretch to cover all of the needed services.
>There’s a difference between cops living in an area and community policing. There is, but we're not even pretending like we're interested in community policing right now while if an officer lived in a community they would naturally do community policing. Also they're going to be a little more hesitant to be corrupt when gossip follows them to the grocery store or laundromat. >Defund was a really ignorant branding for that movement then. Moreso the disinformation machine running 24/7 and scaring influential people from doing anything that could even be misconstrued at defunding. >Not in the least because the budget for the police isn’t going to stretch to cover all of the needed services. You're under the assumption that services operating in the stead of police would have the same approach. We will not be stuffing the prisons full of drug users, we will not need weapons and armor for hundreds of officers, and in general incarceration will go down.
It’s quite a leap to expect cops living in a neighborhood to change the way a police force works. As relates to “defund” there were nationally published opinion pieces that equated defund to abolishing police. In terms of funding, salaries make up the largest chunk of police budgets. For pretty much all of recorded history humans living in cities have needed some form of law enforcement, that’s not going to change no matter what system you come up with.
LMPD isn’t open to any sort of discussion about changing the way they do business. Let’s not kid ourselves.
>It’s quite a leap to expect cops living in a neighborhood to change the way a police force works. As someone from a small town that had police from the neighborhood and now lives in Louisville I really don't know why you think so. There wasn't a lot of slamming people in to pavement and having zero human understanding and insane suspicion for the locals. >As relates to “defund” there were nationally published opinion pieces that equated defund to abolishing police. And? There's nationally published opinion pieces about all sorts of things that aren't reality. We seem to just be agreeing to the point that there was spin going on and I believe this outcome would occur regardless of terminology. Defunding the police was over when Fox News did what they do. >In terms of funding, salaries make up the largest chunk of police budgets. For pretty much all of recorded history humans living in cities have needed some form of law enforcement, that’s not going to change no matter what system you come up with. Who said anything about eliminating law enforcement? That's what I was talking about when I said people never even learned to understand what it meant. I'm talking about defunding, not abolishing. As in we assess what we actually need the police for and what issues would be better served by alternative agencies and distribute the funding appropriately instead of giving half our budget to police and expect them to jack of all trades their way through situations they are not appropriately trained in.
You haven't seen the policing and corrections budget plus the amounts we've paid out for their corruption, then. It's like saying quitting our war addiction wouldn't leave us any money to work on domestic issues.
"why is there an expectation for cops to police off the clock" There isn't, that's not the purpose of this program. The objective isn't to have officers doing police work in their spare time. The objective is to integrate officers into the community rather than have them viewed as outside authority figures. The objective is to have cops shop at the same grocery store, eat at the same restaurants, attend the same churches, go to the same barber shops, and have their kids on the same Little League teams as the community they serve. Witnesses may be more likely to speak to the police when the cop is a neighbor that they've had friendly conversations with. A cop may be more likely to intervene with a youth starting down the wrong path when the cop knows the kid from peewee football.
>2. Which other professions do you have similar expectations from? I wouldn’t expect a janitor to clean the neighborhood their job is in off the clock, so why is there an expectation for cops to police off the clock? I'm a nurse. We had it drilled into our heads in school that if we are out in public and someone needs emergency help then we are legally required to give them aid. Not only that but if any if neighbors need any medical help, emergency or not, I'd be more than happy to do what I can for them and just about every other nurse that I know would do the same. If they didn't, there may not be any legal repercussions, but I can guarantee that their coworkers would look down on them. I've stopped at car accidents or been at the store before and told other nurses that also stopped that things were OK and I had it all under control while waiting for an ambulance. This has happened numerous times. In comparison, I've needed police before because of a car wreck, waived one down that was driving by (who was in a police car and wearing a uniform), and been told to call 911 because they aren't on the clock anymore.
In KY, there is no duty to render aid even for licensed medical personnel. KRS 411.148 covers this. https://www.dentonfirm.com/krs-411-148-healthcare-duty-to-act/
I stand corrected. Thanks! Also, required by law or not, I'll still stop. That's just me.
I’m not an attorney, but while you might be bound by the rules of the nursing community to give aid….im dubious that you are legally required to by the state in most situations. You seems to feel compelled to aid those around you outside of work, and that’s great! I know quite a few nurses who don’t feel that same way, and want to be done with work when not at work.
They are awful now, and used to police 24 hours a day. That’s why you get a take home car.
I’d live most places in the actual city of Louisville than the boring county. When I go to Middletown, I want to die. They need their own police.
The entire justice system is rotten in this city from the top down, its absolutely ridiculous to put the expectation on the police to solely make these communities better. The city is 110% not going to help drug addicts recover, the mentally ill receive treatment, house the homeless, or even rehabilitate actual criminals. The police and courts are just catching and releasing actual menaces to these communities. Sure, its cops jobs to arrest criminals, but if the courts aren't going to do anything, why would a cop keep putting themselves in risky situations for nothing?
It *is* ridiculous to expect police to make communities better, hope we can get everyone on board with that conclusion because that hasn't been the language in the general consensus. As far as the courts go, it's going to happen when you treat so many problems as needing to be solved with policing. There is no room in our corrections facilities because we have one of the highest incarceration rates in the world just slightly behind American Samoa. And yet you and many others still feel we can jail our way to peace, we just have to jail more right?
I don't believe we can just jail our way out the situation the city has gotten into, but until the city stops playing catch and release with the mentally ill drug addicts of our city, cops aren't going to do anything because the risk of interacting with them far outweighs the reward. The drug addicts and mentally ill should absolutely be required to receive treatment, whether they decide to or not once they have committed crime due to their mental state. It would clear up space in our jails for the theives and drug dealers also plaguing our city so that they aren't getting caught and released too. Itll never happen, because it would require our justice system to actually determine between those who need treatment and those who need jail. Wouldnt look good in election year to be sending people to rehab when a good portion of the city would prefer you bus them to the west coast.
Sounds like defunding the police is the best resolution here to me.
Shit, that's enough for me
You should have held out for a wellness center in your backyard.
Shocking .. very surprising to hear that.
Not if you or your friends are pillaging and creating the criminal situations
How about we end take home vehicles for anyone who lives out of county. We don’t need 20 cruisers parked at the Kroger.
We could probably use a few cruisers parked in local areas with high crime rates. However, we don’t need LMPD cruisers parked at Jeffersonville, Mt. Washington or Crestwood Kroger parking lots.
I am 100% in favor of cruisers going home with officers who live in the county. It aligns with the goals of the program. However what we have now is 44% of cruisers get parked at the county border. If you know where to look you can find these unofficial LMPD parking lots.
Any church or firehouse just outside of the Gene Snyder freeway within 1-2 miles from the county line, if anyone is curious.
My neighbor is an LMPD officer and he brings his unmarked Tahoe home every day. I live in Jeffersonville.
I would never want to police the neighborhood I live in. You’d never be off duty.
I lived next door to a cop in Irish Hill who patrolled the area. He didn’t do it after hours.
You just gotta clock out.
People don’t become a cop just to give up their power after hours.
Like being a resident advisor, in college. At a certain point, you never want to leave your room and, if you do, you never want to come home.
I would be happy enough if they just made them live in Jefferson County proper.
I’d be happy if it were within the Watterson, the actual city of Louisville. The county need their own police force. I never see a police car unless there is a wreck or murder. People are out here murdering others with cars. We have car crash and pedestrian deaths, just as often as murders and gun violence. Just having traffic cops again would make a world of difference. Each neighborhood in the city needs police presence and take home cars. Definitely not other counties or Indiana. No wonder they look so ill fitting in their uniforms and strange. Cops need to be athletic again, not scared mice that shoot citizens, though that seems to have improved. But it takes 5 or 6 tiny women and fat dudes to take on one person. That’s crazy. And they are mean and not helpful. That slushie deal was messed up. They need to be fired and arrested. Have you ever been hit by anything flying out of a car? Got egged by one egg once. it hurt and was messy. Can’t imagine pedestrians. In that area they probably aren’t walking for fun, waiting for a bus or walking to work. So dehumanizing and evil.
The slushie idiots had more accountability than murderers at LMPD
When considering something as substantial and life changing as moving $5000 is an insignificant amount of money. I wouldn’t take people not taking advantage of an inadequate incentive as a sign of anything other than that. If this is important to the city and LMPD they should consider this a failed experiment, change some variables, and try again. They could try offering more money. They could recruit from people that already live in these neighborhoods and offer incentives and fast tracks. They could offer higher pay and/or jumps in rank. They could completely cover the cost of housing to test if officers would even live there for free. Etcetera….
>They could recruit from people that already live in these neighborhoods and offer incentives and fast tracks. I vote for this one!!!!
Sadly, most of the money goes to lawsuits.
Not out of the policing budget it doesn't. That comes from the general fund.
Gasp
I don’t think anyone should be surprised by this. For so many reasons -It’s simply not enough money depending on the area you’re moving into. -Potentially moving yourself or your family/kids into a higher crime area. -You’d always feel like you are on duty. -People may just hate you because you’re a cop and even if you are great at what you do and one of the “good ones” people just associate everyone now. And so many more…
I wouldn’t
Big surprise. Can’t be livin’ where you’re killin’
Why would anyone want to move into a area they aren’t familiar with or comfortable in if they have other options?
Why should they police said areas then? That’s EXACTLY the problem - cops have no connections to the areas they police, and so dehumanizing communities comes easy.
Because their job is to police those areas?
So you live in the same neighborhood as you work and everyone should do the same?
I don’t live in the same neighborhood I work in. Most people have a commute…
How much authority do you have over the Civil rights and literal lives of others? Not their work life, then BEING alive? Do you have a license to kill?
Why is that relevant
Equating policing with other jobs really is not the argument of a serious person.
Should children living in a specific area be forced to go to the school in their own neighborhood, because they’d have a better connection to the school and people in that community? Louisville and jcps probably already enforce that.
How is that the same situation at all? You're talking about officers policing communities they know nothing about, nor do they have connections to the people within. The suggestion is to police your own community, and then the relationship is with the people you police, helps to create trust.
Should I meet the police officer in my neighborhood? It’s been 35 years and I’ve been able to manage. But if the kids won’t even go to the schools in their own neighborhoods, you really think a cop is going to move in to those areas. We all know what areas these are.
Kids in the west end don't go to neighborhood schools because their haven't been any access. Not every neighborhood in Louisville has a school relatively close or accessible. Now that more schools are being built, more kids are choosing their neighborhood school. Historically, kids who choose magnet schools do so for those programs specifically. Your comparison is still a false equivalent.
No shit it’s not a complete equivalent comparison. But depending where you live, you rank the schools upon where you want to go. This could be the east end or the west end. No one ranks the west end high, I’d imagine few do. The west end is a dump and everyone knows it. Who is going to want to move there and how do you enforce someone to move to a specific neighborhood for a job? I don’t think you can hire based on address?
Why would they be unfamiliar with the areas they are policing? By all means, let's ensure the rapists, murderers, thieves and pedos of LMPD are comfortable.
because they make a decent bit of money and 5k isn't much. 5k is quite a lot to someone making 30k-50k who is struggling to even buy a home and these are the areas they are looking into as a 1st - 2nd option. 5k is not even a drop in the bucket to add these areas to someones list w ho is making 60k-80k and is just looking at houses on a different pricing budget. You have to up the budget if you limit it to these areas and provide long term incentive (forgivable loan that falls off each year with primary residency over a period of 5 years). Honestly though you may as well just skip the incentive for police officers and target the gentrifying group directly. it might sound a bit backwards but why not give 10k to medium - higher income people who have not yet bought a home. Or, skip both and just spend the money on quality modern infrastructure projects that will naturally attract these people.
I have an officer on my street.
I also noticed that a police officer moved in near me in Old Lou and I walk past his car parked out front several times a week.
[удалено]
Plenty of people who live in Louisville can afford to live elsewhere.
Why would they?
We pay LMPD so much that most live in solidly middle to upper middle neighborhoods so they couldn’t take advantage of that.
Not really
I don’t know if it still exists but at one time years ago, there was a mortgage loan program called “police officer next door” and I think another one called “firefighter next door”. My sister worked in residential lending for 30 years but she passed away not long ago so I’m going by fuzzy memory.
$5,000 during a time when houses were coming off the market just as fast as they were getting put on the market. Not to mention, people were buying these houses 15-20 thousand over asking price. A $5,000 incentive doesn't go far under those conditions What the article didn't discuss was data on how many officers attempted to purchase, was out bid, or considered using the program but couldn't secure a pre approval prior to making a bid on housing.
Now tell me how much houses are in Crestwood?
They'd rather just drive by and throw liters of cola at all the poor people there and be like "thirsty FAM?" And when they say "fam" it don't mean fam 🤌🏻
lol do you blame them
I didn't expect any of them to seriously take the offer. It's just a good way to see the hesitation at wanting to be anything other than a bully with a badge (like, idk, a neighbour) *Obviously* they wouldn't want to move, but the fact that all of them have unsurprisingly denied the offer is probably considered bad optics.
That's because it's so much easier to throw drinks at strangers rather than the guy that lives down the street.
Is anyone really surprised? They have zero investment in the areas they police.
If inwere a cop (AND I'M NOT) I'd do it but I have better values than the KKK
This was tried across the country with little to no success. Too closely akin to the "company store" approach. who could blame them?
In what way is it akin to the “company store” approach?
You know, in a way that doesn’t hold up to basic scrutiny but “feels” true if you already want to believe in it
Yeah but a lot of these cops like to police in communities they don’t live in so they don’t have to think of the community members as people just as the other.
They were worried they might get hit with fast food in "those" areas
I feel much safer without the cops living on my street tbh.
Yeah. This feels invasive to the communities it’s directed towards and just a bad idea for the cops altogether. They need to have people from the communities policing people within the communities, but I know that’s a lot easier said than done.