A few people may be able to accept a society where the police can do
whatever they want without having to explain their actions. I think for
most of us, this just won't work. I suspect that even in acknowledged
police states there is some kind of social contract between the population
and law enforcement, and that people generally understand what motivates
the police and know what to expect from them, as grim as their expectations
may be.
It's ironic to me that the police seem to hate anarchists more than any
other group, and yet they want to be a law unto themselves instead of
supporting a truly lawful society.
You have a good point that guns are the tools we give them, therefore guns
are the tools they use. I would hope that with the right training they
could have effective social and psychological tools to apply to difficult
situations. No, I don't know how this is done. But there are other
professions that deal with the profoundly mentally ill without the use of
guns.
Regarding the two recent shootings, Bruce Gaarder points out that shooting
the engine and tires probably won't stop a car. I don't see how shooting
the driver accomplishes that, either. The driver is not likely to think,
"Gee, I better move my foot from the gas pedal to the brake before I die so
nobody else gets hurt."
Rosalind Nelson
Bancroft (suddenly a much scarier neighborhood after reading Holle's post)
>Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2000 10:26:08 -0800
>From: "wizardmarks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Cc: "Multiple recipients of list" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: Re: Proposal to discuss police conduct
>Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>I'd like to clarify my statement since I was deemed "complacent" about police
>behavior. From listening to an intelligent, articulate officer who was
not at
>the scene when Mr. Saunders was shot, I can say that the squad car
officers are
>trained to see something different than you who were also not there are
seeing.
>That means that the city's population and the line officers--and hence all
other
>police personnel (they come up through the ranks)--have two different (at
>minimum) logic bases from which we are trying to discuss the issue.
>If the line officer is trained thus: "it's winter, it's cold, this big
guy has
>been driving erratically and he's in his underwear. When people go
ballistic,
>the training says they are going to blow any second and they gain incredible
>adrenelin strength. Ergo, this guy is way dangerous." Training: dangerous
person
>ready to blow in a vehicle = make sure he cannot get out of the car, make
sure he
>doesn't pin you between two cars or a car and a building, make sure he
doesn't
>run over you. The cop's common sense tells him/her that if the worst is
>actually present, there is no question that the licensed peace officer
defends
>his/her own life and the lives of by-standers first. Period, end of story.
That
>is the ultimate consequence of charging and licensing people to protect
and serve
>and equipping them with guns with which to do it.
> I'd be willing to bet actual cash dollars that every one of us would do the
>same thing in the same situation if those were the tools we were licensed
to use.
>
> Those of us who have not been there cannot begin from that perspective
and those
>who have been in that position in all likelihood cannot 'explain' it to
>themselves, let alone to another person. That is why we pay 'em the big
bucks!
>If, then, my perspective is 'there's got to be another way to handle this, it
>means we have to be sure that whatever other methods we devise are equally
>effective.
>Next question: Are we in a position to have that conversation with the
police?
>Don't bank on it.
>Wizard Marks, Central
>
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> In a message dated 11/23/00 9:50:21 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>>
>> << Can we please have a discussion on this list about
>> proper police conduct and how we can hold police
>> accountable for deviations from proper conduct?
>> >>
>>
>> This is a sore subject - no pun intended - considering I was mugged in
my own
>> kitchen at 6 a.m. this morning by an individual looking to collect some
extra
>> holiday cash. But violence is violence, regardless of who is dispensing it,
>> so let's just say at the moment I'm feeling sympathetic with anybody who is
>> on the receiving end.
>>
>> I know way too many people who were murdered - my sister, my best friend,
>> co-workers, acquaintances. I've learned that when you're dead, you're dead;
>> there is no healing, no forgiveness, no chance to say oops, I messed up...
>> the families, friends and neighbors of people who have been killed by
>> Minneapolis police (an ignominous way to go, by the way - would you like to
>> have to tell people for the rest of your life that your father was gunned
>> down by cops?) are hurting, grieving. They need more from Chief Olson
than a
>> cold assertion that the police were acting appropriately. How can we
>> acknowledge their pain and loss?
>>
>> Institutional violence puts blood on all our hands. I want to feel
confident
>> that it's there for a darn good reason. Are we as a community going to
make a
>> commitment to nonviolence?
>>
>> What would this mean? Responsibility and reparations, for a start - even if
>> it means opening the door to litigation. Accountability - breaking up the
>> one-party lock on our city government, maybe having an elected police
chief.
>> Retraining our police force in non-lethal intervention techniques.
>> Acknowledging and abolishing racial profiling and over-policing of poor
>> neighborhoods, which promote power abuse. And reconnecting our police force
>> with the community, through incentives for residency.
>>
>> I want to be part of a community that is outraged when people are killed,
>> regardless of the circumstances. The alternative is a kind of slow death of
>> the spirit.
>>
>> -- Holle Brian
>> Bancroft
>> (612) 822-6593
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2000 11:57:48 -0800
>From: "Carol Becker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: Re: Fw: Proposal to discuss police conduct - What is the
Executive Committee
>Message-ID: <001401c05650$d235fda0$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>In Minneapolis, there is no chief operating officer that all department
>heads report to - no "point" to the reporting pyramid as department heads
>report to different committees of the Council. In an attempt to pull
>together some of the personnel decisions into one place, the Executive
>Committee was established. The Code of Ordinances specifies its duties as
>follows:
>
>"Minneapolis Code of Ordinances
>
>CHAPTER 3. POWERS AND DUTIES OF OFFICERS
>
> Section 4. Executive Committee. There is hereby
> established an executive committee consisting of the Mayor,
> the President of the City Council, and up to three additional
> members of the City Council to be chosen by the Council;
> provided, however, that not all of the members of the executive
> committee shall be of the same political party, unless the
> Mayor and all of the members of the City Council shall be
> members of the same political party. The executive committee
> shall establish its own rules and procedures. It shall be chaired
> by the Mayor.
>
> Notwithstanding any other provision of this Charter or special law
> to the contrary, the executive committee shall have the
> exclusive power to appoint and remove during their terms of
> office the Police Chief, Fire Chief, City Engineer, Commissioner
> of Health, City Attorney, City Assessor, City Coordinator, Civil
> Service Commissioner, and any officer in a department or
> agency who, by statute, Charter or ordinance, is appointed by
> the Mayor or City Council or by any public board the majority of
> whose members are members of the City Council. An
> appointment or removal shall be effective only upon approval by
> action of the City Council taken in compliance with the
> requirements of Chapter 2, section 2, and Chapter 3, section 1
> of this Charter. When considering an appointment or removal the
> executive committee shall follow procedures prescribed by
> ordinance or resolution of the City Council which may include
> provision for participation by members and committees of the
> City Council, but in the case of an appointment such procedures
> may not impose a limitation on the candidates to be considered
> by the executive committee.
>
> All appointments by the executive committee shall be made
> from nominations submitted by the Mayor. If after three
> nominations or if within ninety days after a position becomes
> vacant, the Mayor has failed to gain an executive committee
> appointment and Council approval to fill the position, a majority
> of the executive committee may submit in writing to the Mayor
> a list of at least three qualified persons from which the Mayor
> shall nominate a person to fill the position. If that nomination
> fails of approval, the executive committee may submit a new
> list of three qualified persons and the Mayor shall again
> nominate from such list, and these steps shall be repeated until
> a nomination results in an appointment and in its approval by the
> Council. If the Mayor fails to nominate from a list within twenty
> days after receipt thereof, then a majority of the executive
> committee may appoint from such a list.
>
> A person holding an office or seat filled by appointment by the
> executive committee who has not been reappointed and
> approved by the City Council within six months after expiration
> of his or her term shall vacate the office or seat and shall remain
> vacant until a new appointment is made and confirmed. The
> executive committee may designate someone to fill the
> vacated office on a temporary basis for a period not to exceed
> ninety days.
>
> The executive committee may suspend without pay any officer
> appointed by it in the unclassified service for a period not to
> exceed five (5) working days at one time, and for longer periods
> with the approval of the City Council.
>
> Further duties of the executive committee shall be only as
> prescribed by ordinance or resolution of the City Council."
>
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Jenny Heiser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: Multiple recipients of list <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Sent: Friday, November 24, 2000 8:15 AM
>Subject: Re: Fw: Proposal to discuss police conduct - Reporting relationship
>of Police Chief and Mayor
>
>
>> Carol Becker wrote:
>>
>> > >From the Minneapolis City Charter, Chapter 6, Section 1
>> >
>> > The executive committee shall, by and with the consent of a majority of
>all
>> > of the members
>> > of the city council, ...
>>
>> Carol, or any other list members: Please help me out with some information
>> about just what the "executive committee" is and who sits on that
>committee.
>> Thank you.
>>
>> Jenny Heiser
>> East Phillips
>> Ward 6, Prec. 8
>>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2000 11:57:07 -0600
>From: "Dave Stack" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: "Multiple recipients of list" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: Re: Proposal to discuss police conduct
>Message-ID: <016501c0563f$f69d3480$3f39b2d0@stack>
>
>Please forgive me if I have missed previous comments on this aspect of the
>issue. I was just wondering if there is, or has ever been, talk of setting
>up a 'state-wide' police misconduct review board. Such a board would
>(hopefully) objectively deal with the most egregious charges of police
>misconduct in the entire state of Minnesota, above the fray of local
>politics.
>
>Due to current technology, board members from all corners of the state could
>meet electronically on a regular basis, and all could receive
>instantaneously and simultaneously the documents pertaining to each case.
>Just a thought.
>
>Dave Stack
>Harrison
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2000 13:27:03 -0500
>From: "Steven Clift" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Looking for Community Forum Volunteers
>Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
>I often give great kudos to the Minneapolis Issues forum. Now the
>folks in Winona are getting it right too. Would you like to help
>build Minnesota E-Democracy's community issue forum efforts?
>
>In the Winona article below they talk about their extensive early
>outreach. This was key in the early days of the Minneapolis effort.
>Perhaps some of you might want to help extend our outreach to bring
>more voices into this forum (i.e. immigrant communities, youth, less
>heard from parts of the community, etc.)? If you'd like to be in the
>E-Democracy volunteer loop, drop an e-mail to:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>Steven Clift
>Minnesota E-Democracy
>
>------- Forwarded Message Follows -------
>Date sent: Mon, 6 Nov 2000 09:24:09 -0600
>From: Steven Clift <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: [DW] New local online community lessons - "E-Democracy
Thrives in Winona Minnesota"
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>*** Democracies Online Newswire - http://www.e-democracy.org/do ***
>
>
>Enclosed is an insightful article on the creation of one of the
>world's leading "online public commons" - local online
>discussions that matter in the real world. Steve Kranz
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, the article's author and Randy Schenkat
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Co-Chair the Winona Online Democracy
><http://onlinedemocracy.winona.org> effort which is affiliated
>with Minnesota E-Democracy. Along with our Minneapolis Issues
>Forum, these two forums represent a model I encourage other to
>use if you want online public engagement to work at the local
>level.
>
>Please read this article and pass it on to anyone you think is
>interested in building a forum with their community. If you do
>it right and follow through with the work required, geography,
>citizen participation, and the Internet can combine in important
>and meaningful ways. If you are ready for the challenge
>anywhere in the world, drop E-Democracy a note
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and we will put on a list for our future
>outreach and potential training efforts.
>
>Steven Clift
>Minnesota E-Democracy
>http://www.e-democracy.org
>
>P.S. Steve Kranz and Randy Schenkat will attend the Wired for
>Change <http://www.ncl.org> conference later this week. Drop
>them a note directly if you'd like to meet with them.
>
>
>
>E-Democracy Thrives in Winona Minnesota
>-------------------------------------------------
>by Steve Kranz, Co-Chair Winona Online Democracy
>
>Nestled in a scenic river valley aside the meandering
>Mississippi River and surrounded by tree-covered blufftops, the
>idyllic town of Winona Minnesota (pop.25,000) seems an unlikely
>place for cutting edge online citizen involvement. But despite
>Winona's smaller size, E-Democracy has quickly taken hold and
>continues to grow. The techniques used to implement it
>demonstrate approaches to starting online civic participation in
>smaller communities by making specific efforts to build
>credibility, network within existing organizations, and allow
>the project to become an outgrowth of the community itself.
>
>Winona Online Democracy is an ongoing, community-wide discussion
>via email about issues that affect life in Winona. It began in
>mid-August of 2000 and includes a cross-section of community
>members, members of the media and local leaders such as elected
>officials, school board members, and state representatives. The
>goal of Winona Online Democracy is to give everyone a greater
>voice in decisions that affect the community, increase civic
>participation, and help to encourage more input into solutions
>to local problems.
>
>Prior to launching the email discussion, 106 members were
>recruited to participate. This included a broad cross-section of
>the community as well as a good representation of elected
>officials, city administrators and community leaders. Two months
>after the launch date, the list has 170 members and has
>generated interesting and valuable discussions.
>
>The impetus for WOD began when a local organization, Winona A
>Community of Learners, invited Steve Clift of Minnesota E-
>Democracy to give a presentation about online civic discussion
>and the impact it can have on a community. The organizers of
>this event sought endorsement/sponsorship by local community and
>government organizations and it attracted about forty people.
>
>At the speaking event, organizers collected contact information
>(including email addresses) from each attendee. They were then
>invited to a follow-up meeting to discuss implementation in
>Winona. Eight people attended and the agenda dealt with both the
>technical aspects of how an email list is operates and the
>practical aspects of what types of jobs need to be done in order
>to get the list up and running. Most attending agreed to
>participate on a steering committee to help get things started.
>
>
>It was decided that an email list would be set up for the
>steering committee. This would allow them to exchange ideas and
>continue to maintain a dialogue as they planned the project. In
>addition, it would serve as a learning vehicle to work out the
>bugs and make sure the list operated properly before we
>recruited others to participate.
>
>One important aspect of starting the project in a small town is
>that we felt people would be more comfortable if they perceived
>it as homegrown. We thought this would increase credibility and
>make people more open to participation. To that end, we decided
>to call our group Winona Online Democracy and use the
>"winona.org" domain name. This "local branding" of our efforts
>helped make the project feel more integrated into the community
>and not just another dot-com project from the "big-city".
>
>We also decided to develop a website. Our plan was to invite
>people to participate and direct them to the website so they
>could get more detailed information. E-Democracy can be
>difficult to explain concisely, so this allowed people to learn
>about it at their own pace and then make a decision.
>
>Next we focused attention on recruiting. The core of our effort
>to recruit list participants was the use of the "virtual door
>knocking" method (see Steve Clift's article at
>http://www.publicus.net). This involves having people send
>personal email invitations to people they know asking them to
>join. To make this as easy as possible, we drafted a sample
>invitation and encouraged people to modify it to meet their
>needs (see http://onlinedemocracy.winona.org/invitation.html).
>Virtual door knocking is an important concept because it
>increases credibility and the likelihood of a positive response.
>
>
>One virtual door knocking method that was extremely successful
>was to work within organizations to gain access to their
>membership. We invited local nonpartisan groups to become
>"endorsing members" of WOD. This included the League of Women
>Voters, the local teachers union, city government and local
>universities. This gave us access to about 850 email addresses
>in the community. These organizations invited their members to
>become part of WOD. They also agreed to allow us to list them on
>our website as "Endorsing Organizations.
>
>We made a particular effort to encourage elected officials and
>other community leaders to join the list. Having these people
>involved not only provides credibility and access to additional
>resources (such as email lists), but provides value to other
>participants in that their ideas and opinions will be heard by
>those that make the decisions.
>
>In a small community, it is important to get support from those
>who are prominently involved in the community. In order to
>leverage support that we received, we asked everyone who joined
>the list if we could list them as a "Founding Member". The list
>of Founding Members was then placed on our website. People could
>then see the names of their friends, neighbors and people they
>respected and know that they were supporters of Online
>Democracy.
>
>In addition to our online recruitment efforts, we decided to
>reach out in offline media as well. We developed a paper
>brochure to be distributed to clubs and organizations. We also
>appeared on a local cable-access television program and invited
>the local newspapers to cover the "launch" our project. This
>resulted in a front-page article in one of the local newspapers.
>
>
>In the months after the list was launched it has sustained a
>varied and interesting discussion. A "snapshot" shows that in
>the first eight weeks there were 238 emails posted by 53
>different authors covering 12 different topics. We have had good
>participation by a broad range of participants including elected
>officials and government administrators. Examples of topics
>included the following:
>
>-- A discussion that identified dangerous traffic intersections
>in the community (which was prompted by the Mayor asking for
>feedback on a proposal to rebuild city streets).
>
>-- A discussion about improving the "digital divide" situation
>in our community. This discussion played a role in our local
>County government petitioning the state for authorization to
>donate its used computer equipment to local charities. Our
>local state legislators also participated in the discussion and
>are looking at the issue on the State level.
>
>-- Several thoughtful exchanges about local issues such as
>shortfalls in education funding, rebuilding our historic
>courthouse and plans to increase railroad traffic through town.
>
>
>The success and broad participation is due, in part, to
>approaching Winona Online Democracy as an outgrowth of the
>community and building support for it within existing
>organizations prior to actually launching it. By working to have
>community leaders take some ownership (or at least endorse the
>concept) and using these relationships to network within the
>community, Winona Online Democracy has gained acceptance and
>continues to become a strong force for positive civic
>engagement.
>
>--------------------------------
>For more information visit http://onlinedemocracy.winona.org or
>email Steve Kranz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> or Randy Schenkat
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.
>
>
>^ ^ ^ ^
>Steven L. Clift - W: http://www.publicus.net
>Minneapolis - - - E: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Minnesota - - - - - T: +1.612.822.8667
>USA - - - - - - - ICQ: 13789183
>
>
>*** Please send submissions to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
>*** To subscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
>*** Message body: SUB DO-WIRE ***
>*** To unsubscribe instead, write: UNSUB DO-WIRE ***
>
>*** Please forward this post to others and encourage ***
>*** them to subscribe to the free DO-WIRE service. ***
>
>
>^ ^ ^ ^
>Steven L. Clift - W: http://www.publicus.net
>Minneapolis - - - E: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Minnesota - - - - - T: +1.612.822.8667
>USA - - - - - - - ICQ: 13789183
>
>*** Visit E-Democracy 2000 - http://e-democracy.org/2000/ ***
>
>MN-POLITICS-ANNOUNCE is sponsored by Minnesota E-Democracy
<http://e-democracy.org>.
>To receive similar messages, send an e-mail to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To submit announcements: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To discuss: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
>- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> Steven Clift - E: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T:+1.612.822.8667
>Info - http://publicus.net DO - http://e-democracy.org/do
> Web White & Blue - http://webwhiteblue.org
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>
>------------------------------
>
>End of MPLS-ISSUES Digest 881
>*****************************
>
>
