Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Government Crime Databases Open Source The Internet

California Launches Mandatory Data Collection For Police Use-of-Force (seattletimes.com) 117

An anonymous Slashdot reader quotes the AP: All 800 police departments in California must begin using a new online tool launched Thursday to report and help track every time officers use force that causes serious injuries... The tool, named URSUS for the bear on California's flag, includes fields for the race of those injured and the officers involved, how their interaction began and why force was deemed necessary.

"It's sort of like TurboTax for use-of-force incidents," said Justin Erlich, a special assistant attorney general overseeing the data collection and analysis. Departments must report the data under a new state law passed last November. Though some departments already tracked such data on their own, many did not... "As a country, we must engage in an honest, transparent, and data-driven conversation about police use of force," California Attorney General Kamala Harris said in a news release.

It's an open source tool developed by Bayes Impact, and California plans to share the code with other interested law enforcement agencies across the country. Only three other states currently require their police departments to track data about use-of-force incidents, "but their systems aren't digital, and in Colorado's case, only capture shootings."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

California Launches Mandatory Data Collection For Police Use-of-Force

Comments Filter:
  • Bigger problem (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward

    This is mostly due to the idea that unarmed blacks are killed more often by cops than unarmed whites. But the data are scarce and police killings are so rare that it's hard to make this claim with any accuracy. The 800 pound elephant in the room that groups like Black Lives Matter refuse to address is that there's far more violent crime committed by blacks than other races, even when controlling for factors like socioeconomic status. Where's the outrage over all of the violent crime? Moreover, people who me

    • Re:Bigger problem (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 25, 2016 @11:08AM (#52957557)

      I dunno, where is the outrage over home mortgage schemes that kept black people from buying new homes in the suburbs and living in inner city tenements?

      Where is the outrage over failures to force the owners of those tenements from removing lead pain and plumbing?

      Where is the outrage over the abandonment of inner city school systems?

      If you take any population of humans, expose them to lead for their entire lives and then fail to educate them or giver them gainful employment which offers a chance for a better life...

      Then you would end up with slums that are filled with whatever group is oppressed and the other groups, which managed to avoid said fate, pointing the finger at them and calling them animals

      much like you have

      • The entire population was exposed to lead until it was removed from paint and gasoline. Lead isn't the culprit when it comes to violence.
        • by Anonymous Coward

          Hilarious that you can summarily sweep that under the rug.

          A lot of it has to do with frequency and duration of exposure. If you live in a house with lead paint that was applied recently and that is not peeling, then it has little effect on you

          If you live in a 30 year old building where lead pain is chipping off and children can eat those alarmingly sweet (yes it was used as a sweetener in the past) little tidbits, then you will have a much greater effect

          Similarly, if your cheap-ass city administrator decide

          • You missed the point entirely - the ENTIRE population was exposed 50 years ago. Didn't matter where you lived. Lead in gasoline was everywhere. It got into the air, the water, the soil, the food. And people lived in houses with lead paint, and furniture painted with lead paint, because that was pretty much all that there was. The air and water and food and soil didn't suddenly become lead-free because you were white. The veggies weren't marked "lead free - whites only". Plenty of kids worked their way thro
            • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

              by Anonymous Coward

              OK Barb, I see that your hatred of poor American's is deeply ingrained and that you will go to ridiculous lengths to defend your unwarranted position that lead contamination of inner city slums had a major impact on the people who live there, leading to furtherance of violence and poverty.

              Just in case anybody else is interested in the overwhelming evidence counter to Barb's position can read any of these articles:
              https://www.in.gov/isdh/files/Pb_behavior_problems_and_violence_fact_sheet.pdf
              http://www.forbes

              • Too bad that it's easy to disprove all of that. Almost every house built before 1980 has lead solder that is still leaching into the water. And of course, as I pointed out, everyone was exposed to lead in gasoline, which got into the air, the soil, and vegetables. No exceptions. How come we didn't see the same level of violence among everyone?

                It's American culture that is to blame, not race per se. Economic disparity due to racism, not lead. Quit trying to get out of blaming white people for this shit situ

        • by Uberbah ( 647458 )

          The entire population was exposed to lead until it was removed from paint and gasoline. Lead isn't the culprit when it comes to violence.

          Neat goalpost moving, but the removal of lead from gas is a non sequitur on the subject of removing lead from pipes and paint.

          • I didn't move any goalposts. I stated a truth. EVERY SINGLE PERSON in America was exposed to lead. Not just in paint. And it wasn't just the plumbing in poorer communities either. Or lead-based solder in copper plumbing, which is in pretty much every home built before before the 1980s that hasn't ripped out their plumbing. That's much of the housing stock still around. And newer homes have a higher risk of radon, so the poor are less likely to be exposed to that.

            You simply cannot blame the behavior on lead

    • by Anonymous Coward

      The 800 pound elephant in the room that groups like Black Lives Matter refuse to address is that there's far more violent crime committed by blacks than other races, even when controlling for factors like socioeconomic status.

      That's a bold claim. Where are you getting this info from? If you're stating that more blacks are convicted of violent crimes, then that's believable. But, the idea that black people are *actually* committing more crimes than whites seems pretty suspect. What seems more likely is that racial profiling causes more black folks to be arrested and convicted of violent crime. We have quite a bit of evidence to support the idea of racial profiling (e.g. tribalism) but very little (or no) data to support the idea

  • by Anonymous Coward

    There are "gang enhancement" laws. Why aren't they used against the gang in blue when they do evil things?

  • by BrendaEM ( 871664 ) on Sunday September 25, 2016 @10:49AM (#52957469) Homepage

    I don't think that collecting data is enough. Think of how many innocent people were killed by the police without being videoed. Our police are still allowed to be expert witnesses, in courts. I am sorry if this offends people, but there is nothing intrinsically different about police officers that makes them honest.

    • by iCEBaLM ( 34905 ) on Sunday September 25, 2016 @11:15AM (#52957603)

      What gets measured gets managed.

      • You have a good point, but going along with the point that BrendaEM made, all we're doing with the videoing of cops, is the same thing that was originally done when making someone a cop. We look at the video as the final truth, the "displayer" of pure truth. And to that you're saying that is a measurement, and I cna't disagree completely, yet. However, this guy [youtube.com] introduces some variables that should be taken into account before we all just move all of our faith from the police officers to video.
        • No, anyone educated in perspectives and witnesses knows that what one observers sees isnt necessarily the 'truth' other observers see. What video does is provide a static record of one viewpoint from an unbiased perspective. Saying it is pure truth is wrong. Its a singular unflinching perspective. Whether it reflects the 'truth' of the situation is another argument.
    • by Hokan ( 11666 )

      Of course collecting data not enough. But if anything is to change, that data collection is necessary.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      but there is nothing intrinsically different about police officers that makes them honest.

      You mean other than their training? Compare what an officer is trained to see to a recent shooting in my area. The call came into 911 that a person, the son, had a knife to his mother's throat [pennlive.com], had locked her in a bedroom and said he was going to kill her.

      When the police arrived they found, oddly, the son with a knife to his mother's throat. After repeated commands to drop the knife an officer fired a single
      • by OzPeter ( 195038 ) on Sunday September 25, 2016 @12:26PM (#52957961)

        but there is nothing intrinsically different about police officers that makes them honest.
        You mean other than their training?

        Just as a counterpoint to your example.

        1. Officer Sherry Hall from Georgia who claimed that a black guy shot her. Who has now been charged with fabricating that story as well as various other offenses.
        2. Officer Jason Stockley from St Louis kills guy then plants gun on him.
        3. Officer Mark Wayne Rowe from VA Beach stealing gun bags from the evidence room
        4. Pinellas County Sheriff’s deputy Wayne Wagner beats up on a woman and then accuses her of battery of him.
        etc etc

        So yeah, right. Training.

        But what is non-sensical is (former) Officer Stephen Mader from Weirton Wha who was basically fired because he didn't shoot a suicidal man with a gun. Mader who is a former Marine had surveyed the situation, decided that the man in question was not really a threat and was trying to talk him down. Two other officers arrived, decided that the guy was dangerous and shot him dead. Mader was fired because his actions put the other officers at risk. Oh yeah, the gun was unloaded.

      • by Uberbah ( 647458 ) on Sunday September 25, 2016 @01:01PM (#52958173)

        You mean other than their training? Compare what an officer is trained to see to a recent shooting in my area.

        You mean an anecdote? How about we look at the numbers of people who have been released from prison after being proved innocent, who were badgered into confessing by police interrogators - 65 out of 149 [motherjones.com] last year. Like prosecutors, cops are far, far, far more interested in "winning" than in actual justice.

        And cops invariably lie when caught in an unjustified shooting, to cover their own asses. If a cop tells you that nighttime is darker than daytime? Go outside after sundown to check and make sure he was telling the truth.

        • You mean an anecdote? How about we look at the numbers of people who have been released from prison after being proved innocent, who were badgered into confessing by police interrogators - 65 out of 149 [motherjones.com] last year. Like prosecutors, cops are far, far, far more interested in "winning" than in actual justice.

          .
          I think this is a relevant argument. Cops shooting people up are just the tip of the iceberg. A symptom rather than the central problem. Not sure how widespread it is but the black commu

      • It's easy to solve this problem. Put a camera on the gun. If it doesn't work, the gun still works and you're in no worse shape than you were before. If it does work, you'll see whether the suspect had a knife or not. Done and done.

    • by tinkerton ( 199273 ) on Sunday September 25, 2016 @12:56PM (#52958141)

      There's another reason why collecting data is not enough.The police rules of engagement can move along a spectrum from military-like(enemy territory) to police-like(working for the public). I think they shifted a lot towards military-like rules: as soon as a potential risk has been acknowledged the person with the badge has the right to kill. So maybe one should ask european cops what they think of US cops killing and then their chiefs defending the actions.

      • Comment removed based on user account deletion
        • One would think that the military are a bit more coolheaded about it, but there seem to be similar cases with excessive rules of engagement.
          Soldiers are willing to take risks to avoid casualties but their superiors tell them to do otherwise.

          The reason is obvious. The ability for the US to project power is restrained by intolerance at home for soldiers returning in coffins.
          So the rules of engagement are adapted accordingly, preference for killing by remote, and in case of direct contact, when in doubt, kill.

    • but there is nothing intrinsically different about police officers that makes them honest.

      And yet we apply this on a professional scale quite often. e.g. Australian government documents often need signatures witnessed. The gold standard is by a justice of the peace, a judge, or an attorney. However then we get down to medical professions such as doctor, chiropractor, physio, nurse, etc. To the questionable such as an engineer who is a registered member of engineers Australia excluding student members, police officer, sheriff, or a permanent employee of the Australian postal service with at least

  • Maybe they need a tool to identify racial bias in all of their enforcement strategies. Self fulfilling prophecy and all that...

    • Re: (Score:1, Flamebait)

      by iggymanz ( 596061 )

      maybe certain races should get their act together and they'd no longer be treated as lawless thugs by default. When a racial group that is 12% of the population commits over 50% of the violent crime, there is a problem all right.

      • by Uberbah ( 647458 )

        Or maybe you could stop being a racist shit. Black men use drugs at the same rate as white women, yet are 45 times more likely to serve time. Because of selective enforcement, which leads to a neat loop that took racists like yourself some time to perfect: minorities make up more of the convictions, so they are targeted more for arrest by cops. Which makes them more likely to be convicted...

        • You write a completely false statistic then claim racism.

          nice.

          you are part of the problem, denying the magnitude of the problem.

      • Out of 700 or so people killed by Police so far this year under 200 are black. So Police kill a lot of people regardless of color. It's just the BLM and the media make it sound like Police kill Black people exclusively. In the US Police kill a lot more people than vice versa. The narrative needs to change.
      • There is no way of knowing if these statistics are a sampling error due to enforcement issue, or some "inherent" factor (namely socioeconomic).

  • open source

    You mean they didn't put together a bidding process for a $2.8 billion dollar project which will come in at 437% overbudget and finally be ready in 2028?

  • We need more (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward

    Use of force tracking with detailed reports has been the standard in the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) for a long time, including written reports from all employees who have witnessed the use of force. But for police, much more has to be done. Body cameras must be used, with files uploaded to the report and the reports must be "bundled" and cross referenced to allow administrators and the public to identify bad cops.

  • ...and help track every time officers use force that causes serious injuries...

    Who defines "serious?" They or the party involved? They mention something that excludes bruises...but I could be seriously psychologically or mentally harmed.

    It's a positive first step if I may add.

  • I can see it now, this is going to turn out just like the federal seizure database

    California is going to put all this data into the system, and 10 years from now, someone is going to ask "how many people have been killed by police so far?", and the police are going to say "We don't know, because it would crash the system if we tried to look it up".

  • No one is going to become a cop anymore. And if people though the police were tough on criminals, wait till they meet the citizen posse's who will NOT give the suspect a chance to repeat offend...

    • If you mean that people who want to become police officers to help them be bullies don't apply, that alone would solve a lot of the problem.

      • No, no one is going to want to take the risks involved in being a cop, for the low pay and the kinds of scumbags the cops have to deal with and the constant stream of hate from the media and the criminals trying to use their skin color as a "it's racism, I didn't do nuttin'!" get-out-of-responsibliity-free card.

        I side with the cops barring any sort of glaring video+audio evidence.

        • Other countries seem to have little difficulty getting enough police officers while holding them accountable. Is the US a sink of barbarism, that you say we can't?

          • You don't have the level of distrust in police either.

            It's OK, you're still people, just not Americans, so you don't really count :)

            • So, what you're saying is that it's difficult to increase the accountability in the system, since it's easier to hire accountable police officers if they're more trusted, and accountability raises public trust? We've already done that to some extend, with dash and body cams, and some changes to make it easier to prosecute police for crimes, and departments haven't quit en masse. I'd suspect that most police know that being held accountable for serious crimes isn't going to hurt them, since they won't com

Technology is dominated by those who manage what they do not understand.

Working...