Mayor Hogsett, IMPD, Use of Force Policy Changes (Implicit Bias Training)

[IndyDave1776]

"implicit bias" training = 8.5 hours of sitting in a classroom being told how we're closet racists and how we need to go about fixing that for the good of the department. What a way to motivate a bunch of cops. What could go wrong?

Other than sending a bunch of irritated cops out the door ready to tell both the instructors and the management to go do something anatomically impossible while not really feeling that motivated for the next few days (or weeks)?

 

[VUPDblue]

Crime stats in the different districts of this county more or less match up to the population profiles in those districts. I don't believe for one second that any police action, especially deadly force, is motivated by anything other than the actions of the suspect.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Other than sending a bunch of irritated cops out the door ready to tell both the instructors and the management to go do something anatomically impossible while not really feeling that motivated for the next few days (or weeks)?

I had to sit through this kind of stuff at U of L. You're required to take 2 "diversity" classes. You get to listen about how racist you are without knowing about it, then take a "test" that proves it. Implicit Association Test: Are You Secretly Racist? (Hint: You Are) | Science 2.0 if you're interested.

I showed a preference for black faces and the professor was rather surprised, so he asked me. I mentioned my wife was black, so I wasn't terribly surprised. (Now ex-wife, maybe I should retake the test...) I got an A in the class. Take from that what you will. I always thought the assumption that whatever differences this test "discovers" in how you perceive the races probably isn't overwhelmed by how people treat you, their actions, etc. With my supposed preference for black faces, was I going to be more tolerant of insults from a black female over a white female? Would people who scored the opposite have the situation reversed? Plenty of blacks showed a preference for white faces as well. It was explained to us that's how insidious racism is, even blacks were taught blacks were bad and became self hating. My "cross racial lines" preference did not seem worthy of the obvious counter-discussion.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Why is that the assumption?

You got butthurt over "mean streets of Carmel" but seem to have no issue assuming this is a bad shoot?

Maybe when it's all over me and you can get together for some airsoft and I'll run you through the scenario a few times and we'll see how often you shoot me and why. That assumes you'd actually meet me this time.

You're letting your emotions get the best of you, If you can't decipher what's being said in that post. The "assuming this was a bad shoot comment," actually gives the benefit of the doubt, by avoiding jumping conclusions and outright calling the shot bad.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Crime stats in the different districts of this county more or less match up to the population profiles in those districts. I don't believe for one second that any police action, especially deadly force, is motivated by anything other than the actions of the suspect.

You really believe that? It's one thing to be pro-police, but quite another to believe that we are above reproach in all instances, with the onus always falling on someone else. That's what your statement conveys.

 

[VUPDblue]

I'm speaking of my dept and my co-workers, and yes, I believe that.

 

[phylodog]

You really believe that? It's one thing to be pro-police, but quite another to believe that we are above reproach in all instances, with the onus always falling on someone else. That's what your statement conveys.

There are intentional police shootings, accidental/unintentional police shootings and murder/attempted murder. I'm pretty certain VUPD was referring to the intentional shootings and I agree with him. That doesn't say that all intentional shootings are reasonable or justified but it's a far cry from accusations that an intentional shooting had anything to do with the color of either party's skin.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

You're letting your emotions get the best of you, If you can't decipher what's being said in that post. The "assuming this was a bad shoot comment," actually gives the benefit of the doubt, by avoiding jumping conclusions and outright calling the shot bad.

I'm not going to argue with you. I've seen the tone and content of your messages. The offer stands to run you through the scenario once this is all clear and in the open.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

I had to sit through this kind of stuff at U of L. You're required to take 2 "diversity" classes. You get to listen about how racist you are without knowing about it, then take a "test" that proves it. Implicit Association Test: Are You Secretly Racist? (Hint: You Are) | Science 2.0 if you're interested.

I showed a preference for black faces and the professor was rather surprised, so he asked me. I mentioned my wife was black, so I wasn't terribly surprised. (Now ex-wife, maybe I should retake the test...) I got an A in the class. Take from that what you will. I always thought the assumption that whatever differences this test "discovers" in how you perceive the races probably isn't overwhelmed by how people treat you, their actions, etc. With my supposed preference for black faces, was I going to be more tolerant of insults from a black female over a white female? Would people who scored the opposite have the situation reversed? Plenty of blacks showed a preference for white faces as well. It was explained to us that's how insidious racism is, even blacks were taught blacks were bad and became self hating. My "cross racial lines" preference did not seem worthy of the obvious counter-discussion.

Knowing what the premise of this class and test were, wouldn't be easy to simply answer the questions to suit the desired end-state regardless of any underlying biases?

 

[Twangbanger]

Many here have asked why the Mayor didn't want for the outcome of the investigation(s), before making his move.

Read the following excerpt from his statement, and you can pretty well answer that for yourself (bold emphasis is mine):

[FONT=&amp]"...On Monday of this week, I said if a community does not bear witness together, if it chooses to look the other way in the face of a painful past, it risks its very soul," Hogsett said. "Today in Indianapolis, we bear witness...We find ourselves bearing the weight of hundreds of years of history. We will not shed that legacy overnight..[/FONT][FONT=&amp]."

[/FONT]Now: what is this "painful past," this apparently shameful "legacy" that IMPD has brought down upon us, for "hundreds of years of history?" Who is he "bearing witness" against?

What does the tone and tenor of this statement say to you, about the Mayor's reason for not waiting for the investigative outcome?

It's obvious to me. He's not afraid the outcome will be, "Bad Shoot." He's afraid an outcome of "Good Shoot" will deprive him of the chance for his "Baltimore Prosecutor" moment in the sun.

He is a political P.O.S., and does not care what effect this has on the officers of the city. He has found his opening, and he's not going to wait around for the investigation result and take a chance to let some pesky, inconvenient "Good Shoot" ruling get in the way of his moment in the sun.

Gosh...who knows when another opportunity like this will come along?
[FONT=&amp]
[/FONT]

 

[IndyDave1776]

Many here have asked why the Mayor didn't want for the outcome of the investigation(s), before making his move.

Read the following excerpt from his statement, and you can pretty well answer that for yourself (bold emphasis is mine):

[FONT=&]"...On Monday of this week, I said if a community does not bear witness together, if it chooses to look the other way in the face of a painful past, it risks its very soul," Hogsett said. "Today in Indianapolis, we bear witness...We find ourselves bearing the weight of hundreds of years of history. We will not shed that legacy overnight..[/FONT][FONT=&]."

[/FONT]Now: what is this "painful past," this apparently shameful "legacy" that IMPD has brought down upon us, for "hundreds of years of history?" Who is he "bearing witness" against?

What does the tone and tenor of this statement say to you, about the Mayor's reason for not waiting for the investigative outcome?

It's obvious to me. He's not afraid the outcome will be, "Bad Shoot." He's afraid an outcome of "Good Shoot" will deprive him of the chance for his "Baltimore Prosecutor" moment in the sun.

He is a political P.O.S., and does not care what effect this has on the officers of the city. He has found his opening, and he's not going to wait around for the investigation result and take a chance to let some pesky, inconvenient "Good Shoot" ruling get in the way of his moment in the sun.

Gosh...who knows when another opportunity like this will come along?
[FONT=&]
[/FONT]

 

[Denny347]

Many here have asked why the Mayor didn't want for the outcome of the investigation(s), before making his move.

Read the following excerpt from his statement, and you can pretty well answer that for yourself (bold emphasis is mine):

[FONT=&amp]"...On Monday of this week, I said if a community does not bear witness together, if it chooses to look the other way in the face of a painful past, it risks its very soul," Hogsett said. "Today in Indianapolis, we bear witness...We find ourselves bearing the weight of hundreds of years of history. We will not shed that legacy overnight..[/FONT][FONT=&amp]."

[/FONT]Now: what is this "painful past," this apparently shameful "legacy" that IMPD has brought down upon us, for "hundreds of years of history?" Who is he "bearing witness" against?

What does the tone and tenor of this statement say to you, about the Mayor's reason for not waiting for the investigative outcome?

It's obvious to me. He's not afraid the outcome will be, "Bad Shoot." He's afraid an outcome of "Good Shoot" will deprive him of the chance for his "Baltimore Prosecutor" moment in the sun.

He is a political P.O.S., and does not care what effect this has on the officers of the city. He has found his opening, and he's not going to wait around for the investigation result and take a chance to let some pesky, inconvenient "Good Shoot" ruling get in the way of his moment in the sun.

Gosh...who knows when another opportunity like this will come along?
[FONT=&amp]
[/FONT]

Yeah, that statement was what set the tone that we have such a problem with. 100% pandering.

 

[Leadeye]

Many here have asked why the Mayor didn't want for the outcome of the investigation(s), before making his move.

Read the following excerpt from his statement, and you can pretty well answer that for yourself (bold emphasis is mine):

[FONT=&amp]"...On Monday of this week, I said if a community does not bear witness together, if it chooses to look the other way in the face of a painful past, it risks its very soul," Hogsett said. "Today in Indianapolis, we bear witness...We find ourselves bearing the weight of hundreds of years of history. We will not shed that legacy overnight..[/FONT][FONT=&amp]."

[/FONT]Now: what is this "painful past," this apparently shameful "legacy" that IMPD has brought down upon us, for "hundreds of years of history?" Who is he "bearing witness" against?

What does the tone and tenor of this statement say to you, about the Mayor's reason for not waiting for the investigative outcome?

It's obvious to me. He's not afraid the outcome will be, "Bad Shoot." He's afraid an outcome of "Good Shoot" will deprive him of the chance for his "Baltimore Prosecutor" moment in the sun.

He is a political P.O.S., and does not care what effect this has on the officers of the city. He has found his opening, and he's not going to wait around for the investigation result and take a chance to let some pesky, inconvenient "Good Shoot" ruling get in the way of his moment in the sun.

Gosh...who knows when another opportunity like this will come along?
[FONT=&amp]
[/FONT]

This just tells me that the mayor has an overly dramatic and probably over paid speech writer.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Yeah, that statement was what set the tone that we have such a problem with. 100% pandering.

This type of pandering should be every bit as illegal as the type involving a short skirt and a foot propped up on a fire plug.

 

[phylodog]

I'm really not upset with the Mayor. There are a lot of moving parts to something like this and I can't fault him for trying to appease certain groups in an attempt to maintain the peace. That said, it won't take much of a step further in the same direction and my opinion will change dramatically (not that it matters).

The reality is that regardless of which impressive terminology people choose to use, as human beings we possess an innate ability to learn from experiences and base future decisions off of those experiences. If it walks like a duck, talks like a duck and acts like a duck expecting any reasonably intelligent human being to not treat it like a duck is complete bull****. Whether that duck is white, black or Hispanic, each group has segments that I don't trust based solely off of my initial impression. Until something happens to change it I will rely on my past experiences in an effort to protect myself. To expect anything different is ridiculous.

I've stated it many times here and other places, I am absolutely, positively 100% prejudiced in many ways. I make zero apologies for it as this is what has allowed the human race to successfully exist for as long as it has. I don't need to see a crocodile eat someone more than once before I conclude that I don't want to mess with crocodiles. The moral of that story is not that I am a bad person for assuming a crocodile is bad before giving it a chance. I might be bad if I refuse to allow a crocodile to prove itself otherwise.

I am truly exhausted by those who want to act, dress, speak and behave differently yet expect not to be treated differently. There is a reason I didn't move my family into a trailer park in west Hendricks County. There is also a reason I didn't move my family into Haughville. I prefer to live amongst like minded people with similar priorities and mannerisms. This, ladies and gentlemen, is human nature like it or not. Dig deep on anyone who claims otherwise and you will no doubt discover them to be a hypocrite of biblical proportions. Skin color is irrelevant.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Knowing what the premise of this class and test were, wouldn't be easy to simply answer the questions to suit the desired end-state regardless of any underlying biases?

It's not a test like that. It measures differences in reaction times after seeing certain faces and then certain words. Read the link, it'll explain it better.

 

[Twangbanger]

Yeah, that statement was what set the tone that we have such a problem with. 100% pandering.

Totally pandering. Can you imagine if he'd come out and said, "We're announcing a new city-wide training initiative, to teach black mothers how to teach their sons how to follow instructions...kind of a train-the-trainer" type thing...how outrageous that would be? Because that's on the same level with what stinky just did with the police department.

He has a political agenda, and he's not going to wait around for any investigation result of "Good Shoot" to potentially spoil it.

("Hey Rahm Emanuel...this is how it's done, son")

 

[IndyDave1776]

It's not a test like that. It measures differences in reaction times after seeing certain faces and then certain words. Read the link, it'll explain it better.

Here is how it turned out:


Your data suggest slightly stronger automatic association of self with Donald Trump than with Hillary Clinton.

Your data suggest no automatic association of self with either Democrat or Republican.

Your data suggest a moderate automatic association of Hillary Clinton with Democrat than with Republican.

Your score is described as showing an 'automatic association of self with Hillary Clinton' if you were faster responding when 'Me' and 'Hillary Clinton' items were assigned to the same key than when 'Me' and 'Donald Trump' items were assigned to the same key. Your score is described as an 'automatic association of self with Donald Trump' if the opposite occured.

Your score is described as showing an 'automatic association of self with Democrat' if you were faster responding when 'Me' and 'Democrat' items were assigned to the same key than when 'Me' and 'Republican' items were assigned to the same key. Your score is described as an 'automatic identification with Republican' if the opposite occurred.

Your score is described as showing an 'automatic association of Hillary Clinton with Democrat' if you were faster responding when 'Hillary Clinton' and 'Democrat' items were assigned to the same key than when 'Donald Trump' and 'Democrat' items were assigned to the same key. Your score is described as an 'automatic association of Hillary Clinton with Republican' if the opposite occurred.

Your automatic association may be described as "slight", "moderate", "strong", or "no association". This indicates the strength of your automatic association.Your score was described as 'inconclusive' for any test in which your performance was too fast, too slow, or had too many errors for our program to compute interpretable results.

 

[bobzilla]

You really believe that? It's one thing to be pro-police, but quite another to believe that we are above reproach in all instances, with the onus always falling on someone else. That's what your statement conveys.

Land your statement conveys that all police are racist and shoot black people for being black. Do you really think it's always so black and white?(pun intended)

 

[thunderchicken]

I'm really not upset with the Mayor. There are a lot of moving parts to something like this and I can't fault him for trying to appease certain groups in an attempt to maintain the peace. That said, it won't take much of a step further in the same direction and my opinion will change dramatically (not that it matters).

The reality is that regardless of which impressive terminology people choose to use, as human beings we possess an innate ability to learn from experiences and base future decisions off of those experiences. If it walks like a duck, talks like a duck and acts like a duck expecting any reasonably intelligent human being to not treat it like a duck is complete bull****. Whether that duck is white, black or Hispanic, each group has segments that I don't trust based solely off of my initial impression. Until something happens to change it I will rely on my past experiences in an effort to protect myself. To expect anything different is ridiculous.

I've stated it many times here and other places, I am absolutely, positively 100% prejudiced in many ways. I make zero apologies for it as this is what has allowed the human race to successfully exist for as long as it has. I don't need to see a crocodile eat someone more than once before I conclude that I don't want to mess with crocodiles. The moral of that story is not that I am a bad person for assuming a crocodile is bad before giving it a chance. I might be bad if I refuse to allow a crocodile to prove itself otherwise.

I am truly exhausted by those who want to act, dress, speak and behave differently yet expect not to be treated differently. There is a reason I didn't move my family into a trailer park in west Hendricks County. There is also a reason I didn't move my family into Haughville. I prefer to live amongst like minded people with similar priorities and mannerisms. This, ladies and gentlemen, is human nature like it or not. Dig deep on anyone who claims otherwise and you will no doubt discover them to be a hypocrite of biblical proportions. Skin color is irrelevant.

Well stated. I would add (based on my life experiences) there are some cultural differences that factor into our individual biases as well. And, I think that these prejudices biases have always ecisted and always will. No training seminars will change it. As life experiences will further educate us more than some instructor in a classroom