Quote:LOS ANGELES - The Los Angeles City Council on Tuesday approved the first step in a plan to replace Los Angeles Police Department officers with community-based, unarmed emergency responders for non-violent calls for service.

"This is the dawn of a new era of public safety in Los Angeles," said council member Herb Wesson, who co-authored the motion. "The bottom line is that the way things have been going is not working for our communities. This last month has made that crystal clear. We have a responsibility to listen to our people, and our people have spoken."

Wesson said he looks forward to working on the project with members of Black Lives Matter Los Angeles.

"This won't solve all of our problems right away," said Wesson. "But this move marks a sea change in our city's approach to public safety and I'm optimistic cities and counties across the nation will follow our lead."

FOX 11 has reached out to the LAPD for comment and is waiting to hear back.

The motion for the crisis response teams was presented by Wesson and council president Nury Martinez on June 16 following protests in the city over the in-custody death of George Floyd by Minneapolis police officers.

The motion instructs the LAPD to work with the county's Department of Mental Health, Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority and other government agencies to respond to non-violent incidents, such as drug abuse and incidents related to mental health.

It would include diverting nonviolent calls for services, such as neighbor disputes and others from the LAPD to the appropriate non-law-enforcement agencies.

Link

The excuses council come up with after this bonehead, stupid, poorly conceived idea goes sideways with someone’s death will be interesting. Morons.

I don't know if I necessarily have a problem w/ sending unarmed officers to sites/cases/calls that probably won't be violent. The problem is, they want to completely disarm/get rid of the police, apparently even for cases that could easily get violent. That's the issue.

Cool, all the blue cities will get burned down. Not seeing the downside. Win win.

So, what happens when a nonviolent situation suddenly turns violent?

(07-01-2020 03:55 PM)VA49er Wrote:  So, what happens when a nonviolent situation suddenly turns violent?

Call Brad Pitt?

(07-01-2020 03:55 PM)VA49er Wrote:  So, what happens when a nonviolent situation suddenly turns violent?

That’s the issue. Someone called the cops to resolve the problem . As such there exists an inherent risk in every call.

#hancock to rescue...how about #mightymouse

@dipshitestrategy

(07-01-2020 05:11 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

This^

(07-01-2020 03:55 PM)VA49er Wrote:  So, what happens when a nonviolent situation suddenly turns violent?

Social worker leaves in an ambulance.

(07-01-2020 05:41 PM)Browning Hall Wrote:  

(07-01-2020 03:55 PM)VA49er Wrote:  So, what happens when a nonviolent situation suddenly turns violent?

Social worker leaves in an ambulance.

Or hearse.

(07-01-2020 03:52 PM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  Cool, all the blue cities will get burned down. Not seeing the downside. Win win.

Until they wanna bring that nonsense to the burbs and the country.

(07-01-2020 03:46 PM)Bronco14 Wrote:  I don't know if I necessarily have a problem w/ sending unarmed officers to sites/cases/calls that probably won't be violent. The problem is, they want to completely disarm/get rid of the police, apparently even for cases that could easily get violent. That's the issue.

More police get killed in domestic disputes than any other call.
So they will send social workers to get killed.

(07-01-2020 09:33 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-01-2020 03:46 PM)Bronco14 Wrote:  I don't know if I necessarily have a problem w/ sending unarmed officers to sites/cases/calls that probably won't be violent. The problem is, they want to completely disarm/get rid of the police, apparently even for cases that could easily get violent. That's the issue.

More police get killed in domestic disputes than any other call.
So they will send social workers to get killed.

A glimmer of sunshine on a very cloudy day.

All of these efforts remind me of the plot to RoboCop 2, where the city council decide the main character was too violent so they reprogram him to not to engage in responses other than to say “have a nice day”. Of course, the baddies eventually nearly take over the city but are stopped by RoboCop after he is returned to normal.

(07-01-2020 03:46 PM)Bronco14 Wrote:  I don't know if I necessarily have a problem w/ sending unarmed officers to sites/cases/calls that probably won't be violent. The problem is, they want to completely disarm/get rid of the police, apparently even for cases that could easily get violent. That's the issue.

"Probably won't be violent," means that sometimes they will. What then?

I'm fine with sending unarmed officers to sites/cases/calls that cannot possibly become violent. How do we identify those?

(07-02-2020 06:54 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(07-01-2020 03:46 PM)Bronco14 Wrote:  I don't know if I necessarily have a problem w/ sending unarmed officers to sites/cases/calls that probably won't be violent. The problem is, they want to completely disarm/get rid of the police, apparently even for cases that could easily get violent. That's the issue.

"Probably won't be violent," means that sometimes they will. What then?

I'm fine with sending unarmed officers to sites/cases/calls that cannot possibly become violent. How do we identify those?

You can't.


"What about noise complaints?"

https://www.thegeorgiasun.com/2020/04/26...n-georgia/

Quote:A Georgia man is dead today after police say he shot a police officer who was investigating a noise complaint at his home with a 12-gauge shotgun. Officers returned fire, killing the man.

"What about welfare checks?"

https://www.ajc.com/news/breaking-news/d...Fhd6zkj5K/

Quote:Hockett went to Edmonson’s home on Jackson Street in West Point about noon to check on the man, Channel 2 Action News reported. Edmonson’s family called the police to the home, saying he had a psychotic episode, Woodruff said.

“When the deputy arrived, he exited his vehicle to go around a fence toward the house and heard what he described as a banging sound,” Troup County Sheriff’s Office spokesman Sgt. Stewart Smith told Channel 2.

When Hockett went to investigate, Edmonson allegedly fired shots at him.

"What about evictions?"

https://www.wsoctv.com/news/local/we-los...2X53E3YO4/

Quote:A sheriff's deputy in South Carolina was shot and killed while trying to serve an eviction notice Tuesday morning, authorities said.

Sumter County Sheriff's Cpl. Andrew Gillette was shot in the chest and died a short time later, Sheriff Anthony Dennis said.

Gillette was wearing a protective vest, Dennis said.

From the same idiots who don't want us to own guns.

Anyone stop to ask what social workers think of this idea? They must be like, "WTF?"

(07-02-2020 07:26 AM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(07-02-2020 06:54 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(07-01-2020 03:46 PM)Bronco14 Wrote:  I don't know if I necessarily have a problem w/ sending unarmed officers to sites/cases/calls that probably won't be violent. The problem is, they want to completely disarm/get rid of the police, apparently even for cases that could easily get violent. That's the issue.

"Probably won't be violent," means that sometimes they will. What then?
I'm fine with sending unarmed officers to sites/cases/calls that cannot possibly become violent. How do we identify those?

You can't.

My point, precisely.