DOJ: Ferguson PD descrimination against blacks is routine

Upchurch said:
I just want to re-iterate that St. Louis City and County have an unusual history and relationship. The organization of the Country townships probably isn't what most people would assume.
Click to expand...

I'm sure you're right. The world of local government is a complex one. There are a lot of behind-the-scenes interests who know what they want and know how to get it. They enjoy being in a position of power and they're usually not eager to share it. People who have run for local office and gotten elected often say it was a very disillusioning experience. Made much tougher by the naivete of much of the electorate, sad to say.


jimbob said:
To me as a Brit, the idea that Ferguson, with a population on 20,000 should have its own police force seems silly. There is massive scope for economies of scale. Larger municipal areas also would have more scope for oversight.
Click to expand...

This is a big problem especially in American suburban areas. I lived in suburban Westchester County for a while where every village and town had it's own police department and volunteer fire department. In the village where I lived and the one to our south the two suburban fire departments had more fire apparatus per capita than most big cities. The equipment is extremely expensive and costs money to operate and maintain. But you have the established hierarchies that tend to be self-perpetuating. A local fire officer told me that there were some preliminary talks about combining the two fire services but the talks foundered when they began to discuss which command positions would be retained and which would be eliminated.
 
jimbob said:
A patchwork of small authorities looks like a recipe for malpractice and local corruption. Indeed you mentioned Hazard County, and that trope looks to be based in reality.

To me as a Brit, the idea that Ferguson, with a population on 20,000 should have its own police force seems silly. There is massive scope for economies of scale. Larger municipal areas also would have more scope for oversight.
Click to expand...


I believe lot of it has to do with the mythos of the 'rugged individualism' in the US. More local control is seen as something good and moral in and of itself. Now there are advantages and disadvantages to more local control and/or services, but I don't see one as inherently good because the specifics matter much more than the general ideas.

There is also the tradition inertia. I'm within walking distance of three schools, well, two former schools and one still open. Back in the forties these three were apparently a less bad idea. This county still has something like 18 school districts, and really almost all the administrative services could be done by one. There is a similar problem with police forces, which could really all be done by the county sheriff and Jamestown PD, yet there are a bunch other ones still for some reason.

The more eyes there are on something, the less that can get by unnoticed. Local corruption is almost always the most flagrant. The larger the pool of candidates, the better you're likely to have. You touched on those points too. In many places, a rational cost/benefit analysis puts consolation as far and away the best choice, yet still people fight it tooth and nail.
 
dudalb said:
Democracy can be a slow process. But it's better then rule by bureaucratic decree, which is what some people here are demanding.
Click to expand...
C'mon, dudalb. How 'bought "discussing" or "suggesting". No one here is in a position to demand anything. That said, I demand you drop the hyperbole. :)
 
Another complication for reformers in Ferguson is that the city is or was under a city manager style of government. Sometimes that means -- especially in smaller places where the mayor is a part-time position -- the city manager makes the day-to-day decisions with the mayor only involved in a general policy way.

Of course the mayor would also have the power to intervene anytime he wanted. But the reality often is, with a city manager, sometimes the manager forges relationships and alliances that can make it difficult for part-time city council members and a mayor to really get a handle on things. I note when the city manager wanted the police to increase ticket writing he communicated directly with the police chief. That can be another issue in a small city where the elected positions are part-time and the city manager and the department heads are full-time. The manager and the officials of the various departments are there everyday and all day. It can be hard for the part-time council members and mayor to get the information they need in a timely manner.

That said, having read some of the comments by the current mayor James Knowles, he seems like a pretty decent guy. I know he has defended the Ferguson police, also their handling of the protests, but he seems like a guy people could work with. Not an ideologue locked into some strident Republican philosophy. He seems fairly pragmatic.
 
It's very simple. Presumably the politicians who are in favor of police misconduct and racial discrimination make their positions clear in their ads, websites, interviews etc. Just vote against THOSE candidates next time and you're set!
 
cornsail said:
It's very simple. Presumably the politicians who are in favor of police misconduct and racial discrimination make their positions clear in their ads, websites, interviews etc. Just vote against THOSE candidates next time and you're set!
Click to expand...

You've not seen many politicians campaigning, I take it. "Campaign promises" is just another word for lies.
 
wareyin said:
Are you now saying that voting isn't a magical panacea?
Click to expand...

No, I never said voting is a magical panacea. Your strawman is smoldering. Looks like its pants are on fire. Appropriately for the topic.

I'm saying an informed votership is important. Being able to spot lies is a necessary part of that. This is where fact checking comes into play.
 
Gawdzilla Sama said:
No, I never said voting is a magical panacea. Your strawman is smoldering. Looks like its pants are on fire. Appropriately for the topic.

I'm saying an informed votership is important. Being able to spot lies is a necessary part of that. This is where fact checking comes into play.
Click to expand...

Is it considered a "good excuse" if a voter was fooled by lies?
 
Gawdzilla Sama said:
You haven't followed the thread.
Click to expand...

Judging by why you have actually posted, it appears that voters must be able to spot lies, and failure to do so is their own fault. Of course, one wonders how many campaign commercials there are for part-time positions like City Council. In my experience, the only advertisement these type of politicians put out is signs on the side of the road, that often don't even have slogans, much less promises. But I'm sure there is some foolproof method to both find their campaign promises, and determine which are lies; and the fault for not using this foolproof method is entirely the voter's.

Just a friendly reminder, failure to clarify your meaning means you approve of any interpretation of your words.
 
wareyin said:
Judging by why you have actually posted, it appears that voters must be able to spot lies, and failure to do so is their own fault. Of course, one wonders how many campaign commercials there are for part-time positions like City Council. In my experience, the only advertisement these type of politicians put out is signs on the side of the road, that often don't even have slogans, much less promises. But I'm sure there is some foolproof method to both find their campaign promises, and determine which are lies; and the fault for not using this foolproof method is entirely the voter's.

Just a friendly reminder, failure to clarify your meaning means you approve of any interpretation of your words.
Click to expand...
Try reading the thread.
 
Gawdzilla Sama said:
Or that I don't care if you've failed to read the thread. Your fiat rules don't apply to anybody else.
Click to expand...

Oh, no, my friend. On the contrary, when reading the thread, one finds evidence of fiat rules being stated that 'not doing x means you approve of the current situation'. I am merely applying the rules you espouse in this thread to the current situation.

So again, what campaign promises have you ever seen on City Council election signs, and how did you determine their veracity? Or is 'informed voter' just another way to blame the victims of the system?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom