Point.

But in any case, Police pride is a real thing and you need to account for it in your arguments. Otherwise, actual police reform becomes impossible.

I don't really care to coddle the people we entrust with the guns. If their feelings are so easily hurt, then we should fire the lot of them and find new ones who can withstand some words.

I don't think the police actually are this way, not most of them. But if they were, then the answer would be to start over from a clean slate, not try to work around their delicate feelings.

Its more like they serve a critical role in cities.

There's been a drive-by shooting in Baltimore a few weeks ago, but Officer Morale (from the protests / etc. etc.) is so low that none of the officers wanted to do anything about it. Anthony Batts was fired for it, but a change in leadership doesn't change the fundamental morale problem going on with the Baltimore City Police Department.

The fact that they serve a critical role is why I suggest that the response for the case when police all have excessively delicate feelings would be to fire them all and find new ones, not just fire them all and leave the police department empty.

Officer morale in Baltimore is so low that nobody wanted to respond to a drive-by shooting? Anywhere else, if your morale is so low that you don't feel like doing your job, you get fired and they find new people who do feel like doing their job. Did any Baltimore police get fired for failing to respond to this drive-by shooting? If not, why not?

> fire them all and find new ones

What recruiting pool do you imagine we get new officers from? And how do you imagine that having a force completely made of inexperienced cops will improve things?

The claim is that police are so prideful that minor emotional provocations will turn them strongly against us. I don't think that's the case, but if it is, then firing them all and getting new ones will still be an improvement.

More likely, some of them are prideful and the rest go along. Start disciplining them and you'll get rid of the bad ones and fix the rest. For the example of the Baltimore shooting, no need to fire the whole department, but every officer who was on duty and refused to respond should be fired instantaneously.

>The claim is that police are so prideful that minor emotional provocations will turn them strongly against us.

At no point did I say that. Hacker News doesn't lend itself to discussion very well, and if you want to stuff words in my mouth, I will refuse to partake in the discussion.

> For the example of the Baltimore shooting, no need to fire the whole department, but every officer who was on duty and refused to respond should be fired instantaneously.

You clearly have awesome leadership skills. You should run for Police Sheriff, clearly you know more about running a police department than everyone else.

Hello pot, I'm kettle. Need I remind you that you started out accusing me of bringing race into the conversation? So please don't lecture me on stuffing words into people's mouths.

Now as to the actual discussion, you said that if we don't keep pride in mind, it will be difficult to get officers to reform. You further presented the example of the Baltimore drive-by which the police refused to respond to after their pride had been hurt. That, to me, sounds like you're saying that if we hurt police pride they will turn on us by failing to obey us and by failing to protect us. Is that not what you meant?

As for my "awesome leadership skills," are you saying that firing police officers who refuse to respond to an incident because they have hurt feelings due to protests is the wrong action to take? If I understand that correctly, please elaborate. In any other job, refusing to do perform a critical duty required by your job without a very good reason is generally a firing offense. Why is that not the case for the police, and what action do you suggest should be taken?

> Hello pot, I'm kettle. Need I remind you that you started out accusing me of bringing race into the conversation?

If this is your level of maturity, then I shall have no part in the rest of this conversation. Your "awesome leadership skills" can't even comprehend the concept behind "morale" anyway, I'm not sure where to even start a discussion with you.

>...What recruiting pool do you imagine we get new officers from?

There are plenty of people who would be very grateful for the kinds of money police officers can make in a typical city. I seriously don't think there would be a problem.

>...but Officer Morale (from the protests / etc. etc.) is so low that none of the officers wanted to do anything about it.

In any other organization, people who didn't do their jobs would be disciplined or fired. Why are the police different?

Asking for the police to be less discriminatory, less violent in their counters, and more accountable for their actions is normal, routine and given in every other profession. That we allow any exception for the police to violate those aspects as a matter of respecting their pride means that we're giving their pride FAR more weight than it deserves.

When did I say we have an exception? You should just word things that jives well with the Police Force. Otherwise, you turn it into us vs them politics, and that never goes well.

Apologies if I misunderstood.

I'm just trying to fathom a situation in which another type of employee could use 'pride' as an excuse for failing to do the job they are tasked to do in a way that is not injurious to their customers.

I think there are good arguments in support of the police in the way they effectuate their job responsibilities, but "pride" is, in my opinion, not a terribly good one.