Congress Just Passed a Bill Addressing Police Killings While No One Was Looking

[Tsiyu]

http://mic.com/articles/106392/congress-just-passed-a-bill-addressing-police-killings-while-no-one-was-looking


After watching nationwide protests unfold against police brutality, members of Congress did what they have seemed incapable of doing for years: something.

A bill passed by both chambers of Congress and headed to President Barack Obama's desk will require local law enforcement agencies to report every police shooting and other death at their hands. That data will include each victim's age, gender and race as well as details about what happened.

"You can't begin to improve the situation unless you know what the situation is," bill sponsor Rep. Bobby Scott (D-Va.) told the Washington Post. "We will now have the data."

snip

While it will likely take a long time once more to get a usably large picture of police killings across the country, the federal government has an enforcement mechanism to make sure agencies submit: The Department of Justice can withhold federal funds from any states that don't comply.


Read more at the link. I am sure Obama will sign this.

THANK YOU BOBBY SCOTT!



On edit: is usably a word?

[Kalidurga]

1. Good very good

These are the kinds of stats we need.

[Tsiyu]

3. Yes, people need hope that someone is paying attention

I am happy to hear Congress has done this.

[ohheckyeah]

2. It's hard to get too excited when

who knows how long it will take to even start accumulating the data. Seems like a rather half-assed bill for such a huge problem.

I am proud of Bobby Scott for putting it forward.

[Tsiyu]

4. At least it's something

It seems politicians have been afraid to even go near all the cop killings. This makes the public afraid and uncertain.

This law may take a while to produce results, but it's better than the complete lack of accountability cops have today.

I'm proud of Bobby too. It took a Dem!

[ohheckyeah]

14. I agree that it's good to get something-

don't mind me, just not having a good day. Didn't mean to piss all over your thread about a good thing - sorry.

[Tsiyu]

29. You're good

Hope things get a lot better for you

[ohheckyeah]

39. Thanks - I have a long recovery yet to go. n/t

[Tsiyu]

58. And you will make it all the way.

I hope you are graced with every resource you need to get where you wish to be.

[ohheckyeah]

69. Thank you very much. n/t

[babylonsister]

5. Computers? Directive? I can't imagine it would

take too long. Now, the truth might be another story.

[Tsiyu]

6. The truth is an elusive entity in these cases for sure

I think it's awesome that Congress addressed this.

I have a little hope right now. Maybe if law enforcement knows that they can't just hide all these deaths ( 179 killed by NYPD in 15 years according to 1 post I read ); they will have to answer for every one.

Might make some cops think twice.

[daleanime]

7. K&R....

a good first step.

[Tsiyu]

8. agreed

and thanks

[winterwar]

9. about time

The more statistics on this the better

[JDPriestly]

10. K&R.

[Rex]

11. So I guess that means the NYPD is going to declare a 'wartime' footing against Congress?

Seriously, if the police leaders didn't have their heads so far up their asses, this wouldn't be needed by Congress.

OF COURSE the crybabies will pretend this is the start of a war against cops. I had no idea anyone else could live in such a state of denial like the GOP, but evidently some police union leaders have lived far into that realm for longer than anyone ever knew.

[Tsiyu]

22. If they had any integrity this would already be standard practice

But this new law will be a light shining, (just like all the things the Pope just said about the curia!)

People have to get their heads out of their asses and start acting like human beings instead of like murderous, greedy, corrupt beasts.

If they declare war on citizens rather than fight the problems in their own ranks, they will lose that war. Horribly.

[SummerSnow]

31. Exactly, the LEA's will hate Congress for this. But it is needed.

If they hate it then you know something is wrong. no more just telling your captain your version of the story and case closed

[LiberalArkie]

40. I believe it is telling the captain what the union rep told you to say. That is

if the union rep hasn't already e-mailed the captain "your version".

[tjl148]

67. GOP denial?

How does that tie in with the union leaders? And didn't a GOP House pass this bill? And I would really appreciate it if you would report back when you have names of the "crybabies" who specifically said THIS BILL was "the start of a war against cops."

[NJCher]

70. you weren't aware police officers were infallible?

I had no idea anyone else could live in such a state of denial like the GOP, but evidently some police union leaders have lived far into that realm for longer than anyone ever knew.

Do you ever have that right. I have listened to dozens of media interviews with police captains, union leaders, police chiefs, etc. I cannot believe what world these people are living in!

They are so insular and defensive. They are married to this idea that they are heroes who put their lives on the line every day and who deserve some kind of exceptional respect for this, and not only that, high pay. It would never occur to them that there are brutal thugs working right next to them in their very own department.. Oh no, a police officer is always right.

Today, much to my horror, a union colleague who is married to a police officer (now retired), aired her feelings on the matter of the two cops killed in NY. This was at a teacher's union meeting. She was angry at the protesters. She said these killings were a direct result of the protests.

This teacher works with the same kinds of students I do--the kind who are very likely to be the victims of police brutality. It saddened me that she would take the position of the police officers over what goes on with her students.

Of course, she may have never asked. I have. The stories would just boggle your mind.



Cher

[Rex]

71. It really is shocking that no one would decide that breaking the law as a COP

is a far worse crime than a citizen breaking the law! Especially COPS! So instead of enforcing the law on themselves, it is kick them out and let them move on to another town. Let their union take all the heat.

The disconnect by cops like that is scary and makes ya wonder what the fuck world they live in. Certainly not reality with the rest of us. You just expect cops to hold their own to a much higher standard or I do.

[WestCoastLib]

12. Pretty amazing that this data isn't already enforced

How the fuck can you have police firing their weapons without need to record the details of when, where, why and who they fired at?

I work in IT and we have to document every change we make to our software environment.

[stillwaiting]

17. That was my first thought too.

I had no idea this wasn't already required. It's unbelievable to me.

With that said, it's obviously a good thing that it now will be required. Still unbelievable.

[eppur_se_muova]

18. The FBI already collects data on police shootings, but it is voluntary ...

Police Depts. are not required to participate, and many are very selective with their data ...

Some agencies said they didn’t view justifiable homicides by law-enforcement officers as events that should be reported. The Fairfax County Police Department in Virginia, for example, said it didn’t consider such cases to be an “actual offense,” and thus doesn’t report them to the FBI.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/hundreds-of-police-killings-are-uncounted-in-federal-statistics-1417577504

[Boreal]

42. "justifiable homocides"

Don't cops call all murder by cop "justifiable". Fuck, we've seen videos of cold blooded murder by these thugs and they claim the subject was resisting, threatening, or some other lie.

It's a nice gesture to mandate collecting the data but it won't save lives, stop psycho cops and the cops WILL lie on their reports.

[daredtowork]

13. That was fast! nt

[Cha]

15. Shocking! Police and rw pols who are trying to fan the flames with more fuel take Note.

Mahalo Bobby Scott and Tsiyu!

Usably is a good word.. I've just never used it before.

[Jackpine Radical]

20. Yes, "usably" is quite usable. And sometimes useful.

[malaise]

16. Excellent

How was that not law before?

[Tsiyu]

23. It was but they let it lapse

and the data was so sluggishly offered, they got very little from it.

[Jim Lane]

19. Yes, "usably" is a word

It's valid at Scrabble (anagram suably, which surprises me) and it's in Wiktionary, with a citation.

[riqster]

21. It's the adverb form of "usable".

[Tsiyu]

24. Then why does it have that squiggly red line under it!!!!!

Guess we need to add it to the DU spellchecker. I tried a bunch of forms of it when I was copying and they were all squiggled, too. Thanks to all of you who know about words.

[riqster]

25. Spell check....

Eye halve a spelling chequer
It came with my pea sea
It plainly marques four my revue
Miss steaks eye kin knot sea.

Eye strike a key and type a word
And weight four it two say
Weather eye am wrong oar write
It shows me strait a weigh.

As soon as a mist ache is maid
It nose bee fore two long
And eye can put the error rite
Its rare lea ever wrong.

Eye have run this poem threw it
I am shore your pleased two no
Its letter perfect awl the weigh
My chequer tolled me sew

[Tsiyu]

27. 'Tis a beautimous pome

How didd wee evar git allong wifout speelchequer?

[DebJ]

30. Looks like something my iPhone would create when I type something else LOL

[L0oniX]

26. Better late than never.

[Trillo]

28. Yes, according to English Wiktionary, "usably" is a word

Adverb
usably (comparative more usably, superlative most usably)

[yurbud]

32. if enough of us demand a fucking pony, we get it.

[Tsiyu]

57. Amen

This guy's rootin' for everybody.

[stage left]

33. K&R

Thank you, Bobby Scott. Wish we had a rep like you in congress instead of the epsilon semi-moron Trey Gowdy.He probably voted against this. Didn't he?

[RoccoR5955]

34. I thought that they were not in session?

Is this old news?

[Tsiyu]

60. See post #53 nt

[Thespian2]

35. "usably"

sounds good to me. As the caterpillar says, a word means exactly what you want it to.

Also, thanks, Bobby Scott. About time.

[Enthusiast]

36. Geez! Glad to hear of this.

[sheshe2]

37. Good.

[Hekate]

38. Sunlight is the best disinfectant. Kicking for a ray of sunshine in all this darkness. nt

[hootinholler]

41. Wasn't this already law?

I thought that it was just being ignored.

[mainstreetonce]

43. Report should be filed immediately

Wilson wrote his story after he knew what was out there in the medial

[cstanleytech]

44. They should have been doing this decades ago imo. nt

[underpants]

45. Bobby was my Congressman until I moved into the Cantor/Bratt 'burbs

Thank you Bobby

[lordsummerisle]

46. I am shocked, shocked

That congress is still in session...what is the date of this?

[Tsiyu]

53. December 13, 2014 is the date

According to the link.

https://www.congress.gov/days-in-session

They were in session from the 1st to the 16th of December - excluding a few days.

[TheKentuckian]

47. It is Amazing with a capital A that Congress can do anything except screw workers and blow Wall St

without laying siege to DC.

Minimal as hell but it is SOMETHING without going to some extreme, they didn't give away the store in exchange did they?

[Tsiyu]

61. Da bill

https://www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/house-bill/1447

"Death in Custody Reporting Act of 2013 - Requires states that receive allocations under specified provisions of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, whether characterized as the Edward Byrne Memorial State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance Programs, the Local Government Law Enforcement Block Grants Program, the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program, or otherwise, to report to the Attorney General on a quarterly basis certain information regarding the death of any person who is detained, arrested, en route to incarceration, or incarcerated in state or local facilities or a boot camp prison. Imposes penalties on states that fail to comply with such reporting requirements..

Requires the head of each federal law enforcement agency to report to the Attorney General annually certain information regarding the death of any person who: (1) is detained or arrested by any officer of such agency (or by any state or local law enforcement officer for purposes of a federal law enforcement operation); or (2) is en route to be incarcerated or detained, or is incarcerated or detained, at any federal correctional facility or federal pretrial detention facility located within the United States or any other facility pursuant to a contract with or used by such agency.

Requires the Attorney General to study such information and report on means by which it can be used to reduce the number of such deaths."

Passed Senate on the 10th
Passed House on the 12th

[TheKentuckian]

73. Much obliged!

[snappyturtle]

48. Excuse me if I'm a bit of a wet blanket here. However, I think this bill is

a bad idea. Why involve the federal government in matters that might be better handled per state? To me, this is an advancement in the national 'police state' that seems to be building nationwide without this added on.

Second, Somewhere in the back of my mind, around general election times, I thought we were promised advance notice of bills for the purpose of public feedback BEFORE voted upon.

Third, I hope the congress critters read the bill in it's entirety this time and that there isn't something nefarious tucked into it while we're all busy with the holidays. IMHO

edit to add: I think it sounds good but just color me skeptical.

[CreekDog]

49. you seriously don't want the Federal Government and people in other states to know this?

seriously?

you don't want the rest of us to know when the police shoot and kill someone?

wow.

[snappyturtle]

50. What century are you living in? We haven't had this bill until now and we all

know anyway if we're interested, that is. "Stuff" goes viral and now that public awareness is so on the top I think we can keep well abreast of shootings. imho

[IronLionZion]

52. Their "involvement" is to collect national statistics

to shine light on stuff that may have been hidden before. Who else would do it?

If something is said to be a national problem, then we need to find out how big a problem it is, nationally.

People tend to improve their behavior when they know they are being watched.

[snappyturtle]

54. You just made part of my point with this statement:

"People tend to improve their behavior when they know they are being watched."

How far are you willing to agree to this? How about it morphing to more monitoring of the
citizens? I don't mean to cause a rucus....I just think we need to think before we leap. eom

[IronLionZion]

72. Its logistically easier and politically easier to monitor police

since cops are government employees.

I hope that cops think twice before shooting someone if they know it will be reported for statistics.

[snappyturtle]

78. ....and local 'governments' are incapable of doing the monitoring?

I think we need to keep most matters to a grass roots level. Excuse me for being more interested in what the cops/authorities are doing in my county and city than, let's say, San Diego. I think the eyes of the local citizenry is better at keeping score than distant Washington, D.C. Of course, IMHO.

[strategery blunder]

79. Not all local juristictions care

A prime example would be Maricopa County, AZ. The sheriff knows he's a brutal asshole, the voters in the county know he's a brutal asshole, but he keeps getting re-elected because he's a brutal asshole to the brown-skinned furriners and the white people there look the other way (at best) because they don't want to be "forced" to learn Spanish inside "their own country."

(Yes I know that is a horrible generalization against white people in that county, but I know there is some aggregate truth to it, as I used to live there and can speak to hearing that on widespread occasions. Racists sometimes think they can let it out when they're with other people of their own race.)

That's EXACTLY the type of jurisdiction for which this law is needed. The Maricopa County Sheriff's Office sure as hell isn't going to release aggregated data about its police brutality unless it is forced to do so. Are not ALL citizens in this country entitled to a police force that is properly bounded by constitutional protections?

I will support any reasonable law that advances the nation toward that end. However slight the law may seem in the wake of police pulling up and blowing a black kid's head off (Tamir Rice RIP--Maricopa County isn't the only place infested by racist asshole LE), it is better than the alternative, which is looking the other way when local, racist-infested PDs run roughshod over the communities they're supposed to "serve and protect."

[CreekDog]

80. you mean like local governments that turned fire hoses on civil rights marchers?

no thanks, that won't do it sorry.

you're far enough south to know that States' rights hasn't protected minorities as often as it's been used to harm them.

[pasto76]

65. reminder, we live in a Republic, not a democracy

real democracy - where you get a say and vote about _everything_ - is a huge mess. outside of a board of directors or small-ish organization, holy shit is it a nightmare.

in my mid 20s, I joined a mountain rescue team just in time to vote on the first ever official team jacket. The guy in charge of the project had whittled it down to two choices. Holy F*ck, 65 people getting to say whatever was on their minds, lobbying for the one they liked and just in general jockeying for perceived (and non-existant) pecking order....what a nightmare!!

fats forward ten years. the way my ironworker local works allows, in practice, for a small group (in this case 10-15 people) to show up to a union meeting and vote on issues that drive the local. In this case, they voted to prohibit any of the companies that use our ironworkers from signing an agreement to build something (read: get us work by winning bids) until the membership voted on the conditions of that job. We only meet once a month, and the local covers the entire state of colorado and western kansas.

Like, hello. This provision effectively prohibited any contractor from bidding on anything. Thankfully, the International struck that one down.

Expecting "public comment" on any and every bill isnt realistic. Its literally what we elect and pay these folk for. SOmeone posted a link to story by a reporter trying to compile these statistics and was actively obstructed. This is a huge deal.

[dreamnightwind]

51. OK I am confused

From a 12/11/2014 Wapoo article:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2014/12/11/congress-decides-to-get-serious-about-tracking-police-shootings/

The law requires the head of every federal law enforcement agency to report to the attorney general certain information about individuals who die while detained, under arrest or incarcerated.

...

Under the bill, the Justice Department has the authority to withhold federal funds from states that don’t comply in sending the information to federal agencies. The funds total $500 million a year and are divvied up among states based on a formula that includes factors such as population and violent crime.

It says every federal law enforcement agency, does it really mean federal? The other text looks like they are talking about leveraging state reporting with fed fund witholding, though there is no requirement that the feds do so. Perhaps it means both federal and state agencies will be required to report?

Overall it looks like pretty much a joke to me, though I suppose it does more good than harm.

From the OP's referenced article:

It's not the first time Congress has tried: The same law was actually passed back in 2000, but was allowed to lapse in 2006 and was never reauthorized (despite repeated attempts by Scott). Because it takes years for enough local departments to start submitting all that data, the original law barely yielded anything before it expired.

Also, does the language " individuals who die while detained, under arrest or incarcerated" cover incidents where the victim is not yet under custody or arrest, such as the recent high-profile incidents? I assume that it does, though it's not clear to me from the language.

Police reporting the info on fatalies involving police should be 100% mandatory and the data belongs to the public, whose servants they supposedly are. Does this legislation get us there? Probably not, it might help a little though.

The biggest issues IMHO are separation of the prosecutorial mechanisms police go through from the agencies they usually interact with, and a completely revamped approach to selecting and training officers based on principles of non-violence and community support. Changing the laws to decriminalize activities in which there is really no inherent crime (minor drug use that isn't endangering anyone, sleeping while homeless, etc.) is the other part of this equation. Long long way to go, and sadly we're probaby headed in the opposite direction as this nacent police state takes shape.

[Tsiyu]

62. Here's another article

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2014/12/12/3602641/congress-just-passed-a-bill-that-could-change-the-game-on-what-we-know-about-police-shootings/


The text of the bill is above in #62 I believe. Scratch that...lol....#61


From the article above:

This week as all eyes were on budget deal wrangling, with little attention and fanfare, Congress actually got something done to reform the police. It passed a bill that could result in complete, national data on police shootings and other deaths in law enforcement custody.


Right now, we have nothing close to that. Police departments are not required to report information about police to the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Some do, others don’t, others submit it some years and not others or submit potentially incomplete numbers, making it near-impossible to know how many people police kill every year. Based on the figures that are reported to the federal government, ProPublica recently concluded that young black men are 21 times more likely to be killed by police than whites.

Under the bill awaiting Obama’s signature, states receiving federal funds would be required to report every quarter on deaths in law enforcement custody. This includes not those who are killed by police during a stop, arrest, or other interaction. It also includes those who die in jail or prison. And it requires details about these shootings including gender, race, as well as at least some circumstances surrounding the death.

The bill is a reauthorization of legislation that expired in 2006. Rep. Bobby Scott (D-VA) has been trying to revive it since then without success. Scott told the Washington Post the first time the bill passed in 2000, it took years before data started to come in, because of “the way government works,” and then the bill expired. But if states don’t report information, the federal government could use its power to withhold funds to force compliance. It passed the House last year, but finally moved through the Senate this week on the momentum of post-Ferguson outrage.



I agree with you.

[dreamnightwind]

77. weird

from the article:

"This includes not those who are killed by police during a stop, arrest, or other interaction. It also includes those who die in jail or prison."

I guess I could go find the bill and read it, an accidental "not" in the above sentence? Odd that the other articles weren't clear on this either. Surely the bill includes those situations...

[fingrin]

55. SOCIALIST, Socialist, Socialist

Countries like New Zealand, routinely have the police report the crime statistics to the general public.
Oh the Barbarism of Socialism! such a flawed system that abuses its people

(Snark off)

[marym625]

56. I was looking.

But you can't say it enough times

K&R

[Tsiyu]

63. At least someone was

I hate to say it, but if you went all month not noticing Congress passing bills, well.....

I am not gonna judge. I swear. Well, maybe a little....

[marym625]

64. Ha!

There's been a great deal of stuff going on. I think you would have to spend every minute you're not working, and even some you are, reading everything to keep up with every single issue.

[Tsiyu]

66. This is true enough

I just take it for granted that this is a political board and members might listen up when legislation is passed. To be totally blindsided that Congress was in session half the month is bizarre to me, but then I don't have TV...

And a lot of folks on here ...well...let's just say, they aren't what they're trying to sell themselves to be....we used to hunt trolls and it was great sport, but Skinner wants us to play nice.

I'm trying.

[marym625]

68. Love the little

Angel/devil on his shoulder dude. But he's missing shoulders

(See how I'm not touching that one? )

[Tsiyu]

75. I do see that

[TransitJohn]

59. DOJ is already required to collect this info, but mysteriously

doesn't.

[davidpdx]

74. Great news

From the title I was thinking, "oh shit what did they do now?"

[Tsiyu]

76. I know...you're scared to know and scared not to know, right?

I had the same reaction when I saw that headline, but I squeezed my eyes shut and clicked anyway!

Was happily surprised.

[LiberalElite]

81. Where's my Diary?

On Monday, December 22, 2014, Hell Officially Froze Over!

[joshcryer]

82. Some Congress people do their job.

To do things right for a chance.

I said this needed to happen.