Aranna |
The public wants: a very inexpensive police force with the patience and restraint of saints, who have the best training available and a level of professionalism toward crime solving only seen on TV shows.
BUT
You get what you pay for in life. That cop you hire is a human being. If you want an elite police force of larger than life people then you have to shell out the big bucks to pay for them. It takes a lot of money in training and equipment to get that TV style police force and it takes BIG salaries to attract the larger than life candidates who will have saint like patience, restraint, and professionalism.
SO
Pay up. "But I don't want my taxes sky rocketing upward to pay for all this!" It's your choice. You want low taxes and undertrained security guards doing your police work (and getting abusive about it) or you pay high taxes and get a much better police force that makes the community proud. "But my community can't afford higher taxes." Then I guess you don't have a choice you got what you could afford. No point in complaining. You want something better go earn it or do it yourselves. Start a community police force of volunteers who live in the area and have a vested interest in better policing. "But who has that kind of time and commitment?" I have no idea, maybe the people complaining the most?
Aranna |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The only thing you would get by increasing the salary of bad policemen is better paid bad policemen. The principles for how you should do such an important job are so central that if you are willing to ignore them because you aren't paid enough to care, more pay isn't going to make you follow them.
You don't pay the bad cops, you fire them. With a high enough salary there will be a hundred guys lining up to take the spot. And with that big budget you can get them the training and equipment they need while holding them to a higher standard.
Rysky |
Sissyl wrote:The only thing you would get by increasing the salary of bad policemen is better paid bad policemen. The principles for how you should do such an important job are so central that if you are willing to ignore them because you aren't paid enough to care, more pay isn't going to make you follow them.You don't pay the bad cops, you fire them. With a high enough salary there will be a hundred guys lining up to take the spot. And with that big budget you can get them the training and equipment they need while holding them to a higher standard.
I agree with this, better pay means more competition which would give agencies more impetus to get rid of bad cops.
CBDunkerson |
3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The problem is police in bad areas have a s*## job constantly dealing with criminals and angry people with little pay.
Hagerstown is 76% white and 99% yuppie.
From the video it appears that at least three police cars, an ambulance, and a freakin' fire truck showed up... for a bicycle crash.
We aren't talking about the 'mean streets' here.
So no, the dangers of policing are not the problem. BAD policing is the problem.
thejeff |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It might be easier to get better cops and get rid of bad ones if you paid more, but that still has to be the focus. If you're not trying to build a more empathetic police force at the local level it's not going to happen even if you pay them more. This isn't a problem of isolated bad cops that the well-meaning departments just can't get rid of. The problems run much deeper than that.
Look at the abuses of civil forfeiture. Look at the stuff that came out about Ferguson - where a huge percentage of the black population had warrants out for minor offences and the judicial system was manipulated to fund itself out of poor people paying fines and late fees.
Or look at the departments with better use of force records. They didn't get there by paying their cops more but by changing things from the top. Changing policies. Walking beats. Different training. Building relationships rather than treating the community as an enemy to controlled.
It's not even that hard to do. We know what works. It's a matter of political will.
Paying more may be part of the solution, but it's a small part.
Aranna |
Aranna wrote:The problem is police in bad areas have a s*## job constantly dealing with criminals and angry people with little pay.Hagerstown is 76% white and 99% yuppie.
From the video it appears that at least three police cars, an ambulance, and a freakin' fire truck showed up... for a bicycle crash.
We aren't talking about the 'mean streets' here.
So no, the dangers of policing are not the problem. BAD policing is the problem.
True enough. I was speaking in the general sense. In this specific case they need to evaluate the officers actions. (It looks like he was frustrated and took the unwise path). If the action was wrong (and it pretty clearly is) then either fire the guy or pull him off the road till he can get his attitude straight depending on whether this was a one off event or a pattern. Firing him shouldn't be an issue in an affluent area. There will be plenty of people waiting for a good job.
I don't think it takes a law suit to make them discipline the officer... and if it does then the problem is in management.
Comrade Anklebiter |
Story that caught my eye:
Cops Brutally Beat Police Misconduct Investigator After Turning Off Dash Cam
ShinHakkaider |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The only thing you would get by increasing the salary of bad policemen is better paid bad policemen. The principles for how you should do such an important job are so central that if you are willing to ignore them because you aren't paid enough to care, more pay isn't going to make you follow them.
EXACTLY.
I grow tired of hearing how tough of a job the police have. You know who have tough jobs? FIREMEN. Those guys run INTO BURNING BUILDINGS to rescue people and put out fires. At no point do I ever constantly hear the refrain "I felt threatened and feared for my life so I let the people in the building die because I didnt feel safe."
Also? You want to know what's harder than being a police officer? Being an unarmed black male or female civilian. Because you legitimately have to worry about the police murdering you for no reason as well as the criminals that the police are supposed to protect you from. At this point I'm less worried about the actual criminals. They're SUPPOSED to be the bad guys and I kinda know how to take care of myself in regards to them. But the police are EVERYWHERE and the ones that dont abuse their power do not check the ones that do.
One of the things that I find really interesting and enlightening is listening to interviews with former LE who were sickened about the levels of abuse and corruption inside their departments. When you listen to these guys speak most of the time theyre not justifying the actions of the police but they were just part of the CULTURE of the department. and going against that culture has very, very real consequences for them.
Basically everyone is a victim here, the average person of color because people who are unilaterally pro-police believe that we're all or mostly criminals and deserve whatever happens to us whether we were actually doing something or not.
The police officers who want to do their jobs in a decent and respectful manner but now are lumped in with the abusive, murderous thugs that are their colleagues but cant speak out against them in fear of retaliation from those self same colleagues.
Then you have the communities at large who are now not willing to call the police for help because they dont know if they are going to be beaten or murdered by the people that are paid to help them.
ShinHakkaider |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've worked both not for profit and for profit companies and some of the highest paid people in those companies were some of the biggest sociopaths.
Higher pay DOES NOT EQUAL better quality of HUMAN BEING.
More money for better training, possibly.
Suing the crap out of these abusive cops, their departments and their unions, possibly.
But paying someone more who's already an abusive, racist, sociopath is just going to make him/her a BETTER PAID abusive, racist, sociopath.
Aranna |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've worked both not for profit and for profit companies and some of the highest paid people in those companies were some of the biggest sociopaths.
Higher pay DOES NOT EQUAL better quality of HUMAN BEING.
More money for better training, possibly.
Suing the crap out of these abusive cops, their departments and their unions, possibly.
But paying someone more who's already an abusive, racist, sociopath is just going to make him/her a BETTER PAID abusive, racist, sociopath.
No you fire someone who IS an abusive, racist, sociopath. You then pay the guy you replace him with. And it helps if you don't hire abusive, racist, sociopaths in the future.
Pan |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The thin blue line keeps cops in uniform for better or worse. Nobody circles the wagons like police unions.
I agree with Shin, the culture is the problem. Many officers see it as police and civilians. Them vs. us. Civilians have no idea what they do and no place to tell them. Its pretty frightening and the reason why a few of my friends are getting out of LE. Pay is never part of the conversation; anecdotal but take it as you will.
CrusaderWolf |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Not to mention that decisions on whether or not to indict are made by friendly prosecutors.
And there are plenty of documented cases of police forces retaliating when they are held accountable. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-watch/wp/2015/01/15/albuquerque-pro secutor-indicts-cops-immediately-faces-repercussions/?utm_term=.87bbe7283f9 a
SCOTUS has been steadily chipping away at the 4th to the point where officers are held to absurdly generous standards on their conduct during investigations.
And that untrained citizens are expected to remain calm & collected when confronted with the threat of deadly violence from cops, but if an officer panics or acts impulsively and kills a civilian there's a rush of "heat of the moment" excuses.
That's not even opening the can of worms that is police militarization.
Hitdice |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Pan wrote:The thin blue line keeps cops in uniform for better or worse. Nobody circles the wagons like police unions.Then you have your hiring / firing solution right here. Eliminate the police unions. Simple.
That sounds like my magic wand solution of requiring every single uniformed officer to wear a body camera with the department providing 100% transparency of the footage. Simple to describe in a single sentence, and impossibly complex to institute in practice.
thejeff |
3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Pan wrote:The thin blue line keeps cops in uniform for better or worse. Nobody circles the wagons like police unions.Then you have your hiring / firing solution right here. Eliminate the police unions. Simple.
Ahh, there's the conservative solution for you - kill the unions.
The unions certainly help, but I'm not convinced they're entirely a bad thing. Near as I can tell, they're not usually actually fighting management in most of these cases. The brass rallies round as well. Then the prosecutors join in by arranging not to indict those few cases that actually get that far. The thin blue line is actually pretty thick and goes well beyond the rank and file.
Freehold DM |
7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Pan wrote:The thin blue line keeps cops in uniform for better or worse. Nobody circles the wagons like police unions.Then you have your hiring / firing solution right here. Eliminate the police unions. Simple.
my lady, the day that happens is the day i foreswear your company, go to joss whedon's house, kiss him full on the lips, and thank him for his years of excellent writing and directing.
thejeff |
Aranna wrote:That sounds like my magic wand solution of requiring every single uniformed officer to wear a body camera with the department providing 100% transparency of the footage. Simple to describe in a single sentence, and impossibly complex to institute in practice.Pan wrote:The thin blue line keeps cops in uniform for better or worse. Nobody circles the wagons like police unions.Then you have your hiring / firing solution right here. Eliminate the police unions. Simple.
"To every complex problem, there is a simple, easy to understand, wrong, solution."
Again, we know how to fix this. There are cities and departments that have done the work and turned their forces around. It's not easy, but it's doable. Forget the armchair theorizing, look at the success stories and try to duplicate them.
Hitdice |
5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Aranna wrote:my lady, the day that happens is the day i foreswear your company, go to joss whedon's house, kiss him full on the lips, and thank him for his years of excellent writing and directing.Pan wrote:The thin blue line keeps cops in uniform for better or worse. Nobody circles the wagons like police unions.Then you have your hiring / firing solution right here. Eliminate the police unions. Simple.
I never thought I'd say this, but we have to start working to eliminate police unions immediately!
NobodysHome |
5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Why can't people accept firing the bad cops?
Because there's, "The way the world SHOULD work," and, "The way the world DOES work."
They're two different things, and the second is infuriating enough to make you want to throw up.
I was a public school teacher. Now I work for a global megacorporation. In both situations, fear of wrongful termination lawsuits has ground any and all disciplinary and/or termination processes to a halt. So I have firsthand experience with, "This person deserves to be fired, this person should be fired, and yet this person continues to be employed because management views the termination process as too burdensome and risky to proceed."
Step 1 is management. Make it possible to fire the bad cops. Things must start there, and proceed from there.
Two stories to add to the discussion, spoilered because they're a bit long:
He utterly failed to the point that ALL of his stuff had to be re-recorded. By his manager. During the live class. She was up 'til 3-4 am every night re-recording the work he was supposed to have done.
When we asked how he could possibly have screwed up so badly, she responded, "Oh, he does this every time. We kind of expect it of him."
When we asked why she hadn't fired him, she said, "Well, it takes at least 6 months to fire someone here, and it's a ton of paperwork, and I just don't feel it's worth the effort."
In our 120+-or-so person department, we have at least 3 such employees I can name off the top of my head -- employees so bad that anything they touch has to be re-worked, but whose managers consider firing them to be "too much effort".
Imagine if 2.5% of the police force were so incompetent they could not do their job, but whose management was unwilling to fire them. You'd end up with a situation... much like the one we have today, where in every major city, there are a few dozen officers that make the entire profession look bad bad BAD.
I had similar experiences when teaching: There was a guy who attached drop slips to his exams, abused his students until he had only 4-5 left (so the rest of us had to teach classes of 45-50 to satisfy demand), then skipped his required office hours and only showed up on campus 2-3 hours a week. Yet he couldn't be fired because... tenure!
...except my friend never found work as an officer again. Even in areas that desperately needed officers, his file had been "red flagged". Graduated #2 in his class, and couldn't get work as an officer, period.
The corruption runs deep, and the "don't rat out your own" is a terrifying, terrifying thing.
EDIT: Seeing the union stuff above, I'll point out that my megacorporation is non-union, at-will-employment (whatever it's called where they don't need a reason to fire you), but STILL has termination issues. So laying the impossibility of firing people squarely on unions is unfair. Look to the lawyers...
Hitdice |
Hitdice wrote:Logistically union elimination is easier to do. Republicans have already eliminated some of them with simple changes to the law. Just pass a Police Reform Law that prohibits public servants like the police from forming unions in an effort to stop corruption.Aranna wrote:That sounds like my magic wand solution of requiring every single uniformed officer to wear a body camera with the department providing 100% transparency of the footage. Simple to describe in a single sentence, and impossibly complex to institute in practice.Pan wrote:The thin blue line keeps cops in uniform for better or worse. Nobody circles the wagons like police unions.Then you have your hiring / firing solution right here. Eliminate the police unions. Simple.
I disagree. I think both union elimination and universal body camera requirement would see so many legal challenges that neither can be accomplished. I think they're both impossible. (Not hyperbolically impossible, actually impossible.)
Aranna |
I'm also amused that Aranna's two solutions here are "boost pay" and "bust unions". Those don't usually go together.
I stand behind pay boosts... better people try to get into the better jobs. But if eliminating the unions won't fix hiring and firing than you need a solution that works. Perhaps firing the entire police force (by shutting it down) then restarting a new one with new management who care about the people they are hiring and are willing to pay more for the best people.
Pan |
snip
Yeap these things. For the record im not for removing unions, its the culture that somehow needs to be targeted. Sups need to be able to have a path to eliminate bad employees. Folks at the bottom need to be able to report behavior without impact to their career. The community needs to be listened to, not ignored.
thejeff |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |
EDIT: Seeing the union stuff above, I'll point out that my megacorporation is non-union, at-will-employment (whatever it's called where they don't need a reason to fire you), but STILL has termination issues. So laying the impossibility of firing people squarely on unions is unfair. Look to the lawyers...
Forget the lawyers. Look to the management. Look to the corporate culture.
Is there even any evidence that police departments are trying to get rid of these bad cops, but are prevented by union rules or fear of law suits? Like Freehold said, when they do get fired, they just get hired by another department. That's not "We can't fire the bad ones." That's "We don't want to and only do it when forced by public pressure."
thejeff |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
thejeff wrote:I'm also amused that Aranna's two solutions here are "boost pay" and "bust unions". Those don't usually go together.I stand behind pay boosts... better people try to get into the better jobs. But if eliminating the unions won't fix hiring and firing than you need a solution that works. Perhaps firing the entire police force (by shutting it down) then restarting a new one with new management who care about the people they are hiring and are willing to pay more for the best people.
How the hell would you even begin to do that? Do we shut down the police departments for a couple of years for the transition? Rebuild everything from scratch, starting with new trainers and management who aren't part of the current force (or they'll just propagate old ways) and who thus have no idea what they're doing?
Freehold DM |
Aranna wrote:The problem is police in bad areas have a s*## job constantly dealing with criminals and angry people with little pay.Hagerstown is 76% white and 99% yuppie.
From the video it appears that at least three police cars, an ambulance, and a freakin' fire truck showed up... for a bicycle crash.
We aren't talking about the 'mean streets' here.
So no, the dangers of policing are not the problem. BAD policing is the problem.
also, this.
Something else happened here. Not sure what. But that isnt the response for a bike crash. At all.
Aranna |
Aranna wrote:Why can't people accept firing the bad cops?Because they go one town over and get the same job, same pay, same benefits, and get to be the same bad cop. I wish I had a gig that sweet.
As for the cop finding a new job easily. That is because there aren't enough officers in some communities to fill all positions so they take anyone with a pulse. This is exactly the sort of problem that is fixed by higher pay. If you create competition for the jobs then the departments can pass over the guys who has already been fired and hire a better guy who is willing to serve the public trust.
thejeff |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Freehold DM wrote:As for the cop finding a new job easily. That is because there aren't enough officers in some communities to fill all positions so they take anyone with a pulse. This is exactly the sort of problem that is fixed by higher pay. If you create competition for the jobs then the departments can pass over the guys who has already been fired and hire a better guy who is willing to serve the public trust.Aranna wrote:Why can't people accept firing the bad cops?Because they go one town over and get the same job, same pay, same benefits, and get to be the same bad cop. I wish I had a gig that sweet.
Or it's because cops take care of cops and they look out for the guy that got unfairly fired because pepper spraying some stupid kid who deserved it kicked up a public fuss.
Aranna |
Aranna wrote:How the hell would you even begin to do that? Do we shut down the police departments for a couple of years for the transition? Rebuild everything from scratch, starting with new trainers and management who aren't part of the current force (or they'll just propagate old ways) and who thus have no idea what they're doing?thejeff wrote:I'm also amused that Aranna's two solutions here are "boost pay" and "bust unions". Those don't usually go together.I stand behind pay boosts... better people try to get into the better jobs. But if eliminating the unions won't fix hiring and firing than you need a solution that works. Perhaps firing the entire police force (by shutting it down) then restarting a new one with new management who care about the people they are hiring and are willing to pay more for the best people.
Shutting down a police unit is easy (it already happens and it is a simple budget change). Restarting one a bit harder, but there ARE communities who ARE starting police units and they seem to get the job done fine. Just make sure some of the people restarting a new unit are the same community leaders pushing for better police they can make sure the new managers aren't as bad as the old ones.
Hitdice |
Police Chief Says There Just A Few Bad, Deeply Ingrained Prejudices Giving All Cops A Bad Name
I'd be much more willing to give him the benefit of doubt if the words "just" and "all" hadn't been used. "There are a few bad, deeply ingrained prejudices giving cops a bad name," is actually a statement I agree with. When you add the "just" and the "all," it reads more like "If you actually do the math, there haven't been that many riots caused by police violence."
NobodysHome |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Is there even any evidence that police departments are trying to get rid of these bad cops, but are prevented by union rules or fear of law suits?
I would hope not. Both at Global MegaCorp and in the public school system, disciplinary processes were considered extremely sensitive and confidential information. On my one "firing committee", when the process started I was required to sign a form that basically said, "If you discuss this case at all outside of the appointed meetings and processes, you will be immediately terminated and, if appropriate, criminally charged."
We were not to discuss the case even with other committee members except at duly-designated meetings.I know we had 4 employees "mysteriously" depart from our department over the last 14 years. The only reason I know anything about two of them was that for one I was on the firing committee, and on another once the NDA the person had signed expired, he admitted he'd been fired for physically assaulting another employee. I think that's the one that amazes me the most: One of our team members physically assaulted another employee on-campus, and we didn't know anything about it until 3 years later when the NDA expired and he posted it on Facebook.
Discipline is a carefully-guarded secret. I'm not surprised we don't hear anything about bad officers being disciplined.
Like Freehold said, when they do get fired, they just get hired by another department.
On the other hand, here you're 100% correct, and it's one of the most infuriating things I've ever seen in my life. It's not just officers. It's school administrators, corporate executives, and others.
I've watched school administrators fired for gross incompetence get immediately snapped up in better school districts for 40% raises. I watched our director take our department from a 43% profit margin to a 28% deficit in a single quarter, yet when our department finally shut down, she immediately landed another executive job.
Re-hiring of bad officers is absolutely, 100% a problem.
Not disciplining bad officers? I can't say one way or the other whether or not it happens. I'm just not surprised we don't hear anything, because every place I've ever worked has considered employee discipline a "top secret" subject.
thejeff |
thejeff wrote:Shutting down a police unit is easy (it already happens and it is a simple budget change). Restarting one a bit harder, but there ARE communities who ARE starting police units and they seem to get the job done fine. Just make sure some of the people restarting a new unit are the same community leaders pushing for better police they can make sure the new managers aren't as bad as the old ones.Aranna wrote:How the hell would you even begin to do that? Do we shut down the police departments for a couple of years for the transition? Rebuild everything from scratch, starting with new trainers and management who aren't part of the current force (or they'll just propagate old ways) and who thus have no idea what they're doing?thejeff wrote:I'm also amused that Aranna's two solutions here are "boost pay" and "bust unions". Those don't usually go together.I stand behind pay boosts... better people try to get into the better jobs. But if eliminating the unions won't fix hiring and firing than you need a solution that works. Perhaps firing the entire police force (by shutting it down) then restarting a new one with new management who care about the people they are hiring and are willing to pay more for the best people.
Oh. A department. That makes more sense. I thought you were talking a more widespread approach.
Of course, just getting the right management in, along with the right political support, gets you about 95% of the way there anyway.
If local governments want to do this they can. If they don't, they don't have to. Barring very egregious cases, where the Justice Department can win a Civil Rights lawsuit against the department, outside forces can't shut the police department down and restart it.
Most of the communities where these abuses are worst are majority-minority communities within a large municipality. The larger community may not like the big headline stories about police murder, but they're still often more on the police side. They need the police to keep the thugs in the bad part of town under control. And often, with forfeiture and the abusive fines from minor charges, the cops may bring in a good chunk of the budget.
As I keep saying, the problem here isn't a technical one. It's a lack of political will. Too many people want "tough on crime" and that translates all too easily into police harassment of minorities.
Freehold DM |
thejeff wrote:Is there even any evidence that police departments are trying to get rid of these bad cops, but are prevented by union rules or fear of law suits?I would hope not. Both at Global MegaCorp and in the public school system, disciplinary processes were considered extremely sensitive and confidential information. On my one "firing committee", when the process started I was required to sign a form that basically said, "If you discuss this case at all outside of the appointed meetings and processes, you will be immediately terminated and, if appropriate, criminally charged."
We were not to discuss the case even with other committee members except at duly-designated meetings.I know we had 4 employees "mysteriously" depart from our department over the last 14 years. The only reason I know anything about two of them was that for one I was on the firing committee, and on another once the NDA the person had signed expired, he admitted he'd been fired for physically assaulting another employee. I think that's the one that amazes me the most: One of our team members physically assaulted another employee on-campus, and we didn't know anything about it until 3 years later when the NDA expired and he posted it on Facebook.
Discipline is a carefully-guarded secret. I'm not surprised we don't hear anything about bad officers being disciplined.
thejeff wrote:Like Freehold said, when they do get fired, they just get hired by another department.On the other hand, here you're 100% correct, and it's one of the most infuriating things I've ever seen in my life. It's not just officers. It's school administrators, corporate executives, and others.
I've watched school administrators fired for gross incompetence get immediately snapped up in better school districts for 40% raises. I watched our director take our department from a 43% profit margin to a 28% deficit in a single quarter, yet when our department finally shut down, she immediately...
interesting. Thanks for sharing.
Badblood |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
One thing to note is that the girl was charged, along with some other charges, with marijuana possession. It is very likely that probably played into why she tried to get away from law enforcement. She may have ended up being charged with possession anyways if she had stayed and cooperated, and the police or EMTs ending up finding the drugs on her.
From watching the video it seemed like she simply wanted to get away; and things kind of escalated from there.
Who knows how often someone flees from an officer or even chooses NOT to call the police after being the victim of a crime, because they are afraid that the real issue might end becoming the dime bag in their pocket or backpack?
Celestial Healer |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Freehold DM wrote:Celestial Healer wrote:You know the Onion is a satirical site right?m would explain much. The last time I wrnt to long John silver's they looked at me like I was crazy when i asked for a fried abomination from the deep.That's Impus Major's standard order.
Everywhere.
That kid is going places in this world.
Kobold Catgirl |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Aranna wrote:How the hell would you even begin to do that? Do we shut down the police departments for a couple of years for the transition? Rebuild everything from scratch, starting with new trainers and management who aren't part of the current force (or they'll just propagate old ways) and who thus have no idea what they're doing?thejeff wrote:I'm also amused that Aranna's two solutions here are "boost pay" and "bust unions". Those don't usually go together.I stand behind pay boosts... better people try to get into the better jobs. But if eliminating the unions won't fix hiring and firing than you need a solution that works. Perhaps firing the entire police force (by shutting it down) then restarting a new one with new management who care about the people they are hiring and are willing to pay more for the best people.
Look, the Purge works.
We need to raise the bar, in my opinion. Sure, maybe increase the pay, but only to accommodate the badly-needed raise in standards of required training and education. Ideally, we'd be talking a mandatory two-year or four-year degree. In a country with a police force this violent, their training is perhaps even more important than doctors'. Start training these police like diplomats who occasionally have to draw a taser, instead of like soldiers who occasionally have to talk people down. Make that mental illness training they gave in Florida a nation-wide standard. Demilitarize the police force.
In the meantime, increase oversight. A police officer who shoots a man is innocent until proven guilty—but so is their victim. So do as the Canadians do, and have a federal, external force that investigates each and every extrajudicial killing. Not just the ones that gain the public's attention.
Now, to get a little bit tangential for a second, my ideal scenario would be one in which the police didn't have to worry about people owning huge stockpiles of firearms designed solely to kill other human beings, so we could actually start limiting their access to guns and penalizing them for drawing guns when no other firearms were involved. But that's a whole other can of worms.