Idk seems kinda cringe… the police has a monopoly on violence in belgium and often abuses it… then start whining that they are being targetted… I do not support violence against any kind of governement worker but this sounds like gaslighting to avoid discussions about police/governement corruption
High quality [de-escalation training](https://www.theidea.world/law-enforcement) should be mandatory, extensive and re-trained over and over again. For those cases where violent confrontation was not avoidable, post traumatic stress consultation should be readily available (and I would even say mandatory to break the taboo on it).
Investing in quality should be the guiding principle when it comes to law enforcement.
Natuurlijk… Vincent Houssin… Het voorwoord is door Tom van Grieken zeker?
Havent read the book, but i have a strong opinion about policing.
I am in the middle about ‘the police’ in general. It all comes down to which person is in front of you. It is the same job as a social worker trying to make people act in a way that they fit into society, but with extra steps; the ability to inflict serious violence, to be called to only the darkest moments of human existence (a lot of the times), an uniform, a military hierarchy et cetera. Some policemen are handicapped by this as they get into the ‘us’ vs ‘them’ thinking. Then they complain about not being respected enough and blablabla.. Which is only human ofc…
On the other hand im like:
It’s like moving to zaventem and complaining about airplanes: you sort of know what you sign up for.
If you’re in it to help people, there are other ways… Nurses, ambulanciers, social worker, volunteering, … Ways you did NOT choose that were also available to you.
Imo:
As police you are part of the governing might, which means you have to be ‘the father’ in a lot of cases and abide by the rulebook. Rulebooks are often too vague to exactly determine what to do in real life situations, because they are so complex. But that’s why i made the ‘father reference’. A father should only use violence to defend himself, others or the person(s)/kid(s) involved. But being a policeman can get too complicated a lot of times and so some of them do stupid shit, become racist, the ‘we’ vs ‘them’ mentality and so on…and it backfires.
This is why i think investing in newer ideas of a policing force, maybe even a ‘new policeforce’ in total, would be beneficial. Taking all the things we learned from psychology, sociology, history… Split the policeforce into ‘soft power’ and ‘hard power’ (so you want), soft is for deescalating, hard is for when actual danger is already involved.
The soft one gets rid of any military hierarchy and modernizes, hard power can keep playing army lol.
And this is how i spent my last 20 minutes argueing on the internet with total strangers. Thx for coming to my ted talk.
Believe it or not, maar ik denk, moest er een boek “Getuigenissen over geweld door de politie” bestaan, dat die stukje dikker zal zijn.
6 comments
Idk seems kinda cringe… the police has a monopoly on violence in belgium and often abuses it… then start whining that they are being targetted… I do not support violence against any kind of governement worker but this sounds like gaslighting to avoid discussions about police/governement corruption
High quality [de-escalation training](https://www.theidea.world/law-enforcement) should be mandatory, extensive and re-trained over and over again. For those cases where violent confrontation was not avoidable, post traumatic stress consultation should be readily available (and I would even say mandatory to break the taboo on it).
Investing in quality should be the guiding principle when it comes to law enforcement.
Natuurlijk… Vincent Houssin… Het voorwoord is door Tom van Grieken zeker?
Havent read the book, but i have a strong opinion about policing.
I am in the middle about ‘the police’ in general. It all comes down to which person is in front of you. It is the same job as a social worker trying to make people act in a way that they fit into society, but with extra steps; the ability to inflict serious violence, to be called to only the darkest moments of human existence (a lot of the times), an uniform, a military hierarchy et cetera. Some policemen are handicapped by this as they get into the ‘us’ vs ‘them’ thinking. Then they complain about not being respected enough and blablabla.. Which is only human ofc…
On the other hand im like:
It’s like moving to zaventem and complaining about airplanes: you sort of know what you sign up for.
If you’re in it to help people, there are other ways… Nurses, ambulanciers, social worker, volunteering, … Ways you did NOT choose that were also available to you.
Imo:
As police you are part of the governing might, which means you have to be ‘the father’ in a lot of cases and abide by the rulebook. Rulebooks are often too vague to exactly determine what to do in real life situations, because they are so complex. But that’s why i made the ‘father reference’. A father should only use violence to defend himself, others or the person(s)/kid(s) involved. But being a policeman can get too complicated a lot of times and so some of them do stupid shit, become racist, the ‘we’ vs ‘them’ mentality and so on…and it backfires.
This is why i think investing in newer ideas of a policing force, maybe even a ‘new policeforce’ in total, would be beneficial. Taking all the things we learned from psychology, sociology, history… Split the policeforce into ‘soft power’ and ‘hard power’ (so you want), soft is for deescalating, hard is for when actual danger is already involved.
The soft one gets rid of any military hierarchy and modernizes, hard power can keep playing army lol.
And this is how i spent my last 20 minutes argueing on the internet with total strangers. Thx for coming to my ted talk.
Believe it or not, maar ik denk, moest er een boek “Getuigenissen over geweld door de politie” bestaan, dat die stukje dikker zal zijn.
Three languages in one book cover.