Here's my article urging that we investigate police killings in the same way that we investigate plane crashes. theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/… In this thread I'll engage a critique from the left: 
First, there is a bit of common ground here, in that the writer suggests some reforms I've repeatedly advocated. For example: theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/… Nothing about these reforms is incompatible with adding an NTSB-like approach.
Second, the idea that there is an expert consensus for the writer's views is simply incorrect. Police killings are a hugely complicated phenomenon, criminologists argue a lot about them, treating them all as "murders" is simply false, and the writer doesn't even mention
number of guns/frequency of gun possessions/gun crime in America relative to other countries, which just about every expert rates as one important factor, at the very least.
Third, relative to the number of police officers in America, police killings are, in fact, an anomaly. More than 70 percent of police officers *have never fired their weapon in the line of duty.* The public is largely ignorant of and surprised by that fact.
Fourth: the experience of both the NYPD and the LAPD suggests to me that sustained effort by bureaucratic reformers can, in fact, succeed in reducing shots fired by police (NYPD) and excessive force (LAPD) over time. The idea that reform is hopeless is incorrect.
Fifth: In my estimation, defunding and replacing the police would lead to far more murders, middle class, flight from cities and the rise of politically unaccountable private security forces. But that perhaps is a discussion for another thread.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
