I think it would be nice for yall to set an example for transparency on the mental evaluation and training yall do to make sure yall aren't getting 'trigger happy', 'shoot if they don't comply' officers. I'd say having eyes to see if someone has a gun if they instinctively pull up their falling pants, a quick and fast movement that can be interpreted as a 'weapons check' when you only get trained to see everyone as a threat, not as a no brain dumb dumb who likely doesn't know what they are doing or have done. Thus I would also like to see the communication training or evaluation to make sure yall are hiring people who hear what they say and who can listen as well as they are expecting others to. Do appreciate the transparency in the physical requirements but if you want knock out people who can't be physical enough, you'd also wana knock out those who aren't empathetical or even sympathetic enough to work with humans. Right?
Ignorance at its best here. Maybe do your research and learn that evaluations are required not only prior to hiring but periodically throughout. Now, let’s talk about the training civilians get when the police say stop…
@@monstertiger284 lmao thanks for the 5 word disclaimer prior to the rest of your comment or I would have to point out the flaws in the rest of your comment.
@@monstertiger284 above my pay grade, they are lucky to have my opinion fo free. This PD is actually one of the decent ones in my humble opinion and that's why i think they would be able to lead with out adding me to their payrole. I guess i just have more confidence in them than you. but here i'll add some retorical questions, do you know what freedom of speech is or no? do you know what constructive criticism is or are you a snowflake? do you always feel the need to defend the group that has more power and resources?
