太多的警察:为什么要打电话给警察

IF 2.3 1区 社会学 Q1 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY Punishment & Society-International Journal of Penology Pub Date : 2021-10-22 DOI:10.1177/14624745211045652
Jennifer E. Cobbina-Dungy, D. Jones-Brown
{"title":"太多的警察:为什么要打电话给警察","authors":"Jennifer E. Cobbina-Dungy, D. Jones-Brown","doi":"10.1177/14624745211045652","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The repeat use of fatal force against unarmed people of color has driven global protests against police violence and fueled criticism of policing as a mechanism for public safety. In the US, calls to abolish, transform, or reform policing have reemerged with a primary focus on the elimination of structural racism. In this essay, we contend that a two-tier policing problem exists. The first is the continued use of policing to enforce racial dominance through policing practices labeled as “proactive”. The second is contemporary “warrior-style” police training that normalizes the expectation of unquestioned compliance with police directives and authorizes police to use physical force in its absence. This dangerous combination results in over-policing the public generally and Black members of the public specifically. Select incidents are provided to support these claims. We conclude by expressing support for the call to reallocate portions of policing budgets toward other government and community-based structures that function to enhance the ability of people to survive and thrive rather than operate as mechanisms of pre-adjudication punishment and state-sanctioned coercion.","PeriodicalId":47626,"journal":{"name":"Punishment & Society-International Journal of Penology","volume":"25 1","pages":"3 - 20"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"22","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Too much policing: Why calls are made to defund the police\",\"authors\":\"Jennifer E. Cobbina-Dungy, D. Jones-Brown\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/14624745211045652\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The repeat use of fatal force against unarmed people of color has driven global protests against police violence and fueled criticism of policing as a mechanism for public safety. In the US, calls to abolish, transform, or reform policing have reemerged with a primary focus on the elimination of structural racism. In this essay, we contend that a two-tier policing problem exists. The first is the continued use of policing to enforce racial dominance through policing practices labeled as “proactive”. The second is contemporary “warrior-style” police training that normalizes the expectation of unquestioned compliance with police directives and authorizes police to use physical force in its absence. This dangerous combination results in over-policing the public generally and Black members of the public specifically. Select incidents are provided to support these claims. We conclude by expressing support for the call to reallocate portions of policing budgets toward other government and community-based structures that function to enhance the ability of people to survive and thrive rather than operate as mechanisms of pre-adjudication punishment and state-sanctioned coercion.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47626,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Punishment & Society-International Journal of Penology\",\"volume\":\"25 1\",\"pages\":\"3 - 20\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-10-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"22\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Punishment & Society-International Journal of Penology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/14624745211045652\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Punishment & Society-International Journal of Penology","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14624745211045652","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 22

摘要

对手无寸铁的有色人种反复使用致命武力,引发了全球范围内对警察暴力的抗议,并引发了对警察作为公共安全机制的批评。在美国,废除、改造或改革警务的呼声再次出现,其主要重点是消除结构性种族主义。在本文中,我们认为存在双层警务问题。首先是继续使用警察手段,通过贴上“主动”标签的警察手段来加强种族统治。第二种是当代的“战士式”警察训练,这种训练规范了对警察指令无条件服从的期望,并授权警察在没有这种期望的情况下使用武力。这种危险的结合导致了对公众的过度监管,特别是对黑人的过度监管。本文提供了一些事件来支持这些说法。最后,我们表示支持将部分警务预算重新分配给其他政府和社区结构的呼吁,这些结构的功能是提高人们生存和发展的能力,而不是作为判决前惩罚和国家批准的强制机制运作。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Too much policing: Why calls are made to defund the police
The repeat use of fatal force against unarmed people of color has driven global protests against police violence and fueled criticism of policing as a mechanism for public safety. In the US, calls to abolish, transform, or reform policing have reemerged with a primary focus on the elimination of structural racism. In this essay, we contend that a two-tier policing problem exists. The first is the continued use of policing to enforce racial dominance through policing practices labeled as “proactive”. The second is contemporary “warrior-style” police training that normalizes the expectation of unquestioned compliance with police directives and authorizes police to use physical force in its absence. This dangerous combination results in over-policing the public generally and Black members of the public specifically. Select incidents are provided to support these claims. We conclude by expressing support for the call to reallocate portions of policing budgets toward other government and community-based structures that function to enhance the ability of people to survive and thrive rather than operate as mechanisms of pre-adjudication punishment and state-sanctioned coercion.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
12.50%
发文量
60
期刊介绍: Punishment & Society is an international, interdisciplinary, peer reviewed journal that publishes the highest quality original research and scholarship dealing with punishment, penal institutions and penal control.
期刊最新文献
Scott-Hayward, Christine S. and Henry F. Fradella, Punishing Poverty: How Bail and Pretrial Detention Fuel Inequalities in the Criminal Justice System FastCAT: A framework for fast routing table calculation incorporating multiple protocols. Tasseli McKay, Megan Comfort, Christine Lindquist, & Anupa Bir, Holding On: Family and Fatherhood During Incarceration and Reentry The exercise of authority during interactions in custody hearings in São Paulo (Brazil): Building legitimacy through exclusion Barry Goldson, Chris Cunneen, Sophie Russell, David Brown, Eileen Baldry, Melanie Schwartz, and Damon Briggs, Youth Justice and Penality in Comparative Context
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1