Such an infuriating article. Our country treats domestic violence like a joke and the smallest bit of political power like an impenetrable shield.
It's more that policing is localized. In a situation like this the FBI will probably get involved
It still amazes me that your public safety agencies (police, fire and ambulance) are city based, not state based. Is there a compelling reason for that?
Our police come from organizations that were used to round up slaves. There is less logic to this and more historic leftovers.
Agreeing with two other sub-comments before mine, I also want to add that to some degree it's similar to the awful reason why the U.S. runs its schools with localized school districts. So that residents of more affluent areas receive more extensive services.
The size of some states like Alaska and lack of resources, not money but people and material required to do the job is either unrealistic or unsustainable. For example, Alaska is the size of Europe but has the population of Iceland. Imagine if you had a job that had you fly out to Romania (either you stay for a month to finish the investigation or travel back and forth each weekend) and then when that case is over you fly out to Normandy for another case. Then fly out to Estonia after that. The distances mean that you, the detective, would have no life except wading through the worst part of humanity. No wife, no family, a home that would sit empty (if you had a permanent residence at all).
And basic policing? The only way to enforce such a huge area and not bankrupt a nation from travel fees would be to have the police live where they patrol. And if they live where they work, you now have community based jurisdictions. Some places are too big for a unified approach and smaller actions that report to a larger body is really the only what that would work - and it's how the US does policing.
In Australia we have state based policing and the police live where they work. We have local police stations but the money and equipment come from state taxes. And our states are bigger than yours, WA is almost 1,000,000 km² larger than Alaska, and most of our states have much lower populations and population densities than yours. It can work, which is why I asked.
We do have state police. We just also have city police, county police, federal police. They are all seperate and depending on the crime committed different ones will get involved. City or county police will handle your typical day to day policing. State and federal police get involved if the crime crosses county/state lines, happened specifically on state/federal property, or if the county/city police don't have the resources to deal with it. In theory this means that the higher policing jurisdictions provide oversight over the lower ones and the lower ones can provide more focused efforts onto their specific areas that the higher jurisdictions wouldn't be able to do. In practice though a cop is a cop and they all cover for each others crimes/inadequacies.
We do have them though. The US has State Troopers, regional and state Fire Marshalls, state owned healthcare agencies, state operated hospitals, and state operated EMS services.
Here's a few examples:
- New York State Police
- California Highway Patrol
- Florida State Fire Marshall's Office
- Washington Department of Public Health
- Patton State Hospital (run by California State)
- Virginia Office of Emergency Medical Services
Yeah. I think it’s also important to remind people outside the US just how big it is, landmass wise. Germany is smaller than Montana. About 26 Montanas can fit into the US, area wise. So a federally run police force would need to cover more than 26 times the square footage of Germany. State, and then local groups just make more sense at that scale
I fully agree. Places like Montana also have quite a few indigenous nations within them that have their own public services and operations. So I'd argue it would impose an even greater imbalance of powers if there was one gigantic police force that all the other smaller independent police forces were required to work with.
I know as an American I'm propagandized towards believing that a proper balance of powers will "fix" things (as in the 3 branches of government), though in this case I believe it's true.
My state has city, county, state police and even special police for some agencies.
We have both, technically all 4.
Police are often city, not always but often. (Cities like Kansas City had their police captured by the state and no one likes it)
Sheriff's are county
Highway patrol/state troopers are state
The three letter agencies are all federal.
Due to unique internal limited sovereignity there is some overlap between all of them but generally speaking that's how it works.
Practically speaking most rural policing of import is accomplished by state officers in Alaska.
So at what point do people in areas so corrupt that the mayor's sons are able to murder blatantly and with impunity muster up a posse to take care of it themselves?
People should lose the protection of the social contract of law when it stops applying to them.
Ask the folks in Skidmore, Missouri.
Holy shit.
My wife grew up in this town. Unfortunately incest, statutory rape, and domestic violence is rampant and it's partially due to cultural norms of the Inupiaq.
Confused, are you saying domestic violence and statutory rape are just cultural norms? How could that possibly be blamed on anything other than colonialism...
Because before colonialism that was their normal way of life.
politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News