Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Colorado Mental Health Institute Officers

Collapse

300x250 Mobile

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Colorado Mental Health Institute Officers

    I saw this document through a news piece link regarding reclassifying Corrections Officers as direct care staff and even reducing the duties of police officers at the facility followed by cuts through attrition and layoffs. I just wanted to hear some thoughts on this. Clearly progressives are targeting Law Enforcement positions. Unfortunately officers under the control of "doctors" and other clinicians is a recipe for failure. Any thoughts from current Colorado Mental Health officers? I see this as very shortsighted and unfair....

    https://beta.documentcloud.org/docum...tute-at-pueblo

  • #2
    Seems like a union issue. Seems like they are basically making them nursing techs vs cops. Wonder how the union for the nurse techs feel and nurses
    I'd rather be judged by 12 rather carried by 6.

    It should be noted that any and all post that are made are based on my own thought and opinions. And are not related or implied to represent the department I work for.

    Comment


    • #3
      Reclassifying them removes some of the liability SB 217 creates
      "I am a Soldier. I fight where I'm told and I win where I fight." -- GEN George S. Patton, Jr.

      "With a brother on my left and a sister on my right, we face…. We face what no one should face. We face, so no one else would face. We are in the face of Death." -- Holli Peet

      Comment


      • #4
        We’re they Peace Officers? If so, do they lose that status also?

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by CCCSD View Post
          We’re they Peace Officers? If so, do they lose that status also?
          Each of the State mental health hospitals in Colorado has a police department. They are fully sworn officers with statewide jurisdiction, like state park rangers... but rarely take action off the grounds of their hospitals, again much like state park rangers.

          The problem with SB217 is it removes the protections of the Governmental Immunity Act from police officers and police departments, allowing lawsuits in state court.

          The other problem is SB217 prohibits a peace officer from applying a "choke hold" and defines a "choke hold" as any pressure applied to the neck or torso.

          Edit: to any part of the body that potentially restricts breathing.

          Doing so is a class 1 misdemeanor. If you're wrestling around with a suspect and get on top, you've just committed a crime... which other officers present are required to prevent or report, or they have committed a crime.

          I imagine that dealing with the criminally insane results in fairly frequent uses of force, and the thinking is they are trying to get their officers out from under SB217. Designating them as peace officers would negate that, so what I've heard is they may be trying to enumerate the powers of a peace officer and apply it to the new designation, without actually calling them peace officers.
          Last edited by tanksoldier; 01-08-2021, 10:05 PM.
          "I am a Soldier. I fight where I'm told and I win where I fight." -- GEN George S. Patton, Jr.

          "With a brother on my left and a sister on my right, we face…. We face what no one should face. We face, so no one else would face. We are in the face of Death." -- Holli Peet

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by tanksoldier View Post

            Each of the State mental health hospitals in Colorado has a police department. They are fully sworn officers with statewide jurisdiction, like state park rangers... but rarely take action off the grounds of their hospitals, again much like state park rangers.

            The problem with SB217 is it removes the protections of the Governmental Immunity Act from police officers and police departments, allowing lawsuits in state court.

            The other problem is SB217 prohibits a peace officer from applying a "choke hold" and defines a "choke hold" as any pressure applied to the neck or torso. Doing so is a class 1 misdemeanor. If you're wrestling around with a suspect and get on top, you've just committed a crime... which other officers present are required to prevent or report, or they have committed a crime.

            I imagine that dealing with the criminally insane results in fairly frequent uses of force, and the thinking is they are trying to get their officers out from under SB217. Designating them as peace officers would negate that, so what I've heard is they may be trying to enumerate the powers of a peace officer and apply it to the new designation, without actually calling them peace officers.
            I've not heard about the choke hold portion also including the torso. Are you sure on that? I know that was included in the NYC bill, but this is the first I've heard of it here in Colorado.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by FrontRangeCop View Post

              I've not heard about the choke hold portion also including the torso. Are you sure on that? I know that was included in the NYC bill, but this is the first I've heard of it here in Colorado.
              https://leg.colorado.gov/sites/defau...0a_217_enr.pdf

              b) (I) FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS SUBSECTION (2.5), "CHOKEHOLD" MEANS A METHOD BY WHICH A PERSON APPLIES SUFFICIENT PRESSURE TO A PERSON TO MAKE BREATHING DIFFICULT OR IMPOSSIBLE AND INCLUDES BUT IS NOT LIMITED TO ANY PRESSURE TO THE NECK, THROAT, OR WINDPIPE THAT MAY PREVENT OR HINDER BREATHING OR REDUCE INTAKE OF AIR.

              Our guidance is that any pressure applied to any part of the body that could potentially hamper breathing by any amount is a crime.


              "I am a Soldier. I fight where I'm told and I win where I fight." -- GEN George S. Patton, Jr.

              "With a brother on my left and a sister on my right, we face…. We face what no one should face. We face, so no one else would face. We are in the face of Death." -- Holli Peet

              Comment


              • #8
                So...if I twist a pinkie and they gasp because it hurts, I’m getting booked and charged? Dayummmm....

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by tanksoldier View Post

                  https://leg.colorado.gov/sites/defau...0a_217_enr.pdf

                  b) (I) FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS SUBSECTION (2.5), "CHOKEHOLD" MEANS A METHOD BY WHICH A PERSON APPLIES SUFFICIENT PRESSURE TO A PERSON TO MAKE BREATHING DIFFICULT OR IMPOSSIBLE AND INCLUDES BUT IS NOT LIMITED TO ANY PRESSURE TO THE NECK, THROAT, OR WINDPIPE THAT MAY PREVENT OR HINDER BREATHING OR REDUCE INTAKE OF AIR.

                  Our guidance is that any pressure applied to any part of the body that could potentially hamper breathing by any amount is a crime.

                  Interesting, we're not training to stay off the torso. Another example of how poorly written this bill is, in addition to ignoring due process.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by CCCSD View Post
                    So...if I twist a pinkie and they gasp because it hurts, I’m getting booked and charged? Dayummmm....
                    You’re being facetious, but the reality is, nobody knows. That’s the real problem. The provisions are so poorly written, and do far from current practice and case law, that the only way we’ll know for sure what is allowed and what isn’t is when a court case tells us... and nobody wants to be that court case.

                    There is another provision that seems to prohibit consensual contacts.... in that you HAVE to have at least reasonable suspicion a crime has occurred to initiate a contact:

                    24-31-309. Profiling - officer identification - training. (3.5) A PEACE OFFICER SHALL HAVE A LEGAL BASIS FOR MAKING A CONTACT WHETHER CONSENSUAL OR NONCONSENSUAL, FOR THE PURPOSE OF ENFORCING THE LAW OR INVESTIGATING POSSIBLE VIOLATIONS OF THE LAW.

                    The interpretation seems to be that you can still say hi, but if a consensual contact turns into a criminal investigation you have to be able to articulate the legal basis for your contact... if it turns out the guy has a warrant or meth in his pocket but you didn’t suspect that before the contact you can’t make an arrest.

                    You can’t turn a consensual contact into an arrest.
                    Last edited by tanksoldier; 01-10-2021, 04:53 PM.
                    "I am a Soldier. I fight where I'm told and I win where I fight." -- GEN George S. Patton, Jr.

                    "With a brother on my left and a sister on my right, we face…. We face what no one should face. We face, so no one else would face. We are in the face of Death." -- Holli Peet

                    Comment

                    MR300x250 Tablet

                    Collapse

                    What's Going On

                    Collapse

                    There are currently 4442 users online. 297 members and 4145 guests.

                    Most users ever online was 158,966 at 04:57 AM on 01-16-2021.

                    Welcome Ad

                    Collapse
                    Working...
                    X