What do you think she is seeing that none of her fellow officers are seeing?

Comment on the WSJ blog post where the picture of a female riot officer is displayed:

love the first one with the female police… what do you think she is seeing that none of her fellow officers are seeing?

The topic also reminded me of this quote from Affirmative Action and Cops by John Lott:

Increasing the number of women officers under these reduced strength and size standards consistently and significantly increases the number of assaults on police officers. In general, every 1 percent increase in the number of women in a police force results in a 15 to 19 percent increase in the number of assaults on the police, because women tend to be weaker than men.

Why? The more likely that a criminal’s assault on a police officer will be successful, the more likely criminals will do it. The major factor determining success is the relative strengths and sizes of the criminal and officer. The 200-pound Nichols might have decided not to try to escape had his guard been closer to his own size.

My research uncovered another interesting finding. Female officers are more likely to accidentally shoot people. Each 1 percent increase in the number of white female officers in a police force increases the number of shootings of civilians by 2.7 percent. Because of their weaker physical strength, female officers have less time to decide on whether to fire their weapon. If a man makes a mistake and waits too long to shoot a suspect who is attacking him, the male officer still has a chance of using his strength to subdue the attacker. Female officers (as was the case in Atlanta) will lose control of the situation at that point.

This entry was posted in Feminists. Bookmark the permalink.

25 Responses to What do you think she is seeing that none of her fellow officers are seeing?

  1. blogster says:

    enjoying your riot themed series at the moment dalrock. your statistics are definitely interesting and the accompanying logic is correct, but with all statistical analyses can you confirm causation, not just correlation? are there other factors influencing growing numbers of police assaults at the same time as women enter the force?

  2. blogster says:

    An interesting personal story for me out of the riots was the story of enfield town in northern london. Enfield is about 5-10 minutes drive from Tottenham, which to put it delicately, is an unwelcoming place.

    In 2007, I spent on and off, 6 months in Enfield and Palmers Green – lovely place, almost village feel. During the riots last week, hundreds and hundreds (if not thousands) of local men from the area went down to the local shopping precinct and stood guard (outnumbering attending police by several hundred multiples) to ward off would be rioters. It was a proud moment of real community spirit in action. There was a facebook group calling people to action and within 10 hours, 11,000 people had joined.

    Many many women expressed their gratitude to the lads on the facebook wall, but what annoyed me however were the comments of some women along the lines of, “let’s not forget the women!” (in pictures you see some women attending).

    Yeah, that’s why the rioters backed down – because of the women that showed up. Feminists never miss an opportunity.

  3. Knuold says:

    The horses in the background are interesting. 19th century transportation technology aided by 21st century materials technology.

    As for the little lady, timeless maternal technology made null and void by 21st century social engineering technology.

  4. Anonymous Reader says:

    Tisk, tisk, tisk. Clearly she was caught in the act of a mighty, Xenia Warrior Princess battle cry…

  5. A predictable consequence of changing recruitment standards. When I was growing up in Melbourne (1970s to early 80s) the average policeman on the street was an intimidating, youngish, broad shouldered, tall male. They used to patrol in pairs and I can remember thinking to myself that you’d have to be crazy to take them on. Nowadays you often see quite small females on patrol. And the thought has crossed my mind that if I really wanted to it wouldn’t be that hard to overpower them. Most people have no reason to want to do so, but if you’re a desperate criminal then maybe you’d have a go.

  6. Jack says:

    I can only wonder what will happen in a war, and how easy it will be lost.

    “Captain, we’re under heavy bombardment, but we have to turn the ship around and get to shore to have GI Jane’s baby delivered. I’ve heard it’s going to be a boy!”

    “This regiment has been court martialed for sexual harrasment”

  7. Anthony says:

    “Oh s**t! I dropped my shield!”

    Why doesn’t she have a shield, and is that her hand holding the telescoping nightstick that’s bent?

    [D: I’m pretty sure what looks like a bent section of her baton is the one in the hand of the officer to her left. Neither she nor the officer to her left have shields for some reason, although the rest of the group does. It looks like maybe the front line parted to let her and her partner through for some reason. Maybe to make an arrest?]

  8. Dalrock says:

    @blogster

    enjoying your riot themed series at the moment dalrock. your statistics are definitely interesting and the accompanying logic is correct, but with all statistical analyses can you confirm causation, not just correlation? are there other factors influencing growing numbers of police assaults at the same time as women enter the force?

    Thanks. As you point out statistics can’t point the causal arrow, and they can be wrong if a relevant variable is omitted which happens to be correlated with something which was measured. If his study is bogus it would seem to be very easy to find someone with solid counter evidence; the left detests Dr. Lott.

    One way to cross check his findings would be to look at the actual rates of assault against female police and shootings by female police compared to male police. If nothing else this should show if there is a difference. His method probably is better at measuring the overall impact of adding women to the force though, because when they do this they tend to lower physical standards for men at the same time. If smaller weaker men were allowed in because of the rules change for women, the negative effects would still be attributable to the changes for women, even if some of the problems were with the smaller and weaker men.

  9. Opus says:

    I refer to my earlier coment (on the previous thread). I have a form to complete as to the service that I received including an any additional comment question. Should I complete it thus: ‘In view of the recent events in London from which it is clear that Female Officers are not physically appropriate for patrol (or riot) work I was left feeling ill at ease both for myself, the safety of the female officer and thus also for her fellow officer’. I expect it will go in the bin – or they will (if they understand it) mark me down as a member of the awkward squad.

  10. Eric says:

    Dalrock:
    I’m guessing that what she’s seeing is a bunch of thugs in front of her and she can’t resist getting to them!

    The MRA blog ‘Spearhead’ has run a few articles lately about how the female prison guards in my home state are get caught in sexual trysts with male inmates. One commenter mentioned that a few ex-inmates he knows brag about sleeping with their probation officers. Living here on the hyper-feminized West Coast, I’ve long suspected that’s what really attracts women to professions like the military and police. Not only does the ‘gender quotas’ give them the opportunity to boss a lot of really competent men around; it puts them into close proximity to the kinds of street vermin and thugs they really desire for more ‘initimate encounters’ later on!

  11. Van says:

    There is absolutely nothing intimidating about that female officer. Nothing. She’s a joke. If she attempted to arrest any common street thug without backup, he’d laugh as he smashed her face in, then he’d be on his way. She has no business being a police officer.

    Clone her, and put them both in the ring with an average guy, and she and the clone wouldn’t last a round.

  12. Brian says:

    “grrrriirrrrlllllllll power!!!!!!!!!”

  13. Thag Jones says:

    She looks like she’s doing this:

    Watch the whole thing from the beginning though; funny, yet in context, um….

  14. Thag Jones says:

    Oh dang, I tried to link to about 2:59, lol.

  15. WooZoo says:

    Awww… come on. Even I can see it. She needs to take a crap!

    @Thag Jones: Nice find.🙂

  16. Jack Amok says:

    What do you think she is seeing that none of her fellow officers are seeing?

    A “creepy” beta guy about to ask her out on a date. Sheer terror.

  17. grizzledwolf says:

    “D: I’m pretty sure what looks like a bent section of her baton is the one in the hand of the officer to her left. Neither she nor the officer to her left have shields for some reason, although the rest of the group does. It looks like maybe the front line parted to let her and her partner through for some reason. Maybe to make an arrest?”

    The guy on her left has a radio. I assume he is the commanding officer, hence no shield for him.. As for the woman, yeah, she probably dropped her shield.

  18. blogster says:

    @ dalrock

    Thanks for your response. Here in Australia, in April this year, the prime minister Julia Gillard and the defense minister Stephen Smith, announced the opening of frontline infantry roles to women, subject to women being able to meet the physical, mental and operational standards required

    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/defence/the-heat-of-battle-will-be-the-ultimate-test-for-women-in-the-military-says-retired-commander/story-e6frg8yo-1226037698790

    Gillard was quoted as saying:

    “There are many Australian women who love their country, they want to be in the defence force, of course physical capability and intellectual capability has to be judged for every job, but if a woman has the physical capability and intellectual capability to do a particular job then I do not believe it should be denied her on the basis of gender.”

    Be interesting to see how this one plays out.

  19. Opus says:

    @Thag Jones

    I do not have a television and therefore do not watch Sit-Coms, and was previously unaware of the one linked, but although it is perhaps off-topic to say so, I found the clip cringingly un-funny and the Anti-British Zulu joke, nothing but predictable from the BBC (as I assume it is) – but I do agree it is pertenant given the events of this week.

  20. Thag Jones says:

    Opus, I found the Zulu bit lame too and it’s an old show. I don’t know if it’s even been on TV this side of the Atlantic (watched it when I was in England) and I don’t have a TV either anymore. I think with a lot of these shows they’re funnier when you know the characters.

  21. Anonymous says:

    As Hudson said in Aliens, “That’s it, man! Game over, man! Game over!”

  22. Porky D says:

    In over her head – by at least a foot.

  23. Jennifer says:

    I think there’s definitely a place for women in law enforcement (if not in street police positions, then in detective areas where the qualities for such jobs are more evened out between the sexes). But lowering the job requirements is a deadly action to take, in the army as well as the police force; physical strength is a must. And the natural conclusion of this is that we need less female officers, not more.

  24. as;fkj;salfj says:

    Give her an Uzi and even she would look pretty tough.

  25. Svar says:

    @ Brian

    Hahaha, women are funny. This is ridiculous. Why would any criminal take her seriously? They won’t.

Please see the comment policy linked from the top menu.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s