[mmooss]

> introducing mental health crisis workers which have been tried in the US (SF) and worked disastrously.

I've read it has worked very well, though not necessarily in SF in particular. Do you happen to remember where you read that?

It's hard to imagine why having mental health professionals address mental health problems would be a bad idea.

[abe94]

Here's an account from the NYC government itself on how it hasn't worked well - https://comptroller.nyc.gov/reports/audit-of-the-behavioral-...

[mmooss]

That document doesn't support your claim at all, that I see; it talks about limited deployment and management analytics.

Could you point out if I'm missing something?

[abe94]

You can pick and choose what you see from the audit (though in no circumstances is it an astounding success).

The general points i'm trying to get across is

- Responder safety/back-up needs mean you can’t fully “swap out” police. This program still needed to bring in police most of the time. - Coverage and scale are hard in an actually big city, like NYC. (also why denver's success in a tiny city is sort of a useless comparison)

So why not just equip police to better handle mental health cases instead of creating a different task force which doesn't have any of structure the police already has? This isn't rhetorical - the reason is idealogical stubbornness, there are better solutions for achieving mamadanis goals.

[mmooss]

> You can pick and choose what you see from the audit

I don't think so: Pick something that supports your claim. Right now it looks like you linked to it without even knowing what it said, hoping nobody would read it and you could claim some authority.

> Responder safety/back-up needs mean you can’t fully “swap out” police. This program still needed to bring in police most of the time.

The audit specifically says that they can't evaluate that; they don't know because they lack the appropriate data.

Is there something else you base that claim on?

> why not just equip police to better handle mental health cases

Because it takes a lot of training that police don't have time or possibly the propensity for. Even police have long complained that they are given jobs that they aren't suited for.

> the reason is idealogical stubbornness

You answered your own question with that ... there is nothing more I can add!