|
KernelSlanders posted:Naturally, he's been in trouble for falsifying records before. The sheriff tried to fire him in 2007 for pre-signing citations which would 1) then be completed by someone else and 2) submitted as evidence in court. The union review board had him reinstated because reasons. Pointing out a horrible thing a police union did? Wow, way to hate teachers.
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2014 07:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 14:41 |
|
|
meat sweats posted:Pointing out a horrible thing a police union did? Wow, way to hate teachers. You are probably the most anti-police reform poster in this thread. You bring up this distraction of teacher's constantly. No one else mentions it. Edit: I mean, you had a perfect opportunity to discuss a specific and meaningful police reform, one that would weaken police unions, and instead choose to flail against imaginary persecutors. That's just not effective rhetoric and while I'm sure that writing that post was cathartic, it is not conducive to productive discourse on police reform. Trabisnikof fucked around with this message at 07:43 on Aug 10, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2014 07:12
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:You are probably the most anti-police reform poster in this thread. You bring up this distraction of teacher's constantly. No one else mentions it. What it is, is that he's been accused of hating the idea of teacher's unions when police unions basically seem to be little more than ways to ensure that bad cops stay cops. There's a difference here, Cops already have a lot of power, bargaining and otherwise. Teachers? Not so much. Police, you have to go to an academy and pass, teachers can just be gotten off the street. I think personally that it's going to be a mixture of everything. Yes, we need to charge bad cops with being corrupt and overzealous assholes. But we also need to work on *why* people who are like that end up working for the police department, as well as trying to make sure it's not a case of them becoming cops and then just being corrupted by the power. More checks on their power, and especially more requirements to bring out the big guns beyond 'A guy once said he may or may not have an assault weapon'. I'm sort of saying that while Obdicut is kind of acting like charging cops won't do anything, he is right in that the system itself is corrupt and needs to be either reformed, or if the rot runs too deep, they need to start over again. Sadly saying something like that is more likely to get people laughing at you or saying #Notallcops
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2014 15:24
|
|
|
E-Tank posted:What it is, is that he's been accused of hating the idea of teacher's unions when police unions basically seem to be little more than ways to ensure that bad cops stay cops It's mainly because he really doesn't like the idea of teacher's unions. http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3646642&userid=176063 Ctrl-F for 'teachers'. I guess he supports a teacher's union that can't strike or negotiate over wages or working conditions. E-Tank posted:
I've never said that charging cops won't do anything, by the way, or said anything like it. In modern news: Ferguson Police officer shoots and kills an unarmed black teenager quite a large number of times. There doesn't seem to be anything in the least bit defensible about this. The officer is alleging an 'altercation' and that the victim tried to grab his gun (the same excuse Zimmerman used), but that would only account for the first shot, not shooting the kid in the back as he ran away. The local police have already turned the investigation on up the chain, and hopefully the FBI will investigate and community pressure will keep this getting looked at.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2014 19:21
|
|
|
Time is ticking away until the last realistic hope of officer weapon use reform gets retired: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XWsUxkpv2_k
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2014 19:39
|
|
|
E-Tank posted:What it is, is that he's been accused of hating the idea of teacher's unions when police unions basically seem to be little more than ways to ensure that bad cops stay cops. There's a difference here, Cops already have a lot of power, bargaining and otherwise. Teachers? Not so much. Police, you have to go to an academy and pass, teachers can just be gotten off the street. Thing is that cops don't need a union to cover for each other. They'll still have Brotherhoods and Fraternal Orders and such, like the example from just a couple pages ago, that are protected by the 1st Amendment (freedom of association). They'll still be able to punish cops that don't want to play along with a coverup (that arguably gets even easier without a union), they'll still gently caress around with prosecutors that go after them. All that would change is that they wouldn't have union-provided representation, but if one of their own did need a lawyer I'm sure they'd take a "voluntary" collection. I read the first five pages of this thread, then skipped to the end to get past meat sweats stroking his hateboner for public sector unions, yet here we still are. What a waste of a thread.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 00:41
|
|
|
Yeah the problem with police unions isn't the union part, it's the police part - and the fact that the leaders actively fight any amount of accountability or reform.
Kaal fucked around with this message at 00:48 on Aug 11, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 00:46
|
|
|
The problem is you aren't good at reasoning and are applying leftist dogma before facts. I'm using evidence to show why police unions are bad -- it's not my fault there's a lot of evidence and EVERY time a police abuse incident takes place there's a "union head calls for execution of people for looking at police in mean way, demands lollipops for life for officer who shot black man" story the next day. You are starting from the premise "all unions are good" and refusing to change your beliefs based on evidence. I'm pretty sure I'm the only person here who's put forth a detailed list of 15 things that we need to see done at the legislative and cultural levels to fix the police. The inescapable fact is that NOTHING is going to get done as long as we allow police to organize, because police unions and union equivalents exist solely to block any reforms on police power or any expectation that police will follow the law. "Don't worry about police unions, just mandate lapel cameras" is not a serious proposal when every attempt at lapel cameras in the last year has earned an explicit "we will not follow this law" directive from a police union. You have to choose between your knee-jerk support for unions and your claimed support for police reform. If "destroy all police unions & equivalents" is not #1 on your reform agenda then you don't seriously have a reform agenda, you just have a plan for N more years of asking why the latest teenager with a candy bar got shot. And no, there is no First Amendment right to conspire to commit & cover up crimes. I'd like to see the next defendant at a Mafia trial try that one on for size. meat sweats fucked around with this message at 01:27 on Aug 11, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 01:21
|
|
|
meat sweats posted:The problem is you aren't good at reasoning and are applying leftist dogma before facts. I'm using evidence to show why police unions are bad -- it's not my fault there's a lot of evidence and EVERY time a police abuse incident takes place there's a "union head calls for execution of people for looking at police in mean way, demands lollipops for life for officer who shot black man" story the next day. You are starting from the premise "all unions are good" and refusing to change your beliefs based on evidence. No, you're the one who keeps shooting your own arguments in the back by blathering on about teachers unions and all public employee unions rather than talking about police corruption or police reform. Remember everyone, it was Meat Sweats's who first brought up banning all public employee unions as a solution to police corruption. That's why you're a joke and that's why your anti-union jabbering only distracts from a real discussion about police reform. You keep screaming that until we destroy all public employee unions we can't reform the police and that's bullshit and off topic. meat sweats posted:Long-term proposals: meat sweats posted:As long as you continue to insist that public employee unions are good, you will get nowhere with this. meat sweats posted:All public sector unions should be illegal... meat sweats posted:Public employee unions are a cancer, this is an area where you must make a choice between leftist economics and liberal ideas about freedom and equality. Choosing leftist economics would be incorrect. meat sweats posted:I'm in favor of not letting teachers declare they have no intention of complying with the law in those states where electorates have chosen to cut salaries and benefits. meat sweats posted:The teachers go on strike until the budget is restored to the level they demand, irrespective of what the voters or their elected representatives have democratically chosen. meat sweats posted:As long as you think that going against a police union means "having an implacable hatred of teachers" no police reform will ever take place. This is a fact. meat sweats posted:Pointing out a horrible thing a police union did? Wow, way to hate teachers. But yeah, keep arguing with your fantasy I'm sure it feels good.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 01:41
|
|
|
It's funny how that series of posts goes from hating public unions in general to getting right to the issue: those loving teachers.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 01:44
|
|
|
nutranurse posted:It's funny how that series of posts goes from hating public unions in general to getting right to the issue: those loving teachers. Well yes, when you read it as a "series of posts" rather than a series of out of context half-sentences re-ordered to make that point. I was asked how my logic about police unions applies to teachers thirty pages ago and I made the mistake of answering the question honestly instead of shouting slogans. This has led to anyone who questions a police union being accused of "hating teachers" by people who think their job in the "police reform" thread is to shout down any attempt at discussing police reform. At some point you have to realize that "teachers in public schools complying with the will of the electorate on education policy" is a price that must be paid to end the ability of police to kill people for fun. To me, there is no contest as to what the right choice is. To others, their concern with "police reform" stops the minute it requires doing the one necessary thing to achieve any actual police reform.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 01:48
|
|
|
Guys I don't get why you keep bringing up teachers. destroy all public unions!!! I'm simply talkdestroy all public unions!!!ing about an organization that destroy all public unions!!! enables police impunity. destroy all public unions!!!!! Why do you keep bringing up this destroy all public unions!!! total canard?
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 01:51
|
|
|
The ultimate subverter of democracy:
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 01:54
|
|
|
Just out of curiosity, Meat Sweats, should any company that makes a profit from providing services to the government also be banned from lobbying of all kinds? Or is bundled capital fine and good for the political process, but bundled labor is horrible and corruptive? And again in modern news: The Ferguson police brought out dogs to confront the (mainly black) protesters in an absolutely stunning display of media incompetence. They've also claimed the crowd was shouting "Kill the police". I think it's probably there were, at the protest, some assholes shouting that, I really doubt the crowd was ever chanting 'kill the police'. What is striking about this story is that the police version of events doesn't actually make this a legitimate shooting. There's a possibility of poo poo flaring up between protesters and cops there. I don't really trust the Ferguson police to handle crowd control well if they think 'bring dogs to deal with black protesters against a police abuse' is a good idea.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 01:54
|
|
|
meat sweats posted:Well yes, when you read it as a "series of posts" rather than a series of out of context half-sentences re-ordered to make that point. I was asked how my logic about police unions applies to teachers thirty pages ago and I made the mistake of answering the question honestly instead of shouting slogans. So are you denying that you proposed eliminating all public employee unions as a "solution" to police corruption? meat sweats posted:This has led to anyone who questions a police union being accused of "hating teachers" by people who think their job in the "police reform" thread is to shout down any attempt at discussing police reform. Please fine exactly one quote where someone in this thread said that? You cannot use a post responding to your claims about all public employee unions. Find somewhere where the conversation goes police unions -> teachers unions and you're not the one bringing up teachers. meat sweats posted:At some point you have to realize that "teachers in public schools complying with the will of the electorate on education policy" is a price that must be paid to end the ability of police to kill people for fun. To me, there is no contest as to what the right choice is. To others, their concern with "police reform" stops the minute it requires doing the one necessary thing to achieve any actual police reform. Once again you're making a straw man. What do teacher's unions have to do with police unions or police reforms? Nothing. (Besides, you're again ignoring the democratically passed laws that allow public unions and strikes). Explain exactly how we must end teacher's unions so that we can "end the ability of police to kill people for fun". Can you go 5 posts again without mentioning teachers or all public unions? Please say anything you want about police unions or you know police reform if you're interested. Obdicut posted:Just out of curiosity, Meat Sweats, should any company that makes a profit from providing services to the government also be banned from lobbying of all kinds? Or is bundled capital fine and good for the political process, but bundled labor is horrible and corruptive? I am saddened that I can't really believe there is going to be an unbiased investigation into this shooting. When its one cops word against many witnesses, well its obvious what will happen.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 01:55
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:
Maybe not, but what I'm pointing out right now is that the police story is: There was some altercation, both out and inside the car. Michael Brown tried to grab the cops gun. The first shot gets fired. Michael Brown runs away, unarmed, and is shot multiple times. By that police version, that's not in any way a justifiable shooting. Also, the favorite boogeyman of the Right-wing, Eric Holder has said the civil rights DOJ department is going to be keeping a weather eye on things there.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 02:14
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:Maybe not, but what I'm pointing out right now is that the police story is: Well, looks like the FBI is officially investigating: http://www.kmov.com/news/local/FBI-taking-over-Missouri-police-shooting-of-teen-270762451.html I still will be shocked if charges are ever pressed against the officer.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 18:39
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Well, looks like the FBI is officially investigating: http://www.kmov.com/news/local/FBI-taking-over-Missouri-police-shooting-of-teen-270762451.html Fingers crossed at least. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 18:51
|
|
|
How many days does it take to notify a cop he shot someone? I figured you could do that when you place him on administrative leave. https://twitter.com/mattdpearce/statuses/498896252273442816 posted:Ferguson chief says he plans to identify officer in Michael Brown shooting today, if he can reach the officer to notify him. When you compare this to the way police treat releasing the names of other admitted killers, its clear why a lot of communities distrust the police to deal with their own.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 23:12
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:How many days does it take to notify a cop he shot someone? I figured you could do that when you place him on administrative leave. This is actually extraordinary: generally the police shooter is named quickly. This isn't typical.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 23:25
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:This is actually extraordinary: generally the police shooter is named quickly. This isn't typical. Well the town broke out into riots last night, so you can tell how well the department is handling the situation.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 23:31
|
|
|
AlliedBiscuit posted:Well the town broke out into riots last night, so you can tell how well the department is handling the situation. Some interesting crime stats from there: White people, when stopped and searched, have contraband at twice the rate black people do, but black people still get far disproportionately stopped, searched, and charged.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 23:48
|
|
|
From ClickHole, the Onion's BuzzFeed spoof: 8 More Unarmed Teens Still At Large 
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 23:51
|
|
|
Were the riots before or after the mayor declared that they would not allow any protests? That's in the video on the ksdk home page. I can't figure out how to link directly to it. Also on that you can hear the chief of police say "We were gracious today. We allowed them to peacefully protest, which they did," right before his men arrested everyone with signs on the sidewalk. Naturally, the police responding to the overnight protests did everything they could to de-escalate the situation.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 23:56
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:Some interesting crime stats from there: White people, when stopped and searched, have contraband at twice the rate black people do, but black people still get far disproportionately stopped, searched, and charged. Well, those are linked. Since police only search white people when they have a good reason to, searches are more likely to turn up contraband even if white people don't commit crimes at a higher rate.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 23:58
|
|
|
KernelSlanders posted:Well, those are linked. Since police only search white people when they have a good reason to, searches are more likely to turn up contraband even if white people don't commit crimes at a higher rate. Yes, of course they're linked. But they clearly show a racial profiling that's beyond even an arguably utility.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2014 00:52
|
|
|
The FBI is investigating the Michael Brown case. The PD involved actually did request an outside investigation within 24 hours, but it was from the neighboring redneck shitbag police department, so this was wisely perceived as no better than the department which committed the shooting investigating themselves. Ferguson police cars are not equipped with cameras, nor are officers. I assume everyone interested in enough in police abuse issues to be reading this thread is aware of what has happened over the last two days -- militarized police lines literally daring protestors to riot, then using illegal crowd control methods including tear gas, rubber bullets, and wooden bullets in an indiscriminate fashion. There has been a side conversation about whether we are allowed to dislike two bad things at the same time without painting them as equally bad, and the narrative is now about the stupid "it's good to loot black-owned stores after a black person gets shot" nonsense. No one is doing the Brown family or the cause of police reform any favors by getting sucked into that discussion.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2014 17:24
|
|
|
meat sweats posted:The FBI is investigating the Michael Brown case. The PD involved actually did request an outside investigation within 24 hours, but it was from the neighboring redneck shitbag police department, so this was wisely perceived as no better than the department which committed the shooting investigating themselves. Edit: Forget it. I forgot that I don't want to get involved in this mess again. ACAB
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2014 18:06
|
|
|
meat sweats posted:conversation about whether we are allowed to dislike two bad things at the same time without painting them as equally bad, and the narrative is now about the stupid "it's good to loot black-owned stores after a black person gets shot" nonsense. Where are you getting this idea from? Can you find any media outlets (or posters in this thread for that matter) saying that "it's good to loot black-owned stores after a black person gets shot"? If anything the "riots" are being used to distract from an already very flawed police investigation. Sounds like you're making another strawman to me. Meanwhile, in this perfect example of the reasons we need police reform; the police know who the killer is but have pushed back again on telling the public his name: https://twitter.com/Lussenpop/status/499190392261066754 posted:UPDATE: Ferguson police WILL NOT be releasing the name of the officer involved in #mikebrown shooting today. Just got off phone with the PIO
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2014 19:53
|
|
|
By definition, it's pointless to lecture people who would riot. If their community had support, they wouldn't do it. It's interesting to contemplate the many comparisons that have been made to Ferguson/St. Louis and Los Angeles in 1992. The thing that sticks out for me is the total absence of a grassroots black power movement that briefly flourished 20 years ago. Remember "X" hats? Public Enemy? All that stuff is gone now. We've truly moved "race" relations back to a time well before 1992, and to see the smug impassive faces of Ferguson PD brass tells me that the forces of Jim Crow are trying to reassert themselves. I'd love to see what kind of emails those police forward to one another in their down time.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2014 20:14
|
|
|
SrgMagnum posted:Edit: Forget it. I forgot that I don't want to get involved in this mess again. It's kind of sad, although I can't say I blame you given the tone in this thread. I do think we could use another perspective though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2014 20:16
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:By definition, it's pointless to lecture people who would riot. If their community had support, they wouldn't do it. Well, considering Anonymous is actively working at breaking into their emails, we might. E: What's ACAB? Magres fucked around with this message at 20:45 on Aug 12, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2014 20:39
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2014 20:44
|
|
|
There are definitely people (on Salon and on Gawker, for example) defending the looting on the basis of it being a legitimate expression of anger and on how if you have a problem with it you "value property more than black lives" or some poo poo like that. Again, most of the businesses ruined were black-owned and neither they nor the white-owned ones were responsible for what happened. It's ridiculous that people have to say "Both shooting black people and looting are bad. Murder is worse. It's possible to dislike two things at the same time." Every second spent on the stupid "actually, breaking windows and stealing beer is a great way of achieving practical police reform!!!" discussion is a wasted breath that should be spent on identifying the murderer of Michael Brown & achieving real measures to rein in the police.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2014 20:46
|
|
|
'It is not enough for me to stand before you tonight and condemn riots. It would be morally irresponsible for me to do that without, at the same time, condemning the contingent, intolerable conditions that exist in our society. These conditions are the things that cause individuals to feel that they have no other alternative than to engage in violent rebellions to get attention. And I must say tonight that a riot is the language of the unheard.' -MLK These people have tried for decades to be heard, and it has fallen on deaf ears.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2014 20:49
|
|
|
Magres posted:E: What's ACAB?
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2014 20:51
|
|
|
meat sweats posted:There are definitely people (on Salon and on Gawker, for example) defending the looting on the basis of it being a legitimate expression of anger and on how if you have a problem with it you "value property more than black lives" or some poo poo like that. Again, most of the businesses ruined were black-owned and neither they nor the white-owned ones were responsible for what happened. It's ridiculous that people have to say "Both shooting black people and looting are bad. Murder is worse. It's possible to dislike two things at the same time." Ok, so you agree no one in this thread is actually talking about the issue. Nor can you find articles to back up your claim, if you have problems with commenters on Salon/Gawker go comment there. Or start a "MSM thread" in D&D. If you think 'Every second spent on the stupid "actually, breaking windows and stealing beer is a great way of achieving practical police reform!!!" discussion is a wasted breath' then stop bringing it up in this thread? Are there any legitimate reasons to not release the killer's name? I'm struggling to find one.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2014 20:56
|
|
|
If I had any faith in our legal system I would say his safety because vigilante justice is generally a bad thing. At this point though? Throw him to the wolves. I can't wait for Anonymous to dox the child-murdering bastard.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2014 20:58
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:Maybe not, but what I'm pointing out right now is that the police story is:
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2014 20:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 14:41 |
|
|
Magres posted:If I had any faith in our legal system I would say his safety because vigilante justice is generally a bad thing. Seriously. Normally I'd advocate for cooler heads, but honestly the police in Ferguson have proven they are unable to serve in any role related to justice. It should be up to the people they are betraying and harming now to decide what gets done with the murderer.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2014 21:00
|
|
