|
Omi-Polari posted:I think we really need to demystify this whole police thing. Unless anyone is coming at it as an anarchist, we accept that it's a necessary function. I heard somewhere in the past few days a comparison to doctors. Well, there's medical malpractice and you don't want a system in which doctors are immune to any punishment for doing it. Now, what would happen if all the doctors in New York City were unionized? They might resist efforts to crack down on medical malpractice. We have nurses unions and we still hold nurses accountable. Likewise, in states with weak police unions you don't see a significantly better police force. But then again, if a doctor accidentally kills someone because they weren't trained for the task they were trying to do, they aren't investigated by only other doctors. Meanwhile the FBI investigates itself and finds they have a perfect record.
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2014 01:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 00:07 |
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:We have nurses unions and we still hold nurses accountable. Likewise, in states with weak police unions you don't see a significantly better police force. That's always going to be a bit of an issue though because you're drawing your investigators from the same pool as your policemen. You could mitigate this somewhat by having a national level program that focused on other regions (so the New York investigation office would focus on Texas, etc), but that wouldn't really help with national level programs like the FBI, especially if it's a root issue for the entire organization.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2014 01:42
|
|
|
Zeitgueist posted:Sure, but if you point out "Cops aren't about justice, they're about enforcing whomever is in power" people get all upset. In the same way that a passport stamper isn't responsible for the fairness or unfairness of US immigration policy, I think you'll find that most civil servants, police included, see laws as a set of rules we as a society have agreed to abide by, despite our disagreements, rather than guidelines to perfect justice, and that maintaining order and tranquility by holding people to that agreement is a morally good thing to do.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2014 01:47
|
|
|
Shachi posted:It's all the tasing I've received to make me so racist. I just can't help it. Go back to your safe space forum you big baby.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2014 01:48
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:It comes down to team sports, to tribalism. For a lot of people cops are part of who they identity as "us". The police are the heroes that will do what ever it takes to violently protect "us" from "them" not unlike the troops. The troops kill them over there, and the police kill them here. Anyone who doesn't like this must be a supporter of "them". You either 100% support the police and are on the good team, or you hate the police and are on the bad team. You either want the police around doing what they do and enforcing the law, or you want urban ferals descending over suburbia in a tide of rape, murder, and even property crime. There are no other positions, you are either with society or against it. Now they're blaming the rhetoric of the police reform protesters for encouraging the killings of NYPD officers. It's an imperfect analogy. The Vegas killers were actually at the ranch. But it's not like anyone told them to go kill those specific officers in Vegas, or assassinate any specific officers. They were unstable types that were attracted to the broader movement and the rhetoric surrounding it, and may have received some vague encouragement from the wider social networks. Again, imperfect analogy. But a lot of police officers see protesters shouting kill the police, etc. And then someone actually goes out and does it, and very clearly references the police shootings. He's unstable, etc. etc. etc. Now you see there's tribalism among the left-wing activists here, too. From a few pages ago: Rhesus Pieces posted:This is real bad. If the police weren't already paranoid and angry at young black men they sure as poo poo will be now, and their lack of sympathy toward anybody protesting the deaths of Garner and Brown is going to turn into outright hostility if they associate them with this rear end in a top hat, and I won't be surprised at all if they do just that. BrutalistMcDonalds fucked around with this message at 02:33 on Dec 23, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2014 01:53
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:Maintaining order isn't the same as being an enforcer for whomever is in power, even if the end result is the same sometimes. You're talking about different ideas of what constitutes justice. Pretty much everyone agrees that it is unjust to unlawfully take another's property or to arbitrarily detain someone, but when you ask if it is just for a man to steal medicine he cannot afford in order to treat his sick wife, (or whether it is just to arrest that man,) there is disagreement. The police are going to arrest theives regardless of their noble intentions, because we've agreed as a society that you can't just take things, regardless of how much you think you need them.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2014 05:47
|
|
|
I would be thrilled at any cop who says that they'd enforce laws for anyone because they don't see themselves as comic book superheroes. The psycho who murders a guy over loosies isn't going to be the one who sees himself as a meter maid with a gun.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2014 06:27
|
|
|
Ignore the inflammatory title, read the story, and then scroll down and listen to all the 911 recordings: http://www.oregonlive.com/clark-county/index.ssf/2014/12/911_caller_mistakenly_shot_by.html
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2014 06:35
|
|
|
bitcoin bastard posted:Ignore the inflammatory title, read the story, and then scroll down and listen to all the 911 recordings: Okay, I did that, now what.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2014 06:40
|
|
|
Omi-Polari posted:^ This goon was right. But I went to a Mike Brown protest last month and I remember watching and hearing the crowd shout: "What do we want? DEAD COPS. When do we want it? NOW." Careful what you wish for, you just might get it and so on. Though I have to say the people who have been consistent are the libertarians at Reason magazine (who have pushed back for years against accusations right-wing rhetoric and left-wing/anti-police rhetoric leads to violence) and the more hardcore anti-police protesters who literally do want to shoot cops.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2014 07:04
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:Maintaining order isn't the same as being an enforcer for whomever is in power, even if the end result is the same sometimes. You're talking about different ideas of what constitutes justice. Pretty much everyone agrees that it is unjust to unlawfully take another's property or to arbitrarily detain someone, but when you ask if it is just for a man to steal medicine he cannot afford in order to treat his sick wife, (or whether it is just to arrest that man,) there is disagreement. The police are going to arrest theives regardless of their noble intentions, because we've agreed as a society that you can't just take things, regardless of how much you think you need them. What the gently caress is maintaining order if it isn't being an enforcer for the elite? You are trying to make this complicated when in fact, the police are paid by the rich. That poo poo is obvious. The police in America are an arm of the elite. What makes it so sad is, the police don't even loving realize it. The police think they are the last bastion between anarchy and the middle class, but they are beating up and murdering middle class dudes like crazy. It isn't an an argument about enforcement or power, it is about loving justice. If you equate justice in anything you wrote, you don't understand justice at all.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2014 07:25
|
|
|
Misogynist posted:The same people taking issue with the cop-killer rhetoric were the ones who talked after 9/11 about how they wanted to "bomb those sand****ers back into the Stone Age" so the cognitive dissonance needs to be taken with a grain of salt. It's okay until it's you or a family member in the crosshairs. For sure, it generally referred to white anarchists who didn't have any skin in the game. But I'd say that a guy who shot his girlfriend and committed suicide was motivated out of opportunistic and selfish reasons. He was looking for an out and those cops gave his out a sense of meaning. And everyone else is gonna be hurt by that.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2014 07:56
|
|
|
Police are paid by the taxpayers. If you're saying the rich pay most of the taxes, why shouldn't they get preferential treatment?
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2014 08:03
|
|
|
Armyman25 posted:Police are paid by the taxpayers. If you're saying the rich pay most of the taxes, why shouldn't they get preferential treatment? Why don't we bring back usury laws? Stupid poo poo is stupid, and what you wrote is stupid. Poor people pay a lot of taxes, just not Federal income taxes. You are trying to be inflammatory, but you ended up making yourself look foolish. The police are funded locally; through a mix of local taxes, including sales, income and property taxes. Edit: or, traffic tickets and other seemingly benign tickets that add up to a stupid amount of money. Example: Ferguson. Pohl fucked around with this message at 08:45 on Dec 23, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2014 08:41
|
|
|
Armyman25 posted:Police are paid by the taxpayers. If you're saying the rich pay most of the taxes, why shouldn't they get preferential treatment? Because systems like that end up testing the literality of the phrase "Eat the rich".
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2014 09:04
|
|
|
When someone is blatantly trolling, you don't need to jump in with your own take on why what they said was wrong.Wadjamaloo posted:Stories like this cop who bought a thief some eggs spread like wildfire and are seen as very honorable acts. Clearly people expect and want to shops to show discretion, but only when it aligns with their world views. If the police were baseline mediocre and just did an OK job with a few mistakes here and there, this thread wouldn't exist. The problem is that a not-insignificant fraction of Americans feel that the police instinctively exclude them from the society the police are organized to protect for things like the color of their skin, and that this is tolerated as some sort of acceptable side effect by other officers, the other organs of government, and many of their fellow citizens. There's also a lot of posters in this thread with a weird with-us-or-against us thing where everyone either agrees with them, is actively hindering them, or is a quisling. See below. Pohl posted:What the gently caress is maintaining order if it isn't being an enforcer for the elite? American police aren't the Pinkertons or the Stasi or the NKVD, they aren't deporting dissidents to the Minnesota gulags or keeping lists of those who fail to show sufficient allegiance to First Chairman Obama. Yes, on a certain level maintaining public order benefits those on top by keeping those below from storming the gates of Martha's Vineyard and taking all their nice stuff, but in the absence of law and order the rich tend to do just fine and are often even more vicious in their exploitation of the poor.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2014 09:25
|
|
Pohl posted:Why don't we bring back usury laws? So, they aren't paid by the rich then.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2014 12:04
|
|
|
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-30584097 Isn't shooting someone 14 times basically emptying your whole clip in them? How is that justifiable self-defense?
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2014 12:52
|
|
|
Does anyone know when the toxicology reports on the two dead cops in New York are going to be released?
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2014 12:55
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-30584097 It's been discussed to death, but firearms trained police pretty much everywhere are trained to keep firing until the target is no longer a threat; ie until they fall down. A modern firearm can fire off that many rounds before someone drops. The number of rounds fired off isn't (necessarily) an indication of excessive force; the fact that an encounter went from a fist fight to a cop drawing his gun is. Not only is it a police officer's job to de-escalate, it's also what would be reasonably expected from a member of the public, especially when dealing with someone who is quite clearly mentally ill.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2014 13:20
|
|
|
Murderion posted:It's been discussed to death, but firearms trained police pretty much everywhere are trained to keep firing until the target is no longer a threat; ie until they fall down. A modern firearm can fire off that many rounds before someone drops. This case also seems exactly like the sort for which the Taser was designed, an incident where previously a firearm would be used could now be resolved with less-lethal force. Why does it seem like tasers get deployed at the drop of a hat, except when they might actually result in less damage being done?
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2014 14:44
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:If the police were baseline mediocre and just did an OK job with a few mistakes here and there, this thread wouldn't exist. The problem is that a not-insignificant fraction of Americans feel that the police instinctively exclude them from the society the police are organized to protect for things like the color of their skin, and that this is tolerated as some sort of acceptable side effect by other officers, the other organs of government, and many of their fellow citizens. It's not just an issue of people feeling like they get treated differently because of their skin - every aspect of our judicial system (and more but I'm focusing just on this) is racist. When you control for everything else there are still huge disparities in how people are treated based on race.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2014 15:25
|
|
|
JohnClark posted:This case also seems exactly like the sort for which the Taser was designed, an incident where previously a firearm would be used could now be resolved with less-lethal force. Why does it seem like tasers get deployed at the drop of a hat, except when they might actually result in less damage being done? As someone who follows Taser stuff with moderate interest I've literally never, and I mean never, read about them being used instead of a gun. They are always used instead of a baton beating, basically, when the cops don't want to leave bruises on somebody but want to hurt them. If cops feel threatened they pull guns and start shooting. "Saving lives" has absolutely been replaced by "officer safety".
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2014 16:41
|
|
|
AVeryLargeRadish posted:Nah, the idea is that you arrest then release over and over or stage raids on the "wrong" address. It's easier to target family members and friends of family members than De Blasio directly. For instance, how would they feel if their secretary can't show up because the police made an "honest mistake" and raided their apartment, and whoops, looks like we destroyed all their possessions in the process! Better yet, target their kids. I'm ignorant of NYC inner political organization, but couldn't de Blasio simply fire the gently caress out of anyone doing this?
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2014 16:51
|
|
|
Kulkasha posted:I'm ignorant of NYC inner political organization, but couldn't de Blasio simply fire the gently caress out of anyone doing this? Not sure how it is in New York but the police raided a Mayor's house in Maryland, killed his dogs, and smashed up a lot of his stuff purely to cover their own asses and nothing happened.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2014 16:53
|
|
|
Anybody see this? http://www.tmz.com/2014/12/23/michael-brown-song-video-dead-police-parody-leroy-brown/ This is a room full of cops! What a depressing state of affairs this is.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2014 17:14
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:Anybody see this? quote:Singer Gary Fishell is a P.I. who once worked as an investigator for the Federal Government. His lawyer tells TMZ, Fishell now realizes the song was "off color and in poor taste." The lawyer adds, "He's a goofball who writes funny songs." We asked why Fishell would sing this in a room full of cops, and the lawyer replied, "He thought the room would get a kick out of it." When contacted for additional comment, Fishell's lawyer added that that the song was only intended to "inspire chuckles," and that those in attendance had "a good ol' laugh." Mike Brown did not respond to TMZ's requests for a comment.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2014 17:29
|
|
|
Lots of "good apples" all around.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2014 17:30
|
|
|
computer parts posted:That's always going to be a bit of an issue though because you're drawing your investigators from the same pool as your policemen. Sounds like Confucian administrators or Bourbon Inspectors. Far too Federal to exist in this country, unfortunately.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2014 17:42
|
|
|
I was talking to my friend and he summed it up very well: "You know how in the show "The Shield" where the cops are just another one of the street gangs? That."
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2014 17:43
|
|
|
AreWeDrunkYet posted:Does anyone know when the toxicology reports on the two dead cops in New York are going to be released? Anyone? Isn't this standard operating procedure for police shootings?
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2014 18:12
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:Anybody see this? I am sure Bill O'Reilly will talk about how the police in Eagleton need to be removed. edit: And Rudy Guliani will talk about how a police force is fanning the flames of hatred.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2014 18:16
|
|
|
Radish posted:Lots of "good apples" all around. It's weird to me that so many police lack the self-awareness to realize why a good chunk of people hate them. I'm not surprised that they're racist as gently caress, it's just weird that they apparently lack the capability to understand why there might be any negative reaction to their heinous poo poo they do (as opposed to realizing why people hate them and doing it anyways).
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2014 18:30
|
|
|
Radbot posted:It's weird to me that so many police lack the self-awareness to realize why a good chunk of people hate them. I'm not surprised that they're racist as gently caress, it's just weird that they apparently lack the capability to understand why there might be any negative reaction to their heinous poo poo they do (as opposed to realizing why people hate them and doing it anyways).
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2014 18:31
|
|
|
Well literally nobody believes that but racists, so no surprise that it's not helpful.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2014 18:43
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-30584097 When you escalate to deadly force, the law makes no distinction about whether you used a lot of deadly force or a little deadly force so long as you're taking a consistent action. So if you were attacking me with a knife and I fired my entire magazine at you it would be just as justified (or unjustified) as if I'd fired a single bullet.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2014 18:43
|
|
|
Y'know, now that TMZ has video of it, I do see how that could be seen as a bit off color. At the time we were all simply innocent doves who were just entranced by the rhyme and had no idea what was being said. What a coincidence, so very sorry.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2014 18:44
|
|
|
Radbot posted:It's weird to me that so many police lack the self-awareness to realize why a good chunk of people hate them. I'm not surprised that they're racist as gently caress, it's just weird that they apparently lack the capability to understand why there might be any negative reaction to their heinous poo poo they do (as opposed to realizing why people hate them and doing it anyways). You have to have a reason to listen to your critics in order to gain self awareness.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2014 18:45
|
|
|
Radbot posted:It's weird to me that so many police lack the self-awareness to realize why a good chunk of people hate them. I'm not surprised that they're racist as gently caress, it's just weird that they apparently lack the capability to understand why there might be any negative reaction to their heinous poo poo they do (as opposed to realizing why people hate them and doing it anyways). Police don't think people should genuinely like them, they don't honestly believe they have earned the public's love. They aren't sad they're losing a PR war despite their best efforts to be good guys or what ever. It's more like a king or dictator angry his subjects aren't displaying enough public admiration. The police feel they are entitled to a sort of fear based hero worship by the public based on their power, based on them being above the law. It's like an abusive spouse getting angry that his wife isn't showing him enough love, not appreciating all he does for this family. And just like an abusive spouse they'll think every act of violence they commit is deserved or for their own good. It's not like police are sitting there all hurt and sad that people don't like them and lacking the self-awareness to understand why. The cops know 100% why people hate them, they just don't think the public has the right to hate them because they are so used to being in full control of every situation. Public opinion is a situation they can't just taser or choke out and that makes them very upset.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2014 18:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 00:07 |
|
|
Murderion posted:The number of rounds fired off isn't (necessarily) an indication of excessive force; the fact that an encounter went from a fist fight to a cop drawing his gun is. Not only is it a police officer's job to de-escalate, it's also what would be reasonably expected from a member of the public, especially when dealing with someone who is quite clearly mentally ill. JohnClark posted:This case also seems exactly like the sort for which the Taser was designed, an incident where previously a firearm would be used could now be resolved with less-lethal force. Why does it seem like tasers get deployed at the drop of a hat, except when they might actually result in less damage being done? Megaman's Jockstrap posted:As someone who follows Taser stuff with moderate interest I've literally never, and I mean never, read about them being used instead of a gun. They are always used instead of a baton beating, basically, when the cops don't want to leave bruises on somebody but want to hurt them. AreWeDrunkYet posted:Anyone? Isn't this standard operating procedure for police shootings?
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2014 19:11
|
|