|
SedanChair posted:Was this established? FRINGE posted:
I think FRINGE described it really well. I just used the word dangerous because anything could happen at any time, but stressful is a much better word.
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2015 18:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 00:52 |
|
|
Lemming posted:It also looks like there's been a trend since the early 70s of being lower numbers of deaths on the job all the time, despite an increase in population (~206 million to ~316 million) and presumably number of cops. Pohl posted:I think FRINGE described it really well. I just used the word dangerous because anything could happen at any time, but stressful is a much better word.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2015 19:55
|
|
|
But but but LEO deaths include things like heart attacks. Obviously this skews the numbers. That job isn't statistically dangerous.  Apparently in the race to super-ftp-smug nobody noticed the fishermen and construction worker stats include a lot of medical related deaths. No job related murders of fishermen or construction workers though, except by you know... Zeitgueist posted:unsafe conditions, and capitalism.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2015 21:29
|
|
|
Except the medical deaths of Firefighting and Law Enforcement that we are laughing at here are not things like cancer related to firefighting, or severe back injuries caused by duty belt, but heart attacks at a young age caused by poor fitness and bad eating habits in not-extreme activities, like a fat firefighter collapsing after a flight of stairs, or a cop collapsing on a yearly mandated fitness run. That's not a hazard of the job anymore than walking to your car is. Separating those both statistically and rhetorically from "stabbed in the neck"-type deaths or "run over by a fleeing perp" is very important. Yet an another mainly american thing. Being a fat gently caress is so accepted and common that a fat gently caress dying of being a fat gently caress is a tragedy and a hazard of the jobs requiring things such as: walking, kneeling, running, standing For clarification, hazards caused by and inherent to policing: -Violence by others -Equipment related to the job causing disabilities -Excessive driving upping hazard of being in traffic -Mental illness from trauma and stress List goes on, but on the side of hazards NOT caused by and inherent to policing: -Being fat -Eating like poo poo -Not exercising Glad to be of help in sorting this out for you. I'll help you more: Death caused by medical issues related to the job: quote:"Deputy Chief Steven Bonano died from blood cancer he contracted after inhaling toxic materials as he participated in the rescue and recovery efforts at the World Trade Center site following the terrorist attacks on September 11th, 2001." Death NOT caused by medical issues related to the job: quote:"Assistant Chief Carl Borderlon suffered a fatal heart attack inside of the police department's headquarters building during the early morning hours after having changed a flat tire on his patrol car. Another death NOT caused by medical issues related to the job: quote:"Lieutenant Scott Travis suffered a fatal heart attack while clearing snow from the walkways in front of the Bullitt County Detention Center during a heavy snowstorm." The bottom two were people of bad health and life styles succumbing to those things who just happened to work as police officers. Vahakyla fucked around with this message at 21:45 on Mar 20, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2015 21:32
|
|
|
I'll add my own smugness modifiers, thanks though. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2015 22:01
|
|
|
Ima Grip And Sip posted:Apparently in the race to super-ftp-smug nobody noticed the fishermen and construction worker stats include a lot of medical related deaths. The entire discussion hinges on the pay and leniency for committing violent crimes that LEOs give each other https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BiS4JQF90js https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uFAFqf5lOCE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ins9VAo-xLY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSo37wpKaNI
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2015 22:08
|
|
|
Vahakyla posted:
This is kind of silly because the occupational fatality states for the other professions include the same sort of stuff, and also the nature of police work is a very unhealthy lifestyle in of itself. Besides, a delivery driver slipping on a frozen sidewalk is an occupational death even if we might do the same walking to work. Including these deaths in the statistics represents aggregate risks caused by the differing amounts different occupations place people in situations where low probability events could result in death. A 55 year old overweight chef is at far less risk of a heart attack then a 55 year old overweight police officer that has to shovel out the parking lot as part of his duties. Its correct to point out cops get an inappropriate amount of hero worship for how "dangerous" the job is. Trying to use the fact fishing is more dangerous to say cops don't need guns or to be threat conscious is a non sequitur. Its like saying fisherman shouldn't have life vests because logging is more dangerous and loggers don't wear them.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2015 22:22
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:Its correct to point out cops get an inappropriate amount of hero worship for how "dangerous" the job is. Trying to use the fact fishing is more dangerous to say cops don't need guns or to be threat conscious is a non sequitur. Its like saying fisherman shouldn't have life vests because logging is more dangerous and loggers don't wear them. It's not a non-sequitur, it's specifically talking about how "this job is dangerous" is not an excuse for killing folks on questionable cause. Policework can be dangerous, so can logging. One of those two jobs gets a pass when somebody gets shot. Lets hold police to standards of loggers, who probably don't get to say "well the guy was holding a screwdriver" and get to avoid trial when they shoot somebody. Oh and  just for you Ima
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2015 22:30
|
|
|
Zeitgueist posted:It's not a non-sequitur, it's specifically talking about how "this job is dangerous" is not an excuse for killing folks on questionable cause. A substantial part of the danger from police work is from people trying to kill you, none of the danger of logging is from people trying to kill you.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2015 22:36
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:A substantial part of the danger from police work is from people trying to kill you, none of the danger of logging is from people trying to kill you. A substantial part of the danger form policework comes from driving a car and eating poorly. Probably more than from people wanting to kill you. I'm not sure why any of that argues for more leniency in response to shooting someone to death, rather than more.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2015 22:39
|
|
|
Plenty of young healthy people have heart attacks due to undiscovered heart defects and the like. On topic http://www.shreveporttimes.com/long...-ford/25049063/ "I apologize to the court in not having been more diligent in my duty to ensure that proper disclosures of any exculpatory evidence had been provided to the defense." drat
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2015 22:40
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:A substantial part of the danger from police work is from people trying to kill you, none of the danger of logging is from people trying to kill you. Oh and by the way The risk of dying as a cop, from any job related injury is about 10 in 100,000(2013) The risk of dying from actual murder as a black american is 17.5 in 100,000(2011) I'm assuming you're for giving black folks the benefit of the doubt when a cop makes a threatening movement at them, right?
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2015 22:46
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:A substantial part of the danger from police work is from people trying to kill you, none of the danger of logging is from people trying to kill you. Should citizens be empowered to kill cops when they (Obviously not. And "trained" officers should be held accountable for murder when they execute people. In fact, their "training" which is the excuse they give for jailing innocent people, killing innocent people, and breaking various laws "based on their professional judgement" should be held against them when they egregiously fail to behave as non-monsters.)
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2015 22:59
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:A substantial part of the danger from police work is from people trying to kill you A substantial part? Compared to traffic accidents?
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2015 22:59
|
|
|
Zeitgueist posted:It's not a non-sequitur, it's specifically talking about how "this job is dangerous" is not an excuse for killing folks on questionable cause. Unless and until restraining violent people with weapons becomes a part of a logger's job description, this comparison is worth than useless. Logging is dangerous because there is a high risk of serious injury and the job site is often really far away from medical attention. Police work is dangerous because officers are dealing with people who want to hurt them as part of their job. Like, loggers don't get a pass when they shoot someone because their job will never require them to shoot someone. This isn't to say that police were justified in this case, or that they shouldn't be held accountable for situations like this where they obviously screwed up. But if "loggers don't get to shoot people" is just about the dumbest possible critique of police violence.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2015 23:01
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:A substantial part? Compared to traffic accidents? Substantial is doing a lot of heavy lifting as a weasel word there.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2015 23:01
|
|
|
Zeitgueist posted:A substantial part of the danger form policework comes from driving a car and eating poorly. Probably more than from people wanting to kill you. Zeitgueist posted:Oh and by the way
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2015 23:03
|
|
|
Patrick Spens posted:Unless and until restraining violent people with weapons becomes a part of a logger's job description, this comparison is worth than useless. Logging is dangerous because there is a high risk of serious injury and the job site is often really far away from medical attention. Police work is dangerous because officers are dealing with people who want to hurt them as part of their job. Like, loggers don't get a pass when they shoot someone because their job will never require them to shoot someone. Myself and others are bringing up logging to put the "danger" aspect in perspective. Police work is dangerous because sometimes officers are dealing with people who want to hurt them, but it's also dangerous because you're in a car all day. That's true of other car-centric jobs. There's no reason why cops should get a pass when they shoot someone, even if that's a possibility on their job. If anything, they should be scrutinized more, to suppress "bad apples" and corruption. All of this is in the context that police are shooting people way too often. If folks don't want to talk about other dangerous jobs, don't bring up the danger. Dangerous is not an excuse to kill people.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2015 23:09
|
|
|
A substantial part of the danger from logging is from cougars trying to kill you.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2015 23:10
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:According to that link, the vast majority of black homicide victims were killled by men they knew, not the police, so... You're right, it's egregious how immune to arrest and prosecution black men are.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2015 23:11
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:Zero percent of the risk in most professions comes from people actively trying to harm you due to your profession, and very few involve an obligation to engage with drunk, unstable, or actively violent criminals. Law enforcement is exceptional in this regard, so I don't know why you keep bringing up lumberjacks. What percentage of risk of death from criminals makes it OK to go lenient on someone when they kill a person? quote:According to that link, the vast majority of black homicide victims were killled by men they knew, not the police, so... You are in substantially more danger of someone trying to kill you as a black person than a cop is. I'm just trying to figure what the parameters are that make it OK to go easy on someone when they kill a person.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2015 23:12
|
|
|
Zeitgueist posted:You are in substantially more danger of someone trying to kill you as a black person than a cop is. I'm just trying to figure what the parameters are that make it OK to go easy on someone when they kill a person.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2015 23:17
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:Except for the part where you explicitly talked about cops making "threatening movements" in your original post. Except for the part where someone mentioned the danger of someone trying to kill you as some sort of justification for shooting people and I was responding to that.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2015 23:19
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:Zero percent of the risk in most professions comes from people actively trying to harm you due to your profession, and very few involve an obligation to engage with drunk, unstable, or actively violent criminals. Law enforcement is exceptional in this regard, so I don't know why you keep bringing up lumberjacks. If a small number of "not specially trained, non-cops" can restrain extremely strong and literally psychotic individuals then the armored gang should be able to do it without gunning people down to get their dicks hard. The reason they have so many excuses for executing people is because that is their preference. The first time this came to general public attention was when that "Most Dangerous Gang" (or whatever it was called) expose hit social media a few years ago and they had a cop on camera essentially admit to killing someone who was burned and bloody from a car accident "because he looked gross". (Speaking of psych work - it pays nothing compared to LEO salaries and requires more contact, and more restraint than is expected of the cops.) When a cop makes a decision to kill someone they should be investigated up one side and down the other to check for a failure in judgement (of any kind). They are trusted with public force and should be held extremely loving accountable for its use. If their excuse is "I didnt make a decision I just reacted" then they should be put at a desk permanently, fired, or imprisoned depending on the nature of the failure. Corporate America wants cops who are dumb, violent, and obedient to their masters. The citizens need cops who are smart, thoughtful, and restrained. This is a serious battle. edit - This is reflected more and more with the military faux-warzone training and mindset of the people that are supposed to be here to serve and protect the citizens. FRINGE fucked around with this message at 23:23 on Mar 20, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2015 23:20
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:A substantial part? Compared to traffic accidents? Taken from the National Law Enforcement Officer Memorial Fund The NLEOMF lists 62 cops killed feloniously; 48 of whom were shot, 10 of whom were killed by a vehicle (5 struck by car, 3 car crashes, 2 motorcycle crashes), 2 were killed in a struggle, one was strangled and one "was killed in a fire related incident." If you strip out the car and motor cycle crashes and the "killed by fire," you get 56. I'm not sure if you should keep the "struck by vehicle" because that could be either intentional homicide or recklessness, but anyway, 126 cops died in 2016. (with hit by car) 56/126 = 44 percent (without hit by car) 51/126 = 40 percent Note that I just grabbed the data for 2014 at random, if anyone has data that spans over several years that would be cool to see. So I would say that between 40 and 44 percent of all fatalities being homicides would be a substantial portion of the danger.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2015 23:23
|
|
|
Patrick Spens posted:Note that I just grabbed the data for 2014 at random, if anyone has data that spans over several years that would be cool to see. So I would say that between 40 and 44 percent of all fatalities being homicides would be a substantial portion of the danger. You can go grab the numbers for preceding years though. I know this was a typo but it is in the spirit of the propaganda: quote:126 cops died in 2016
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2015 23:26
|
|
|
On a happy note, one criminal cop was busted. This guy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lMSaDu1Eh2E He never got busted for robbery while in loving uniform, but he did get busted for threatening to kill people while off-duty. http://thefreethoughtproject.com/karma-cop-legally-robbed-people-cash-arrested-assault-deadly-weapon/ quote:The irony here is that while Dove was assaulting people with a gun and stealing from them, while on-duty, he escaped all accountability. But when he assaults people with a weapon, while off-duty, he is then arrested.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2015 23:35
|
|
|
FRINGE posted:Until the LEOKA report for 2014 that number is bullshit. You're an idiot the LEOKA report is not all inclusive so using it as a measure of the high water mark is loving stupid, also even according to the LEOKA report from 2013, literally the safest year ever recorded to be a cop, shows that more cops were shot to death then died in traffic accidents. Calling the NLEOMF propaganda doesn't make it so, the fact that they are pro-police doesn't somehow invalidate their data, do you think they're just engraving fake names into the memorial in DC or something? Zeitgueist posted:Substantial is doing a lot of heavy lifting as a weasel word there. SedanChair posted:A substantial part? Compared to traffic accidents? Yes, substantial, as in 30-40% depending on year/source, as in more then traffic accidents. There's nothing weasel words about it. Zeitgueist posted:Oh and by the way That's a depressing statistic but I think its telling that you decided to compare cop fatalities from the year with the least police fatalities ever recorded to to murders of black Americans from the year where the most cops were murdered in the last 10 years, despite there being data on both available in the same year.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2015 23:40
|
|
|
FRINGE posted:Until the LEOKA report for 2014 that number is bullshit. Fair enough, LEOKA doesn't include illness related deaths, and it's 2013 count of felonious deaths is lower than than NLEOMF's for the same year, so the comparison is going to be off, but 27 felonious deaths vs 49 accidental deaths but I'm taking out two that were killed during pursuit. 25/76 = 33 percent killed by malice. Note that 2013 was a good year for cops, the average number of police killed feloniously from 2004 to 2013 was 51 a year. quote:I know this was a typo but it is in the spirit of the propaganda: Well now I have to leave it in.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2015 23:45
|
|
|
I think it's telling that to a certain subset of posters in this thread, there is no such thing as legitimate criticism towards law enforcement.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2015 23:45
|
|
|
Oh my god. Can we all agree that while policing may not be as dangerious as some say, it is probably more dangerious than the average desk job? I also hate to say it, because some of these tactics are fairly new, saying "policing isn't that dangerious" could walk into "yes, it isn't that dangerious now because police walk around like everyone is trying to kill them." This whole thing isn't a productive discussion anyhow. The question is how do we get cops to kill fewer people, not "is being a cop dangerious or not." It has just become a dick waving contest. Spun Dog posted:I think it's telling that to a certain subset of posters in this thread, there is no such thing as legitimate criticism towards law enforcement. Those peolle tend to hide in the GiP thread.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2015 23:47
|
|
|
FRINGE posted:Law enforcement is pathetic in this regard. Ask anyone that has worked the floor at a locked psychiatric facility. The scared little piglets woudnt even walk inside past the lobby when they wanted to question someone because we demanded they leave their guns outside of the resident area. Dead Reckoning fucked around with this message at 23:52 on Mar 20, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2015 23:48
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:That's a depressing statistic but I think its telling that you decided to compare cop fatalities from the year with the least police fatalities ever recorded to to murders of black Americans from the year where the most cops were murdered in the last 10 years, despite there being data on both available in the same year. Oh give me a loving break, the reason why I used those were because I pulled an article that quoted one year, and one quoting another year. I didn't try any harder than that, because I knew you were going to whine no matter what, so why bother. Save me some time, is there a year where the data on all police deaths begins to eclipse the data on just AA murders, are we going to do that thing where you miss the point of the observation in an attempt to nitpick data. The only telling part here is I correctly guessed you were going to whine about cherry picking data when it wouldn't have many sort of difference to my point.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2015 23:50
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:You're an idiot the LEOKA report is not all inclusive so using it as a measure of the high water mark is loving stupid, also even according to the LEOKA report from 2013, literally the safest year ever recorded to be a cop, shows that more cops were shot to death then died in traffic accidents. Nope. LEOKA has 26 cops shot in 2013, vs 23 killed in car accidents, 4 killed in motorcycle accidents and 9 struck by vehicles accidentally (which I'm going to count as traffic accidents). Patrick Spens fucked around with this message at 23:53 on Mar 20, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2015 23:51
|
|
|
Taxi drivers have a MUCH higher risk of being murdered at work than cops do (source [pdf]), but taxi drivers in many places are not allowed to carry guns on the job, if not by local law then by the companies they work for. If cab drivers started regularly shooting unarmed black people because they found their existence threatening, I'm pretty sure they would actually be prosecuted.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2015 23:53
|
|
|
nm posted:Oh my god. Can we all agree that while policing may not be as dangerious as some say, it is probably more dangerious than the average desk job? The discussion comes from folks attempting to justify cop kills. I think if we agree that cops kill way too many people and should do it less, and shouldn't get it easy when they kill someone, we'd be good, but that's the core of the conflict, isn't it? quote:who? They poo poo and run every few pages of these threads.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2015 23:56
|
|
|
Zeitgueist posted:The discussion comes from folks attempting to justify cop kills. I think if we agree that cops kill way too many people and should do it less, and shouldn't get it easy when they kill someone, we'd be good, but that's the core of the conflict, isn't it? This discussion comes from the fact you and Sedan Chair couldn't stand Pohl making the point "Policing is dangerous but it doesn't justify the tactics they're using" without jumping all over him/her for saying police work is dangerous. edit: sorry it was Sedan Chair and Fringe
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2015 00:57
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:This discussion comes from the fact you and Sedan Chair couldn't stand Pohl making the point "Policing is dangerous but it doesn't justify the tactics they're using" without jumping all over him/her for saying police work is dangerous. Wasn't me, as you say. I have always held the position that cops should be held to at least the standards that other citizens are, if not higher. As a very wise philospher once said, "with a glock and license to kill black people comes great responsibility"
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2015 01:14
|
|
|
Ordinarily this would be Poetic Justice, but I assume much like the founder of MADD, William Lawrence didn't actually expect this. http://america.aljazeera.com/watch/shows/america-tonight/articles/2015/3/19/dub-lawrence-utah-swat-team-police-militarization.html Well at least the brave men, with their dangerous jobs are keeping us safe from gangs and drugs.... quote:From 2010 to November 2014, 45 people were killed by police in Utah – more than the number of Utahns killed by child abuse or gang- and drug-related violence. Oh. ate shit on live tv fucked around with this message at 02:04 on Mar 21, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2015 02:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 00:52 |
|
|
Gee that's almost the number of police violently killed per year, in one state!
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2015 03:15
|
|