|
Reason posted:I think its pretty telling that in most of the UK police officers do not normally carry guns and their wiki page for police killings is one page, where on the US page it has to be broken down by year, though it appears to be pretty incomplete, probably because there isn't really any sort of national data collection for police killings. This is from a couple of pages back, but I'd like to tag this in to an "interesting" (horrible) section of British and Irish history. Note that the list is incomplete, as it contains only a few of the killings committed by British police/RIC/RUC during the Irish War of Independence and The Troubles of Northern Ireland. Those are a completely different kettle of fish, however, as on both of those occasions police units were operating alongside the army. It's difficult to tell whether more killings were done by the army or the police in each of those cases, and the line between the two breaks down at several points. But turn your eyes to the number of dead in the Irish war of independence. Wikipedia lists the dead as roughly 550 Republican combatants, 700 police and army combatants, and 750 civilians. Even if we attribute a vast majority of civilian deaths to official British forces, that leaves us with a number roughly equal to the estimate of those killed by American police in a year. In other words, it's probably wrong to say that American police have killed more people in a year than the British have in the past century.  They are, on the other hand, comparable to British police units operating during open warfare or decades long anti-terrorist campaigns. This includes the Black and Tans, the most notorious bunch of raping, pillaging, murdering bastards ever to wear a police uniform in the history of the British isles. If anyone wants, I'll try to do a writeup on the British police in Ireland, or don't get the police and army mixed up, fuckwits.
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 16:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 10:49 |
|
|
Murderion posted:
Yeah but this is kind of silly cause the population of Northern Ireland is like a third of just the state of Massachusetts.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 16:56
|
|
|
mastervj posted:This is retarded. Then perhaps you'd like to explain what information can be extracted from the number alone? Jarmak posted:Yeah but this is kind of silly cause the population of Northern Ireland is like a third of just the state of Massachusetts. D&D doesn't really "do" statistics.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 17:03
|
|
|
Slager probably didn't wake up and figure "I'm gonna kill me some darkies today." That doesn't mean that he definitely didn't let racism subconsciously encourage him to mistrust a black man and consider him unarmed to be enough of a threat to kill, or make him think that Walter Scott was worth less than him because of his race. He probably didn't intend to coldly murder Walter Scott as some kind of punishment for not letting himself be oppressed. That doesn't mean that he didn't respond to a fleeing, unarmed suspect with the conscious decision to use a lethal weapon (he even paused long enough to aim twice, the second time slowing his fire to adjust his aim and shoot at Scott was slowing down). He probably didn't plant the Taser on Scott as part of a conscious decision to go out that day to murder innocent people and get away with it out of bloodlust. But he still made the conscious decision to plant a Taser on the corpse to cover himself. Regardless of whether Slager was panicking or had something else that would be brought up as an excuse, he still made a conscious decision of his own free will to kill a fleeing, unarmed man with aimed gunfire and frame him for stealing his weapon to let himself get away with it. Calling for him to be thrown in prison is not "screaming for revenge" or "being bloodthirsty." Slager was granted power over his fellow man and he abused it until he killed someone and tried to cover it up. Assuming anecdotes about his past are accurate, he has a history of abusing black civilians. Slager isn't a victim of anything except his own racism and lack of care. quote:But turn your eyes to the number of dead in the Irish war of independence. Wikipedia lists the dead as roughly 550 Republican combatants, 700 police and army combatants, and 750 civilians. Even if we attribute a vast majority of civilian deaths to official British forces, that leaves us with a number roughly equal to the estimate of those killed by American police in a year. If you want to be pedantic, sure. But the United States police force is not currently fighting a guerrilla war against black people trying to rebel against the government and form an independent state. Not exactly the same kind of conflict.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 17:05
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:Yeah but this is kind of silly cause the population of Northern Ireland is like a third of just the state of Massachusetts. chitoryu12 posted:If you want to be pedantic, sure. But the United States police force is not currently fighting a guerrilla war against black people trying to rebel against the government and form an independent state. Not exactly the same kind of conflict. I made my point badly, sorry. I was trying to compare the number of police killings in the US to an actual goddamn war, and the Irish independence war was the best comparison I could make based on the level of police involvement. Oh, and the 1919-22 conflict was fought over all of Ireland, not just the north.    edit: But yeah, statistically it's complete bullshit. Dunno what I was trying to prove. Murderion fucked around with this message at 17:36 on Apr 10, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 17:24
|
|
|
Murderion posted:I made my point badly, sorry. I was trying to compare the number of police killings in the US to an actual goddamn war, and the Irish independence war was the best comparison I could make based on the level of police involvement. Yes and its a stupid comparison, the Florida highway system killed more people last year then that entire war, Ireland is a small country. Murderion posted:Oh, and the 1919-22 conflict was fought over all of Ireland, not just the north. Sorry, I misread that as being mostly referring to the troubles, we're up to just under 2/3 of the population of Massachusetts now. edit: just saw your edit, yeah I'm not saying US cops don't kill a ridiculously high amount of people, I just think this statistic is a silly comparison.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 17:38
|
|
|
I wonder if these numbers are representative of the country as a whole: Police in South Carolina have fired their weapons at 209 suspects in the past five years, and a handful of officers have been accused of pulling the trigger illegally – but none has being convicted, according to an analysis by The State newspaper. At least 101 African-American suspects were shot at, of whom 34 died. At least 67 white suspects were shot at; 41 died. Five were either Latino, Asian or Native American; four of them died. Analysis of the statistics revealed that about 38 percent of the shootings were fatal. South Carolina lawyer John O’Leary, who has defended cops for 26 years, said he "cannot remember any” police in the state getting convicted. “Certainly, there’s been a lot of shootings,” O'Leary said. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/04/08/south-carolina-officers-shootings_n_7027694.html
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 17:42
|
|
|
So in other cop news as well two NYPD Narcotics detectives were caught stealing money from a bodega during a raid. They were both fired, one of the cops just happened to be the most sued police officer in the city, and a retired cop on Staten Island was caught running an illegal poker ring. Man it's like there is some kind of culture of corruption in the NYPD.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 18:05
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:D&D doesn't really "do" statistics. Neither does the CDC regarding guns because it's legally barred. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 18:10
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:Then perhaps you'd like to explain what information can be extracted from the number alone? You don't even have that number. I agree that a complete analysis would require more detailed data, but it's irrelevant because that number does not exist for a reason. And that reason is to protect murderous policemen.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 18:58
|
|
|
Zeitgueist posted:Neither does the CDC regarding guns because it's legally barred. This is just uncivilized. Shame on your contry (to USA people).
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 19:01
|
|
|
Zeitgueist posted:Neither does the CDC regarding guns because it's legally barred. The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion: We tortured some folks > Let's debate about everything related to Police and Criminal Justice, and whatever unconnected random poo poo I have an axe to grind to about.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 19:07
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion: We tortured some folks > Let's debate about everything related to Police and Criminal Justice, and whatever unconnected random poo poo I have an axe to grind to about. Nah, it's related. The fact that almost any suspect, in the USA, might have a firearm factors into the equation. And the fact that CDC is barred from even tracking things is just another step to keep the status quo. Which includes policemen killing people without fear of repercussion.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 19:17
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion: We tortured some folks > Let's debate about everything related to Police and Criminal Justice, and whatever unconnected random poo poo I have an axe to grind to about. The total number of people killed by firearms would be a useless statistic, because whether or not the shooting was justified is a value judgment and not at all based in anything like law or policy, and even if you had that number it would be meaningless without all the other data oh you want the other data too no you don't "get" statistics like I do. Seriously, dude, just be honest that you're OK with government opaqueness about dead people. Then you can shut the gently caress up and stop being smug about how everyone else is stupid and making little "Oh D&D" quips and gently caress the hell off. Seriously. Literally none of the statistics you're talking about can loving exist without the raw data, but people like you constantly saying that the raw data is somehow something we plebes can't understand is why police oversight is something that doesn't happen until after a toddler gets his face burned off. Kugyou no Tenshi fucked around with this message at 19:20 on Apr 10, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 19:18
|
|
|
mastervj posted:Nah, it's related. The fact that almost any suspect, in the USA, might have a firearm factors into the equation. And the fact that CDC is barred from even tracking things is just another step to keep the status quo. Which includes policemen killing people without fear of repercussion. Why would the Center for Disease Control be tracking police shootings?
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 19:20
|
|
|
Deaths are things they track?
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 19:22
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:Why would the Center for Disease Control be tracking police shootings? because it's an epidemic
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 19:22
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:Why would the Center for Disease Control be tracking police shootings? They were banned from doing any research on any type of gun violence in 1996, due to a push by the NRA.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 19:23
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:Why would the Center for Disease Control be tracking police shootings? Because the CDC is pretty much the central government research organization regarding human safety and mortality in the United States? You know who does the research that helps inform OSHA enforcement? NIOSH, an arm of the CDC. You know who tracks the aftereffects of abortions? The CDC. You know who compiles the lists of how people died and why and whether or not there were behavioral factors involved? The CDC. This is basic poo poo, on their website and Wikipedia page. None of this is secret obscure poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 19:27
|
|
|
mastervj posted:You don't even have that number. I agree that a complete analysis would require more detailed data, but it's irrelevant because that number does not exist for a reason. And that reason is to protect murderous policemen. mastervj posted:This is just uncivilized. Dead Reckoning fucked around with this message at 19:31 on Apr 10, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 19:29
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:So, you're not actually disagreeing with anything I said? Guns hurt or kill people outside the context of people committing crimes. Does the FBI track gun suicides? Do they monitor how many children hurt themselves because their parents didn't lock up the gun safely? What about accidents, like at a shooting range or when cleaning the gun at home?
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 19:33
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:Why would the Center for Disease Control be tracking police shootings? In a nutshell, because I'm on my phone, you'd want to come at the issue with epidemiological studies, which is their jam. The CDC also has the institutional heft, reach and experience to get and trawl through the requisite data, which will be a real undertaking since that's not already been done. Edit: Not that this would be the only way to do it, mind you. Accretionist fucked around with this message at 19:36 on Apr 10, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 19:34
|
|
|
Lemming posted:They were banned from doing any research on any type of gun violence in 1996, due to a push by the NRA. Gun deaths in general make sense, and I know about the bullshit with the NRA, I was just thinking police shootings would be the domain of the UCR edit: and BJS
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 19:34
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:I guess you don't understand how American government works either. To keep this short, statistics on gun violence are tracked by the FBI, the federal agency that collects data on crime, not the CDC. No the FBI covers gun crimes not gun deaths.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 19:35
|
|
|
Bonus points for being smug while correcting people with wrong info.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 19:37
|
|
|
Zeitgueist posted:No the FBI covers gun crimes not gun deaths. But...but raw numbers! You don't "get" statistics! There's no way to tell if those deaths are justified because values! (Seriously, Dead Reckoning is probably the worst "you civilians don't understand" shill without ever coming out and saying it.)
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 19:40
|
|
|
You can argue about how easy it is to interpret whether an individual police shooting is justified, but if you don't compile the data you can never begin to analyze the data to look for common threads, racial demograhpics of the incidents, how many were traffic stops, how many involved drugs or alcohol, how much experience the officers had in each incident, what role the officers' partners (if they had one) played etc. We compile case logs, data bases for all kinds of things. For instance, Divers Alert Network tracks dive related deaths and compiles as much information as possible about each incident and releases an annual report with a description of each and every fatality and categorizes and analyzes as best they can. When a specific type of problem in medicine is identified, for example, unexpected blindness resulting after long spine surgeries, a database was set up to collect information about each and every occurrence to study possible causes to address the problem. My own medical specialty has had a long running project to compile data on every case that resulted in a closed malpractice claim (i.e. generally a lawsuit where there was a finding or settlement against the doctor/hospital), identifying several different categories of incident and resulting in some changes in practice. Closed claims is a crude method and by no means captures every incident, but it's far better than collecting no data at all. The UK has had much more thorough analysis of things like deaths associated with surgery looking at ALL cases over a period of many years. Police killings of citizens is an issue that cries out for such data collection and analysis. For instance if you found that in half of cases utilizing the power of arresting the citizen or physically subduing them, resulting in a physical confrontation that escalated, could have easily been avoided, then it suggests you could substantially reduce the problem just by utilizing alternate modalities whenever possible. If you find out that 95 percent of the killings are white officers killing blacks and that shootings resulted in these encounters at 5 times the likelihood of traffic stops/arrests for the same cause when white officers stop whites, then it tells you race or race stereotype attitudes/racism is a problem. Etc. etc. You can't necessarily divine with certainty whether a particular shooting was justified, but the data in aggregate has great power and can show you some obvious issues you wouldn't bbe sure about looking at an individual case or even several cases. You could do studies with half a police force wearing body cams and half not and see if there is a difference in shooting type confrontations and incidents, and even switch the groups halfway to account for differences between individuals. But if you refuse to even gather data to look at, you are essentially saying that either there is no problem, the status quo is fine, or that you have no interest in tackling it or improving the situation.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 19:40
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:Gun deaths in general make sense, and I know about the bullshit with the NRA, I was just thinking police shootings would be the domain of the UCR If it's the NRA why aren't they studying it now? Obama ordered them to start doing it three years ago. Is the NRA wielding executive power now? 
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 20:28
|
|
|
Zeitgueist posted:No the FBI covers gun crimes not gun deaths. For the record, the CDC does in fact collect data on causes death (including guns), since literally 30 seconds of googling brings up their stats for homicide and suicide in 2013. However, the FBI Uniform Crime Report is generally the source people go to for firearm assault/homicide due to differences in data collection methods and the fact that the UCR's whole purpose is to provide uniform crime data for analysis purposes. The 1996 Omnibus Consolidated Appropriations Bill for Fiscal Year 1997 stated that “none of the funds made available for injury prevention and control at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention may be used to advocate or promote gun control.” So they're free to research gun violence, they just aren't allowed to advocate for a partisan position on gun control. Zwabu posted:You can argue about how easy it is to interpret whether an individual police shooting is justified, but if you don't compile the data you can never begin to analyze the data to look for common threads, racial demograhpics of the incidents, how many were traffic stops, how many involved drugs or alcohol, how much experience the officers had in each incident, what role the officers' partners (if they had one) played etc. The report makes no judgement about whether the deaths were justified or not, because, as I pointed out, that's not something you can do without examining the totality of the circumstances. There is no succinct summary of "good" vs "bad" shootings. This whole derail started because chitoryu12 made a direct comparison of officers killed by assailants in the line of duty and suspects killed by police in the line of duty, which still doesn't work because some percentage of police shootings are going to be justified.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 20:47
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:I guess you don't understand how American government works either. To keep this short, statistics on gun violence are tracked by the FBI, the federal agency that collects data on crime, not the CDC. Luckily the FBI never engages in any kind of questionable shoot. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/19/us/in-150-shootings-the-fbi-deemed-agents-faultless.html?_r=0 Well, you know, according to the FBI. 5 "Bad shoots" aside, which again, luckily, injured no one. New York Times posted:Occasionally, however, there were alternative reviews. One, involving a March 2002 episode in which an agent shot an innocent Maryland man in the head after mistaking him for a bank robbery suspect, offers a case study in how the nuances of an F.B.I. official narrative can come under scrutiny. Is there really no reason for non-law enforcement to even compile basic statistics?
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 20:50
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:Oh, sorry, I assumed that we were talking about crimes in "Police and Criminal Justice" thread. You are a moron, and a pedantic moron at that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 20:54
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:Oh, sorry, I assumed that we were talking about crimes in "Police and Criminal Justice" thread. A 1997 ammendment to that 1996 bill added "in whole or in part" which was enough to kill basically any CDC research into the area for about 2 decades. But yes, you'd be technically true in saying it didn't explicitly forbid the research, and also laughably naive on how government works.  However, the reason you're starting to see research now is that Obama ended the ban last year. But yeah the FBI tracks gun crime, not gun deaths/violence on the whole. I'm curious though, how does the UCR classify gun deaths where the victim was anarmed black person and the perpetrator was a cop who planted a weapon?
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 21:00
|
|
|
spacetoaster posted:I worked law enforcement for several years before quitting. You know what I did when people ran away from me? I let them. So what if they run away? If this wasn't such a horrible situation with the guy being gunned down and all it would be funny. The cop had his freaking car and identification papers. Where is he going to run to? Man why did you have to quit  Maybe because I'm old but I seem to remember that if a non-violent suspect was running and chasing him down would put bystanders, the suspect or the cop at risk then the choice was 'let him go and track him down'. This macho bullshit of losing control off the situation and I'm sure the real existence of getting poo poo for letting him get away is out of hand. A busted taillight is not in any way a reason to taze someone much less shoot him. So he got away. You have his car, paperwork, what the gently caress is he going to do? Drive around with another broken taillight? I had an idiot friend about 30 years ago that refused to sign a speeding ticket. He's black. All the cop did was write "refused to sign" on it and left it on his windshield. Technically my understanding it can be arrestable but he want a militarized rear end in a top hat where nowadays the same situation he'd get dragged out the windows, tazed to 'comply' and probably kicked in the head.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 21:11
|
|
|
Toasticle posted:Man why did you have to quit Hmm seems like policework has a tendency to drive out well-meaning and well-adjusted sensible people. That might be a problem.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 21:13
|
|
|
Toasticle posted:Man why did you have to quit Cops today are better than they ever were in the US and trying to evoke somekind of image of the better good old times is such blatant bullshit.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 21:15
|
|
|
JFairfax posted:I wonder if these numbers are representative of the country as a whole: They likely are. This website uses the news to track every individual case of police killing someone in the US (not only gunshots, but also Taser accidents, running over, beatings, etc.). You can use CTRL+F to quickly find numbers in 2013, 2014, and 2015 for particular states. I don't have the time to do it now, though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 21:16
|
|
|
Vahakyla posted:Cops today are better than they ever were in the US and trying to evoke somekind of image of the better good old times is such blatant bullshit. So is this a 'it's always been like this but now we hear about it because internet' or are you seriously implying the militarization and overall attitude of us vs them has not gotten worse in the lst three decades? Edit: And yes I am saying in the 70's/80's the stories that are coming out almost weekly at this point were loving huge deals on the rare occasions they did happen, or heard about them. I remember dirty cop stories were about stealing drugs/drug money or taking bribes, I cannot remember a single Tamir rice, Brown, the guy with the BB gun or any of the other dozens of hosed poo poo happening on a now regular basis. Toasticle fucked around with this message at 21:25 on Apr 10, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 21:20
|
|
|
Toasticle posted:So is this a 'it's always been like this but now we hear about it because internet' or are you seriously implying the militarization and overall attitude of us vs them has not gotten worse in the lst three decades? It's gotten much, much better, if you factor in the disruption that has been The War on Drugs. The abuse of suspects still goes on but it really, really did used to just be par for the course to tune up suspects on the regular. Drop guns also used to be much more of a thing, as did non-policing: writing off entire neighborhoods. This is still a problem to some extent, but it used to be that a call in from a black community about white yahoos roaming around beating up black people would get a response of "so loving what'. Forensic science has advanced, too, and so while cops still often try to blame the first guy they find convenient, three's a lot more likelihood of forensics actually pointing to the right person.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 21:25
|
|
|
Toasticle posted:So is this a 'it's always been like this but now we hear about it because internet' or are you seriously implying the militarization and overall attitude of us vs them has not gotten worse in the lst three decades? I didn't say it's all good. I said it was better.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 21:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 10:49 |
|
|
Toasticle posted:So is this a 'it's always been like this but now we hear about it because internet' or are you seriously implying the militarization and overall attitude of us vs them has not gotten worse in the lst three decades? Militarization is a recent phenomenon but US cops used to be way more blatantly racist. You have to remember that the reason you didn't hear anything about racial profiling, for instance, is that racial profiling was official policy and legal until the DOJ made it haraam in 2003.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 21:27
|
|