|
Merdifex posted:
Its not really the whole story. http://www.rawstory.com/2014/12/disturbing-video-shows-anti-police-brutality-protester-bashing-berkeley-man-in-the-head-with-a-hammer/
|
#
?
May 16, 2015 23:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 04:33 |
|
|
ToastyPotato posted:The phrasing of that post makes me think the poster has a particular opinion on the protests in general. Perhaps it did happen, but if it did, then I am shocked that it managed to never go viral in the past 5 months given how quickly things go viral when a black people are alleged to have done something bad during a protest. I am also surprised that it hasn't been trotted out multiple times since then by closeted racist brigade. Just look at the last protests when things got heated on that Saturday afternoon and fights broke out. I did get it from a racist. That's what it's being used for. I wonder why, however, people take such images at face value.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2015 23:57
|
|
|
Merdifex posted:I did get it from a racist. That's what it's being used for. I wonder why, however, people take such images at face value. It fit's their narrative and reaffirms their beliefs. Which means that they aren't "wrong" or "bad people" for having bigoted views. In other words "am I really a racist if black people really do act like savages?! Look, here is a link that proves it!"
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 00:19
|
|
|
Cichlid the Loach posted:Which part of my post are you saying that to? Btw you seem to have incorrectly nested the quote tags so it looks like my own middle sentence was written by someone else and I'm refuting it or something, are you confused about which opinion I'm espousing? Jesus chill out I was just surprised about SWAT shooting a 7 year old girl. Some of you people really read way too much into a single word.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 00:46
|
|
|
blackguy32 posted:Its not really the whole story. Still more proportional than police escalation of force.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 01:15
|
|
|
LorrdErnie posted:Still more proportional than police escalation of force. I doubt it.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 01:53
|
|
|
Cichlid the Loach posted:This is the thing that gets me, especially in regards to on-duty "justifiable" or "accidental" shootings of innocent people. If, in the course of my job, I made a mistake or had an accident that caused an innocent person to die violently by my hand before my eyes, I don't think I would be able to get out of bed, let alone touch a loving gun ever again, let alone strap one on and return to the same job the puts me in the same kinds of situations again. How can that SWAT guy who shot the 7-year-old girl in the head actually WANT to go back to that job, if it was a true accident and he was not that kind of person? unless you're a truly exceptional person you'd probably manage to rationalize it and get on with your life (unlike the dead person, hah!). e: except if you were already depressed but then it's more of a force of habit than anything
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 02:02
|
|
|
Agrajag posted:Jesus chill out I was just surprised about SWAT shooting a 7 year old girl. Some of you people really read way too much into a single word. I don't know about a 7 year old, but they bagged a 1 year old last year. Anonymous tip leads to no knock SWAT raid in which they throw a flash bang into a toddlers crib. http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/07/us/georgia-toddler-stun-grenade-no-indictment/ They are also not paying any medical expenses since, as I understand it, it would be considered a bribe? http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/aug/19/ga-county-refuses-pay-medical-bills-after-toddler-/ Edit: found a second link with less histrionics. Edit 2: I assume this is the 7 year old. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Aiyana_Jones -Zydeco- fucked around with this message at 07:46 on May 17, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 07:41
|
|
|
Some non-US policing: http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-decline-of-hong-kongs-police-1431039925 quote:Hong Kong’s police once had a reputation as Asia’s finest. But Andy Tsang, who is retiring this week as Commissioner after four years on the job, has diminished his force’s reputation for professionalism and impartiality by doing Beijing’s bidding.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 16:03
|
|
|
Every level of "justice" in America is full of wonderful brilliant souls! http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/05/death-penalty-lethal-injections-untrained-doctors quote:... quote:As Dr. Jay Chapman, the Oklahoma coroner who essentially created the modern lethal injection protocol, observed in the New York Times in 2007, "It never occurred to me when we set this up that we'd have complete idiots administering the drugs."
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 19:10
|
|
|
Samurai Sanders posted:I guess I didn't think of slapstick as real suffering. Suffering would be something like starvation. In the story of the ants and the grasshopper, when the grasshopper had no food completely by his own doing, did the ants laugh at him? No, they invited him to their table, because they are good Christian ants. Really? The way I heard this fable, the grasshopper was left in the cold to starve and the moral was presented as "don't be a fuckoff or you'll die horribly". ...now I have to wonder if that's how Evangelical kids hear it, too.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 19:46
|
|
|
Thesaurasaurus posted:Really? The way I heard this fable, the grasshopper was left in the cold to starve and the moral was presented as "don't be a fuckoff or you'll die horribly". edit: sometimes a third party, like bees or squirrels, let the grasshopper in. Samurai Sanders fucked around with this message at 20:02 on May 17, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 19:55
|
|
|
Never trust a goddam squirrel.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 20:08
|
|
|
Samurai Sanders posted:Huh, reading about it, I guess there are lots of interpretations of the ants' final behavior, most of which say gently caress the grasshopper. People changing children fables to fit their own agenda? My entire life is a lie. Next thing you are going to tell me is that universal truth is also a fable.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 20:20
|
|
|
FRINGE posted:The state worked for years to keep Doerhoff's identity secret. But in a legal challenge by a Missouri death row inmate, he was forced to testify and eventually was unmasked. In his testimony he admitted that his disability made it hard for him to properly combine the death drugs, which he sometimes mixed up, and that, on his own, he'd started "improvising" and reducing the amount of anesthesia given to condemned prisoners by half. Unbelievably, the federal government actually used Doerhoff to create the protocols for federal executions and to oversee them. Jesus Christ.  FRINGE posted:Never trust a goddam squirrel. Truth. Pohl fucked around with this message at 07:20 on May 18, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 07:17
|
|
|
Obama Just Announced a Plan to Restrict Police Use of Military-Style Equipmentquote:On Monday, the White House announced a plan to set new restrictions on local police departments from obtaining military-style equipment from the federal government. The limitation on military gear is part of an ongoing effort to rebuild trust between community members and law enforcement officials following the unrest seen in Ferguson, particularly the police response to protestors there. Good news! Hopefully in there is a way to deal with how much military equipment is already out there, but restricting new stuff is better news on police militarization than I have seen in a while.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 14:06
|
|
|
gently caress You And Diebold posted:Obama Just Announced a Plan to Restrict Police Use of Military-Style Equipment Sometimes that's a good way to solve a problem in a way that doesn't rock the boat too much. It would be ideal to just say "anybody that isn't a SWAT team doesn't get to have a loving tank, ever" but good luck getting that through Congress. If memory serves other problems have been solved the same way. Laws to the effect of "you can keep your toys but don't get any new ones." Over time the old ones will fall apart and not get replaced. It isn't ideal but if it actually works it's definitely a step in the right direction. Granted it truly baffles me how much we're going to hear police being all "well we JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND why nobody likes police anymore!" after this bullshit. "Serve and protect" should be replaced with "hope we don't notice you or decide your skull needs more holes in it" these days.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 14:56
|
|
|
Why the exception for a "Swat" team? There is literally no need for one. The purpose of "shock and awe" no-knock raids is to secure drug evidence incase the occupants try to destroy it. And to that I say, "so what?" Your precious evidence isn't worth the huge escalation of force against citizens. SWAT teams should be explicitly federally banned and should exist as only an FBI special task force.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 17:01
|
|
|
Powercrazy posted:Why the exception for a "Swat" team? There is literally no need for one. Probably been posted before but http://www.cato.org/raidmap
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 17:10
|
|
|
Powercrazy posted:Why the exception for a "Swat" team? There is literally no need for one. The purpose of "shock and awe" no-knock raids is to secure drug evidence incase the occupants try to destroy it. And to that I say, "so what?" Your precious evidence isn't worth the huge escalation of force against citizens. SWAT teams should be explicitly federally banned and should exist as only an FBI special task force. You do kind of need those special units to exist in the rare case you need them but yes I do agree with you, really. Your average local police force probably doesn't need a SWAT team at all. It just truly baffles me that your average local beat cop is armed like a damned infantryman in a combat zone and has a tank on call if he decides he needs it.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 19:27
|
|
|
gently caress You And Diebold posted:Obama Just Announced a Plan to Restrict Police Use of Military-Style Equipment The MoJo article doesn't explain that there's prohibited and restricted categories. Here's the report: https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/docs/le_equipment_wg_final_report_final.pdf This matters because some things like wheeled armored/tactical vehicles are restricted while some things like tracked ones are prohibited. Other notable prohibited items include camouflage, bayonets, grenade launchers and vehicles capable of mounting a weapon. Restricted means that they need to provide specific situations where they'll use it and to what purpose along with training and documentation of significant incidents where they use the equipment. Any riot gear is restricted, as are pyrotechnics and breaching apparatus. The prohibited gear is important to be sure, but the restricted list also matters since the police going out of those policy boundaries can result in termination of federal assistance plus further penalties. Any military surplus equipment of a military nature (not office furniture) provided as part of 1033 is property of the Department of Defense and so they lose it, restricted or not. This depends on what the policy boundaries are and how strictly they're enforced but it clearly points out that nonviolent protests aren't a legitimate reason to break out the riot gear. They quote the following policy favorably: quote:The University of Texas System Police (UTSP) has a policy on Emergency Rescue Armored Personnel Vehicle (MRAP), which specifies that the “exclusive operational purpose” of the MRAP is to enhance the physical protection of its occupants. Accordingly, the policy requires that any MRAP vehicle display the words “Emergency Rescue,” so that its purpose is clear to the community. Further, unless the Police Director expressly authorizes use of the MRAP in response to other specified emergency circumstances (e.g., an active shooter), the UTSP policy explicitly prohibits the use of MRAP vehicles in response to “exercises of the First Amendment right to free speech” or as a part of “any public demonstration or display of police resources.” The USTP policy also requires the police academy to develop training consistent with the vehicle’s mission for officers who are most likely to utilize the vehicle, with such training including, at a minimum, “engagement and deployment with this vehicle as well as use of the vehicle to successfully and safely rescue those requiring evacuation.” It's interesting stuff all around.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 19:32
|
|
|
1337JiveTurkey posted:Other notable prohibited items include camouflage
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 19:40
|
|
|
Powercrazy posted:Why the exception for a "Swat" team? There is literally no need for one. The purpose of "shock and awe" no-knock raids is to secure drug evidence incase the occupants try to destroy it. And to that I say, "so what?" Your precious evidence isn't worth the huge escalation of force against citizens. SWAT teams should be explicitly federally banned and should exist as only an FBI special task force. That's an interesting argument, usually people say we should largely disarm the regular cops and leave the firearms to special teams for things like violent bank robbers packing body armor (which is absolutely a very rare circumstance). If we make it so that regular cops don't get rifles and there's no SWAT, should there be a point of escalation between street cops and calling out the National Guard?
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 21:09
|
|
|
1337JiveTurkey posted:The MoJo article doesn't explain that there's prohibited and restricted categories. Here's the report: https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/docs/le_equipment_wg_final_report_final.pdf Thanks for that, I was a bit puzzled when I saw battering rams on the list, as those are in common police use worldwide. A couple of things that caught my eye: quote:RECOMMENDATION 2.3 — AFTER‐ACTION REVIEW: (1) LEAs must collect and retain Required record keeping seems to be pretty important. Getting caught in a lie also screws the department over and opens it up for punishment. Another point of interest: quote:For Programmatic Violations. For violations of any programmatic term or condition Summed up - you can have your supply lines choked off for loving up. gently caress up handling protests? If you run out of riot gear you'll have to contact other departments or the national guard. Same with helicopters, MRAPS, and whatever other masturbatory aids you need to fight a drug dealer with a switchblade. The big problem here is that it doesn't deal with equipment currently in use, and it doesn't give the feds authority to confiscate gear that's being misused, although that might be covered by existing legislation.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 21:10
|
|
|
FRINGE posted:Going a step beyond that: I have thought for a long time that officers on-duty and in-uniform should be visually obvious so that the public can call on them when needed. Stealth cars and tacticooled-up MiB intimidation uniforms are not doing the public any good. Being able to sneak up on people to raise revenue should not be a major design purpose in public safety vehicles. Lol plz draw some goddamn lines. Unmarked patrol cars exist for the fact that they have more resale value, are more nicer to give take-a-homes as, work for non-emergency functions very well, etc etc while still being usable in routine patrol work. If this is based on the goddamn meme picture of european vs US police, I got som bad news for you. Many European cities have a good portion of their routine patrol officers in plain clothes and unmarked cars. It's not some goddamn sneaky beaky thing, it just is more versatile for many tasks. Many people also are more willing to talk to officers in plainclothes.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 21:25
|
|
|
Murderion posted:Thanks for that, I was a bit puzzled when I saw battering rams on the list, as those are in common police use worldwide. They probably mean the Battering rams that are on vehicles, I think the hand held one have a different name. quote:Summed up - you can have your supply lines choked off for loving up. gently caress up handling protests? If you run out of riot gear you'll have to contact other departments or the national guard. Same with helicopters, MRAPS, and whatever other masturbatory aids you need to fight a drug dealer with a switchblade. Helicopters have actual practical uses, and I'd hate to see those get banned. They're pretty invaluable for search and rescue. At least the little ones we have now, if they get an apachee or start sniping suspects from inside the copter, that would be different.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 22:39
|
|
|
Also helicopters themselves are pretty benign in terms of their usage, as they're unarmed and just serve as a way to keep an eye on things from above. They may look intimidating, but contrary to Hollywood and Grand Theft Auto there's not actually guys firing assault rifles down into a car chase from them.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 22:58
|
|
|
Anora posted:Helicopters have actual practical uses, and I'd hate to see those get banned. They're pretty invaluable for search and rescue. At least the little ones we have now, if they get an apachee or start sniping suspects from inside the copter, that would be different. The supply is based on utility to the department, so there's very little chance a request for a police copter would be turned down. There's almost no chance it would be taken away, and if a department needs one while under suspension there ought to be a few arrangements made. It does mean you'll have to get your application for The Rook in before October 1st, though. Order early to avoid disappointment! 
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 23:04
|
|
|
Vahakyla posted:Lol plz draw some goddamn lines. Here, in Ireland, unmarked police vehicles are equipped with more equipment than marked ones. A basic cop car would have radios and a siren. Thats about it. Unmarked cars hav: ANPR (Automatic number plate recognition), generally a faster vehicle than marked vehicles, - which is usually a ford mondeo - and often used by the crime prevention units because of how harder it is to spot.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 23:08
|
|
|
chitoryu12 posted:Also helicopters themselves are pretty benign in terms of their usage, as they're unarmed and just serve as a way to keep an eye on things from above. They may look intimidating, but contrary to Hollywood and Grand Theft Auto there's not actually guys firing assault rifles down into a car chase from them. I won't dispute that helos are useful, but communities which see a lot of ghetto birds overhead do not tend to like them. They are noisy and annoying, they can serve as a constant reminder that the community is unsafe, as well as being intimidating and creating a weird distinction between the observers above and the observed below.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 23:30
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:intimidating and creating a weird distinction between the observers above and the observed below. Hey now thats kind of a reach... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rXPrfnU3G0 How will we ever get a nice safe enveloping panoptican skynet with a negative-nancy attitude like that? Besides soon the cops will have a "need" for the super silent ones that can blanket everywhere: http://phys.org/news/2015-05-cicadas-military-swarm-mini-drones.html quote:'Cicadas': US military's new swarm of mini-drones They are being billed as "things to track weather patterns with", which means they will eventually be silent mini-bomb-bearing assassins I guess.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 23:40
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:I won't dispute that helos are useful, but communities which see a lot of ghetto birds overhead do not tend to like them. They are noisy and annoying, they can serve as a constant reminder that the community is unsafe, as well as being intimidating and creating a weird distinction between the observers above and the observed below. They're also typically cautious and/or scared of police cars and uniformed officers. It's not the helicopter's very existence in the arsenal, but how it's used. On the other hand, APCs and mounted machine gun turrets have extraordinarily few purposes for modern policing and almost exclusively serve as a means of intimidation and/or letting the cops feel like badass commandos.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 23:42
|
|
|
Farmer Crack-rear end posted:That's an interesting argument, usually people say we should largely disarm the regular cops and leave the firearms to special teams for things like violent bank robbers packing body armor (which is absolutely a very rare circumstance). If we make it so that regular cops don't get rifles and there's no SWAT, should there be a point of escalation between street cops and calling out the National Guard? Literally never going to happen and even if it did it would take all of one repeat of something like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Hollywood_shootout for them to get it all back. Keep in mind that countries where police are relatively unarmed access to heavy weapons is extremely difficult and rare.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 00:34
|
|
|
tsa posted:Literally never going to happen and even if it did it would take all of one repeat of something like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Hollywood_shootout for them to get it all back. Keep in mind that countries where police are relatively unarmed access to heavy weapons is extremely difficult and rare. Not to mention the cop-ego fixation with "beating bank robbers". They could have just let them drive off and followed them indefinitely, using less money and without creating the loving enormous public hazard of a literal cops-and-robbers shootout in a public street. It wasnt a movie. (*GASP*) They werent going to dispear into an alternate dimension with the secret space-fuel they took from the mad scientists safety deposit box. They were going to get into a truck and drive away.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 00:38
|
|
|
chitoryu12 posted:They're also typically cautious and/or scared of police cars and uniformed officers. It's not the helicopter's very existence in the arsenal, but how it's used. Consider a community policing model where officers work to establish human relationships with people in the communities they police. Police in a squad car can be identified -- oh that's officer so and so. They can wave. They can stop the car and have a conversation. Police in helicopters can't do any of that -- they can yell at people with a bullhorn. I don't think occasionally seeing a police helicopter would undermine that community policing mission, but if you regularly see police helicopters above your community I could see that being an impediment to building relationships between communities and police. And they're still loud, annoying, and signal communities that some danger is on the loose among them.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 00:50
|
|
|
FRINGE posted:"Something happened once so we must kill everyone forever" is part of the problem mindset. Shotguns and rifles are meant to be carried in trunks or racks, often out of reach of the officers unless they're necessary for an escalated situation. Heavier weapons are part of European policing as well, but they often prefer submachine guns. In a situation where firearms are necessary, rifles and shotguns are actually far superior to handguns: they provide improved power and range and are much easier to learn to use effectively than handguns. The problems with longarms being used excessively is doctrinal rather than the mere existence of the equipment somehow being evil or bad. On the subject of North Hollywood, the robbers both immediately began firing assault rifles with drum magazines at everything they saw and the officers on the scene actually initially demanded that they drop their weapons rather than firing; they actually walked back inside the bank after seeing the officers surrounding them and then came out shooting (even firing on a news helicopter at one point). You're talking about a "public hazard" being the officers bothering to try and stop people who are randomly firing automatic weapons in public, as opposed to letting them shoot everything they wanted and driving away. Despite your completely balls-stupid claim that somehow it was the officers' fault that a shootout took place (as opposed to, you know, the two bank robbers who showed up with illegally full auto converted rifles and body armor who were the first ones to begin shooting), there was actually not a single death from the North Hollywood Shootout except for the two robbers. If you're going to pick a hill to die on when talking about police reform, "North Hollywood was the fault of the police for not peacefully letting the machine gun-spraying bank robbers leave and then just following them until they surrendered" is not the best one.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 01:20
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:Consider a community policing model where officers work to establish human relationships with people in the communities they police. Police in a squad car can be identified -- oh that's officer so and so. They can wave. They can stop the car and have a conversation. Police in helicopters can't do any of that -- they can yell at people with a bullhorn. I don't think occasionally seeing a police helicopter would undermine that community policing mission, but if you regularly see police helicopters above your community I could see that being an impediment to building relationships between communities and police. And they're still loud, annoying, and signal communities that some danger is on the loose among them. You know most police helicopters spend most of their time as medevac right?
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 02:20
|
|
|
My experience is with the LAPD and that's not at all their primary mission, AFAIK. http://www.lapdonline.org/air_support_division/content_basic_view/1437
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 02:52
|
|
|
Vahakyla posted:Lol plz draw some goddamn lines. In a lot of American areas there are places where the police literally use being sneaky and nabbing people for fines as a way to fund the department. I'm serious. Where I'm originally from there is a stretch of highway where the speed limit is set artificially low. The local department has black uniforms and paints their cars black and sit around that particular stretch of highway at night just waiting for people to speed. If they don't get enough people for traffic violations they'll literally just make poo poo up. I know people that have been given tickets for doing things that were literally physically impossible. Some nearby departments have also been doing similar things. There's a department that is almost entirely funded by fines that came from a particular hill. It's a bit of a big, steep one so people (not being idiots) would try to get a bit of speed going before driving up it. The speed limit of the road leading to the hill was dropped and the police hide there all day, every day to nab people speeding up to handle the hill. It very seriously is often all about revenue.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 03:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 04:33 |
|
|
And this is 90% of American unmarked patrol car see use? I am aware of fines for revenue, but you can't just use such insanely broad brush. "Let's just forbid unmarked cars, there is this small town..."
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 03:59
|
|