|
wixard posted:If I remember right you pass 1 weigh station driving from Philadelphia to Baltimore on 95, and I'm pretty sure the one I'm thinking of is south of Baltimore so it might be 0. Do you really think it's possible to regulate all the trucks and drivers that drive on that corridor in a parking lot at that weigh station? They need a place for overweight trucks to park. Not to mention most weigh stations aren't open 24/7 and night-time is generally when both safety equipment and driver fatigue are most important to regulate. Your hope for local cops on the beat is that they are corrupt in one way but not corrupt in another (admittedly more vindictive) way? Is there any other profession in America that you hold to these standards? Is your hope for teachers that they forge grades instead of making misleading calls to social services?
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2014 20:39
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 02:30 |
|
|
Are there any studies about how Americans view police broken down by age and/or location? As other people have pointed out in detail, one of the many reasons that the police are awful is that many Americans are awful and believe anyone charged with a crime surrenders their citizenship and humanity. I'd like to think there was some hope of things improving based on demographics.  wixard posted:In that video the trucker basically asked to be pulled over (what did he expect to happen, the cop would know he wanted him to stop talking on the cellphone?) and the cop didn't gently caress with him for it. If a teacher ignores an absence and it fudges a grade up to pass a kid instead of failing them I have no problem with that either. The example you gave is a teacher falsifying records in order to help a child; this instance would be like a teacher falsifying records in order to cover up their own malfeasance. If the driver was doing something for which he should have been ticketed, he should have been ticketed. Otherwise the cop could have just let him go without a ticket and without trying to offer up fraudulent records.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2014 21:02
|
|
|
wixard posted:The teacher isn't creating a fraudulent record in my example? quote:The example you gave is a teacher falsifying records in order to help a child; this instance would be like a teacher falsifying records in order to cover up their own malfeasance. wixard posted:Yes, I agree the trucker should have been ticketed and I said it in my first post here. I don't think they should use their horns to regulate other drivers on the highway and I'm pretty sure it can be interpreted as aggressive driving or something in most places. That's my whole point - it actually does help both the cop and the driver to have a good reason for the stop happening, and the cop's would have been just as good with a ticket. He even mentions the guy has a violation for a light out on his last inspection so this should help with his employer, why do you think he isn't trying to help him? I guess we just have different perspectives regarding how leniently the officer's actions should be viewed. To continue the teacher metaphor, I've been a teacher, and there's a world of difference between a teacher ignoring an absence, and a teacher fudging grades because they did something illegal or against policy. Quid pro quo behavior like this is corruption, and I guess because the person that witnessed the illegal behavior could have got something out of the cop's cya attempt you see it from a more ameliorative stance than I do. Personally I think "this corruption isn't as harmful as this other corruption so this is how I'd prefer it to be handled" is a nihilistic and corrosive attitude to take towards the misbehavior of public servants.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2014 21:24
|
|
|
Dr. Arbitrary posted:It depends on the job. Just guessing, but I think a cop who does mostly drug busts is probably going to have a pretty low mortality rate compared to highway patrol. It's mostly due to traffic accidents, with a large proportion of those being motorcycle accidents.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2014 03:05
|
|
|
SrgMagnum posted:I'll go ahead and volunteer myself as tribute. Who do you mean by "community activists"?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2014 04:25
|
|
|
KILLOLOGY! loving lol.quote:This week, it was revealed by local KRQE News 13 that a retired Albuquerque Police Officer was teaching a class that was seemingly designed to instruct other cops on how to be more aggressive. Surely this is just some dumb wanna-be thing that the officer in Albuquerque found, right? How common could this type of indoctrination be? http://killology.com/trainer_police.htm
|
|
#
¿
Nov 23, 2014 04:06
|
|
|
Cole posted:This type of thinking is in line with why McDonald's has to warn that their coffee is hot. I'll have to get pedantic here and bring up that the warning is a piece of cya put on there after a woman spilled McDonald's coffee in her lap and got third degree burns to her thighs and genitals and required skin grafts. You can look up the NWS pictures if you want. She won the lawsuit in part because McDonalds knew they were serving their coffee too hot, having settled several similar cases out of court.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 24, 2014 01:06
|
|
|
Davethulhu posted:Is there actually a law that you can't point things at cops? The guy was arrested for "felony menacing", which isn't cop specific. Also this case is never going to go to trial, because you have to "knowingly place someone in fear of imminent bodily harm" and the guy clearly thought he was being funny, and was also boggled that someone would actually mistake a banana for a gun. But hey, I'm a cop, someone made me look foolish, better arrest them. I'd take issue with: quote:knowingly placed Deputy Love and I in imminent fear by use of an article fashioned in the manner to cause us to reasonably believe it was a deadly weapon Can a banana reasonably be said to have been "fashioned"? By whom, Mother Nature? A million year course of evolution?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 26, 2014 22:54
|
|
|
And I've been mugged and threatened by cops, and the cops were more frightening because I knew what the mugger wanted, and that he just wanted to get my poo poo and run, but the cops started making threats right off the bat, and I had no idea what they were going to do, and that they'd have the full weight of the police force behind them no matter what they did.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 26, 2014 22:59
|
|
|
deratomicdog posted:The criminal ruined his own life by committing crimes. The judge prosecutor and police are simply doing their jobs. And what are the judge, prosecutor, and police's jobs?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 26, 2014 23:48
|
|
|
tsa posted:To remove dangerous people from general society. Nope! This is an idealistic and naive view that doesn't explain why, for instance, people are arrested for possession of marijuana, or why prosecutors routinely seek the highest possible sentence then bargain down.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 27, 2014 00:54
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:I don't waste my time with simple possession cases. Diversionary program and accelerated rehabilitation. I'm too busy dealing with 8 year old kids being shot in the head. That doesn't speak to his point that the role of police, prosecutors, and judges is to "remove dangerous people from general society." If removing dangerous people from society is their sole goal, then why are there so many arrests for possession? I understand you can only be so lenient and still keep your job, but if the goal of police is to remove dangerous people from society, why are they even bothering with arrests for possession? They too have rules they have to abide by, but it's far more complicated than just removing dangerous people, which is why I called his view idealistic and naive. 
|
|
#
¿
Nov 27, 2014 01:44
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:well, now that the trend seems to be legalization, it may be a non-issue in a few years. Just to be clear, you're not defending tsa's statement from my claim that it's idealistic and naive, right? Anyways, "in the future this may not be an issue" is cold comfort to students who get diversion on a weed charge and then are denied student loans because of it. The fact is, it still is an issue. I agree with you that kids getting shot is infinitely more important, which is why I disputed tsa's claim in the first place. edit: To be clear, I don't think you cackle over the misery of pot smoking kids, but my point is that this is a systemic issue. Sharkie fucked around with this message at 01:57 on Nov 27, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Nov 27, 2014 01:54
|
|
|
A HOT TOPIC posted:Actually it looks like with the more marijuana arrests made there are less violent crime arrests, because the violent offenders are already locked up on the weed charges. Can't commit those associated violent crimes when your in jail. Thanks war on drugs. As well all know, correlation equals causation. Now track it with sales of Harry Potter books.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 27, 2014 02:06
|
|
|
The Ender posted:I'll admit a bias of mine: 'he was reaching for his waistband' and 'he was going for my gun' have become such common bylines for any act of police violence that I automatically assume the cops are sacks of poo poo whenever they use those phrases, whether they're being honest or not. "He was reaching for his waistband" is indistinguishable from "his hands dropped below shoulder level." And I feel this is worth crossposting from the Michael Brown thread:  ohiocarry.org posted:The officer approaches you. Be polite and say hello. Remember, you have done nothing wrong, and should not be afraid. The officer will probably start out by asking you your name and introducing him/herself. Don't be afraid. I always start out with "Hi officer. I am ______ with Ohio Carry (you choose if you want to give your full name or only your first). How are you today?" This opens up a relaxed conversation. They may ask you what you are doing walking around with a gun, or why you are carrying a gun around.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 27, 2014 07:52
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Whatever else you can say about open-carry filth (and you can say a lot; you can pretty much say anything), they don't point their guns. They may hold them at low ready but they don't raise them to eye level and aim. And in any case an open carry reckoning is coming; somebody's going to get shot. The kid didn't point his gun at eye level and aim at the cops, either. According to their own testimony it was in his waistband. If he had a rifle slung over his shoulder with his hand on it like the white guy in the picture, the outcome would have been the same. As far as black open carry groups, perhaps they haven't gotten shot because they're in clearly marked groups - what about a black guy on his own who happens to be open carrying? Though I agree a reckoning is coming.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 27, 2014 08:29
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:That's low ready, as I mentioned. It's menacing but it is not pointing. There's no way he could have got the rifle to that position without pointing or sweeping it, however momentarily. Unless maybe he had it somehow slung below his waist, pointing down, like a scabbard. SedanChair posted:I never said he pointed it at the cops. Before the cops arrived he was pointing it up and down the street. He was sweeping the whole neighborhood with a presumably loaded weapon. Like I mentioned re: the picture, that guy had to have swept the gun at some point. I'm just trying to say that it's incredibly hosed that police didn't even try to ascertain the situation, they literally arrived and killed him; they guy in the picture had safety in numbers, and the benefit of being white. If the kid in Ohio was in that posture, he would have been shot. I don't know that we actually disagree on important points.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 27, 2014 09:08
|
|
|
Volkerball posted:An unlikely ally. quote:“We Talked about this subject, and yeah -- she just said, you gotta understand that there are a lot of black folks that are incredibly, more and more, distrusting of law enforcement,” Bush said. “Which is a shame, because law enforcement’s job is to protect everybody.  I'm imagining that W is literally a sheltered 12 year old white kid, and Condoleezza is using small words to patiently explain to him why people are mad at the nice policeman. W becomes upset that the policeman hurt somebody.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2014 00:06
|
|
|
themrguy posted:The only actual source I've ever seen for the IQ thing is the article where one local department wouldn't hire a guy because they thought he was overqualified and wouldn't stay (and thus didn't want to spend thousands training him), which if you've ever been in a hiring position is a totally valid concern. Screening candidates, training, etc. is a huge pain in the rear end and you don't want to do it anymore than necessary. There are enough real problems with police that you don't have to misinterpret an article from years ago to paint them all as idiots to find something to complain about. Overqualified for scoring too high on an IQ test, yes. From Jordan v. City of New London: quote:The city responded that it removed Jordan from consideration because he scored a 33 on the WPT, and that to prevent frequent job turnover caused by hiring overqualified applicants the city only interviewed candidates who scored between 20 and 27. This was allowed despite the Court admitting that there was no correlation between scores on the test and job satisfaction.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 2, 2015 07:30
|
|
|
Omi-Polari posted:The main thing is presence and just keeping up appearances. The other thing is there's reluctance in the gay community to report crimes directly to the police for various reasons. You don't want to risk being re-victimized, or your report not being taken seriously. This is definitely on the soft-end of community policing. Shomrim up in New York gets a little more "handsy" from what I'm reading. I was thinking about this idea. I'm skeptical of state-based community patrols, or patrols that are otherwise tied closely to police departments -- they'd probably just end up echoing the problems a community has with the real police. But I did think that unarmed, ground-up community organizations might be a helpful thing to have, and one of my reasons for thinking so was that people who are rightfully hesitant to go to the police might be more willing to go to a group that is made up of, and beholden to, the local community. They could be a police alternative for things like property crimes and conflict resolution. I don't know that it would work, but I think in some places it could.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 6, 2015 07:38
|
|
|
Vahakyla posted:Militias are pretty right, I'd say. Eh, it depends on what they're militant about and their actions. Black panthers, for instance.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 6, 2015 08:03
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 02:30 |
|
|
Intel&Sebastian posted:Are civilians with legal guns allowed to draw down everytime someones dog scares them or is that a cops only thing? It strikes me as odd that this is such a regular thing it only gets mentioned in passing in a story like this. Some police group claimed that dogs are immune to pepper spray, thus shooting them is the first and only deterrent to muddy paw prints and dog slobber. Of course a bunch of veterinarians did a study, and the results were "lol of course pepper spray works on dogs you dumbasses." DARPA posted:Officer slips on banana peel; executes woman. There are some stupid posts in the comments but overall they're encouraging.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 8, 2015 00:09
|
|