US Politics Mega-thread - Page 1701

On March 06 2015 05:53 Toadesstern wrote:
nah I meant having it done seperatrely alltogether with only neutral stuff on a control group. Figure out about how big that effect is in general and just include that into the algorithm for the actual test later on. Like I said, that would require the test to know what pair is easier for you, as in they'd still have to assume it's easier for people to do white+good vs black+bad in comparison to the other way as an example and it's also only applicable to groups of people.

On March 06 2015 06:54 zlefin wrote:
I feel the Justice Department isn't acting strongly enough on Ferguson. The information on the report is far more than is needed to simply force them to change their police and court practices; it looks to be enough to make the city both civilly and criminally liable for a huge number of constitutional violations. Disband/replace the local police force and court system. The whole town may need reworking anyways, if enough residents file civil suits against the city it could get bankrupted easily by the looks of it.

On March 06 2015 06:54 zlefin wrote:
I feel the Justice Department isn't acting strongly enough on Ferguson. The information on the report is far more than is needed to simply force them to change their police and court practices; it looks to be enough to make the city both civilly and criminally liable for a huge number of constitutional violations. Disband/replace the local police force and court system. The whole town may need reworking anyways, if enough residents file civil suits against the city it could get bankrupted easily by the looks of it.

On March 06 2015 07:01 zlefin wrote:
I coulda been clearer there, the local authorities should disband/replace the police department. The feds could probably arrest most of them though, which would kinda force the issue.
As to being bankrupted, it doesn't necessarily solve anything, but it may happen anyways. Since individuals can sue the city for violating their civil rights, and such a lawsuit would be in federal court, so the county won't be able to dodge the suits so easily, and the Justice report + all the evidence they've acquired is probably enough for a LOT of people in ferguson to win their suits. There could be literally thousands of people in Ferguson who could win in a civil suit from the city. If they choose to litigate, that could easily bankrupt the town.

On March 06 2015 07:11 GreenHorizons wrote:
I don't know how you could not disband the current department and expect the citizens to have any trust in them?

On March 06 2015 06:41 oneofthem wrote:

there are tests for this particular task as a measure of cognitive ability and the distribution is probably not clustered enough for a simple average to be of much use in weeding out this effect

On March 06 2015 07:12 Gorsameth wrote:
Replacing the entire police force would be nice but as others have said it is simply not practical. I would more look towards those in key positions who should have identified and acted on the racial profiling happening on a scale like this.

Trying to get a few officers from other districts with a better record of dealing with racial issues to move to Ferguson and using them to try and reform the mindset is more realistic and might have a positive effect.


because disbanding is not a realistic option when you cannot replace?

Its not about what would be best in an ideal world. Its about what is practically possible

On March 06 2015 07:31 GreenHorizons wrote:



I'm sorry but I don't accept that it's not practically possible. All the shit that gets done and spent in the name of protecting freedom and justice, it's just not honest to say that it's "too impractical".

Camden NJ disbanded a police department of ~460 officers. It's practical if you give a crap about the people getting their Constitutional rights consistently shit all over.

Get some federal money to a new or county department as incentives for good officers if you have to. But I am not going to accept "it's too hard/expensive" to make sure these Americans aren't the victims of the people that are supposed to protect them.

People of Ferguson have never seen a member of ISIS, AQ, or any terrorist in person except the ones they see every day on the streets of their town. How in the world could/should they be more scared of people half a world away than they are of the people actually terrorizing them?

If you think you are going to convince the residents of Ferguson that with all the money being spent in the country for a whole load of bullshit reasons we can't find the resources to make it 'practical' to rebuild the FPD from the ground up, you might as well just turn Ferguson into a giant prison and put the residents in it.

EDIT: People have to realize even if individual officers weren't engaged in the regular denial of rights and predatory policing they were all complicit in it by not reporting the abuses to the authorities.

On March 06 2015 07:45 Gorsameth wrote:

My reasoning is that in my experience (tho I am not American) there tends to be a shortage of police officers in general. Its not the greatest job that a lot of people aspire to. That means you cant just pull in a lot of people from around the country to replace an entire police department since there is already a shortage pretty much everywhere.

Now if that is wrong and the US is swimming in competent, non racist policemen then yes replacing the entire department is an option but I don't think that is the situation.

On March 06 2015 07:50 GreenHorizons wrote:


Disbanding doesn't mean that all the officers are banned from ever being police again (although I could see a case for that). It just means it has to be taken over by new leadership and that officers need to be rehired. It could also mean that the county just takes over and it wouldn't be hard for them to move some people around and get some new hires. It would make sense to require any former FPD that wanted to join the new force be retrained and monitored to make sure they are following new expectations.

But it's far more unreasonable and impractical to expect the residents to trust a department that has not been disbanded or significantly restructured. Regardless of what is done, if the realities don't significantly change it will be pointless.

On March 06 2015 07:50 GreenHorizons wrote:


Disbanding doesn't mean that all the officers are banned from ever being police again (although I could see a case for that). It just means it has to be taken over by new leadership and that officers need to be rehired. It could also mean that the county just takes over and it wouldn't be hard for them to move some people around and get some new hires. It would make sense to require any former FPD that wanted to join the new force be retrained and monitored to make sure they are following new expectations.

But it's far more unreasonable and impractical to expect the residents to trust a department that has not been disbanded or significantly restructured. Regardless of what is done, if the realities don't significantly change it will be pointless.