EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 3917
| Forum Index > Closed |
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please. In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. | ||
|
On_Slaught
United States12190 Posts
| ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23643 Posts
Having said that, you talk as if our cops are modern day Gestapo, doing this do people in the street every day. This is NOT a regular occurrence. Obviously they are not the Gestapo but your impressions of what everyday interactions with police are like, are certainly not everyone's. In 2011, NYPD Made More Stops Of Young Black Men Than The Total Number Of Young Black Men In New York I get that it's hard to understand because it's simply not your life, like understanding why kids would throw rocks at tanks, but once you are made aware, I don't think there is any excuse to petulantly refuse to realize that your personal experience and anecdotes fall far short of encompassing the entirety of people's experiences. If people think that this stuff is rare and being oversensationalized, they simply don't know that it's just getting caught on tape. As for Beverly Hills and Martha's Vineyard, there's plenty of cocaine in both of those places. Plenty of other crime too. Anyone who explains away police problems by quoting how often they find themselves guilty of misconduct I can't take as being serious though. | ||
|
On_Slaught
United States12190 Posts
On June 01 2016 07:49 Plansix wrote: The job is safer than it has ever been. This is not the 70s and 80s any more. There are some places that have high crime, but that no excuse. If you look at cities like Chicago, who have been caught operating illegal detention facilities(see previously cited article a couple pages back), there is no more public trust. If they are tense and can't see normal people on the street as anything but a threat, time to go get help and find a new line of work. And I find it comical that you give Kwark shit for calling out all police over a few bad apples and then turn around to justify the police seeing everyone as a threat because of a few bad apples. Seriously? How do you not see the obvious difference? The police officers job is to actively go out and look for bad guys. They are literally looking for danger. Other than soldiers, there is no better application of the cliche "hope for the best, prepare for the worst." I mean seriously, just imagine how police would function if they did NOT assume that everyone could be a threat. This doesn't mean you treat everybody like a criminal. This means you be on guard at all times. Yes, that can lead to mistakes, but that doesn't make it the wrong approach to dealing with potential criminals. By contrast, assuming all police are corrupt and out to get you only leads to more conflict, which can set off an already tense situation. No, it shouldn't be this way. But given the massive number of guns in this country, I'm don't see how you can blame them. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22093 Posts
On June 01 2016 07:40 On_Slaught wrote: Having said that, you talk as if our cops are modern day Gestapo, doing this do people in the street every day. This is NOT a regular occurrence. You might want to check your facts. We are up to somewhere around 480 people killed by police sofar this year. http://killedbypolice.net/ This doesn't just happen every day, it happens roughly 4 times per day. | ||
|
On_Slaught
United States12190 Posts
On June 01 2016 07:52 GreenHorizons wrote: Obviously they are not the Gestapo but your impressions of what everyday interactions with police are like, are certainly not everyone's. In 2011, NYPD Made More Stops Of Young Black Men Than The Total Number Of Young Black Men In New York I get that it's hard to understand because it's simply not your life, like understanding why kids would throw rocks at tanks, but once you are made aware, I don't think there is any excuse to petulantly refuse to realize that your personal experience and anecdotes fall far short of encompassing the entirety of people's experiences. If people think that this stuff is rare and being oversensationalized, they simply don't know that it's just getting caught on tape. As for Beverly Hills and Martha's Vineyard, there's plenty of cocaine in both of those places. Plenty of other crime too. Anyone who explains away police problems by quoting how often they find themselves guilty of misconduct I can't take as being serious though. Not even sure what to say to this post. Of course they are rare. Again, police are interacting with citizens EVERY SECOND of EVERY DAY. And I never said the police are off the hook because of them being found guilty of misconduct. Your selective reading ignores my recognition that there is a problem that requires significant more attention and work than it already is getting. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
So yeah, I think its comical. Apparently a couple bad apples in a city justification for police to see us all as targets. But we can’t say mean things about police that have bad apples in their profession, who see us all as threats. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23643 Posts
On June 01 2016 08:02 On_Slaught wrote: Not even sure what to say to this post. Of course they are rare. Again, police are interacting with citizens EVERY SECOND of EVERY DAY. And I never said the police are off the hook because of them being found guilty of misconduct. Your selective reading ignores my recognition that there is a problem that requires significant more attention and work than it already is getting. If you were a black guy in New York you would laugh hysterically at the notion that harassment and abuse from the police are "rare". I don't know how else to explain it than I did. Maybe several a day ending in death and countless more just in injury or constitutional violations is "rare" to you, but if it is we have wholly different understanding of what the word means. As has been pointed out, the "bad apple" argument is bunk as we've been shown time and time again when police just outright lie in order to protect criminals (so long as they wear a badge). I don't know if it's fair to call them "corrupt" but they are certainly part of a systematic attempt to protect criminals with badges, presumably under duress of losing their livelihood if they were to actually do their job and protect citizens from criminals whether they wear badges or not. | ||
|
On_Slaught
United States12190 Posts
It's funny you mention that cop who shot the kid with the toy gun. The second I saw that video I screamed at my computer screen that the officer needed to lose his job. His blatant disregard for protocol coupled with his refusal to properly analyze the situation meant he wasn't fit to be an officer. I wouldn't even be against prosecution considering the violation of protocol. But again this is just a diversion from the real issue. Unless all of you can give me an alternative to police officers existing, stop pointing out the problems and start pointing out the solutions. Also, using trigger words like "targets" is disingenuous at worst, and inflammatory at best. Just because a cop approaches your car with caution when he pulls you over doesn't mean he sees you as a target. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22093 Posts
On June 01 2016 08:10 On_Slaught wrote: Apples and oranges. Military leadership being incompetent/risk averse is in no way a slight against police officers in the United States. It's funny you mention that cop who shot the kid with the toy gun. The second I saw that video I screamed at my computer screen that the officer needed to lose his job. His blatant disregard for protocol coupled with his refusal to properly analyze the situation meant he wasn't fit to be an officer. I wouldn't even be against prosecution considering the violation of protocol. But again this is just a diversion from the real issue. Unless all of you can give me an alternative to police officers existing, stop pointing out the problems and start pointing out the solutions. Also, using trigger words like "targets" is disingenuous at worst, and inflammatory at best. Just because a cop approaches your car with caution when he pulls you over doesn't mean he sees you as a target. The alternative is every other first world nation in the world. | ||
Liquid`Drone
Norway28739 Posts
If there's one thing I don't agree with, it's that I actually don't like the idea of body cams. I think that while it immediately makes sense as a way of providing oversight and accountability, it is likely to have adverse effects in getting competent police officers in the future. I know that for myself, I find that having autonomy and trust is extremely important, and forced body cams would to me be experienced as a fundamental distrust in my ability and trustworthiness. I honestly think we want the police force to consist of people whose self-pride (which tends to correlate with ability) is too high for them to find constant supervision palatable. In a related vein, I currently don't teach, although I do identify as a teacher, but if there is one aspect of the teacher job I actually dislike, or flat out hate, it is that so much time has to be devoted to paperwork and 'accountability' that it negatively influences the opportunity of teachers to teach. For example, adhering to formal assessment guidelines would, if done by the letter of the law, mean that your average Norwegian teacher would have to spend something like 2-3 hours of every day - weekends included - on giving students feedback. I think that it is far preferable to have strict requirements, say a 3 year education with a lot of focus on ethics, where unfit students are rooted out during the process, and then giving police officers the autonomy to best do their job, rather than kinda stating that they are operating under the assumption that fuckups will be made. | ||
|
On_Slaught
United States12190 Posts
On June 01 2016 08:12 Gorsameth wrote: The alternative is every other first world nation in the world. Show me a first world nation that has a gun epidemic like ours and does better policing and I will go read about them right now. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On June 01 2016 08:16 On_Slaught wrote: Show me a first world nation that has a gun epidemic like ours and does better policing and I will go read about them right now. Lethal force is fine when there is a real fire arm on the scene, rather than a knife, scary looking bat or toy gun in a department store. | ||
|
On_Slaught
United States12190 Posts
On June 01 2016 08:18 Plansix wrote: Lethal force is fine when there is a real fire arm on the scene, rather than a knife or scary looking bat. Are you implying that a knife and bats aren't lethal weapons? That should an officer get into a fight, he ought make sure that fight is fair? | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On June 01 2016 08:20 On_Slaught wrote: Are you implying that a knife and bats aren't lethal weapons? That should an officer get into a fight, he ought make sure that fight is fair? You 100% know what I am talking about. They exist in the EU and they manage to deal with this amazing weapons without guns and killing people. Our police just shoot someone if they are holding a bat and not listening to commands, not even trying to attack, just hanging out passively resisting arrest. The EU just waits until they have the numbers advantage and deals with it without killing anyone. | ||
|
Mercy13
United States718 Posts
On June 01 2016 08:12 Liquid`Drone wrote: I think those are 12+ solid suggestions from Simberto. And the fact that it's fairly easy to come up with such a list really speaks volumes on how broken the system is. If there's one thing I don't agree with, it's that I actually don't like the idea of body cams. I think that while it immediately makes sense as a way of providing oversight and accountability, it is likely to have adverse effects in getting competent police officers in the future. I know that for myself, I find that having autonomy and trust is extremely important, and forced body cams would to me be experienced as a fundamental distrust in my ability and trustworthiness. I honestly think we want the police force to consist of people whose self-pride (which tends to correlate with ability) is too high for them to find constant supervision palatable. In a related vein, I currently don't teach, although I do identify as a teacher, but if there is one aspect of the teacher job I actually dislike, or flat out hate, it is that so much time has to be devoted to paperwork and 'accountability' that it negatively influences the opportunity of teachers to teach. For example, adhering to formal assessment guidelines would, if done by the letter of the law, mean that your average Norwegian teacher would have to spend something like 2-3 hours of every day - weekends included - on giving students feedback. I think that it is far preferable to have strict requirements, say a 3 year education with a lot of focus on ethics, where unfit students are rooted out during the process, and then giving police officers the autonomy to best do their job, rather than kinda stating that they are operating under the assumption that fuckups will be made. Somethimg to keep in mind regarding body cams is that they also protect the police. Departments which adopt them see a drop in false reports, which allows police to avoid a lot of hassle. | ||
|
Nyxisto
Germany6287 Posts
On June 01 2016 07:56 On_Slaught wrote: I mean seriously, just imagine how police would function if they did NOT assume that everyone could be a threat. This doesn't mean you treat everybody like a criminal. This means you be on guard at all times. Yes, that can lead to mistakes, but that doesn't make it the wrong approach to dealing with potential criminals. It's called policing by consent, they do it in the United Kingdom. They've had like 10 dead officers in the last decade, sounds better than turning your cities into warzones This is a list of dead officers in the last 100 years, what does that pass as in the US, a bad weekend? | ||
KwarK
United States43581 Posts
On June 01 2016 08:20 On_Slaught wrote: Are you implying that a knife and bats aren't lethal weapons? That should an officer get into a fight, he ought make sure that fight is fair? If he needs to resort to lethal force to win a fight and there is no immediate danger, perhaps he should not try to start a fight until he has more options. That's how we do it in the UK. Yes, people should comply with the police. But non compliance ought not to be a death sentence in most cases unless the police officer fucks and turns it into a "obey or die" situation which, if anything, is more likely to result in a fight/flight response from the perp. | ||
|
On_Slaught
United States12190 Posts
First, we shouldn't expect an officer getting into a fight with a criminal to fight fair. If they bring a knife/bat to a gun fight, and still have the audacity to get violent, then they get whats coming. Do we really expect cops to show up to a violent scene, go in with his gun, yet once he sees the combatant merely has a bat he should put away his gun and pull out his night stick? Sure hope there isn't a gun hiding anywhere. People continue to say that cops like to shoot people with weapons that aren't being violent... not ONCE have I defended these cops. That is a clear violation of the law as it is and should be punished as such. If it isn't being punished, that gets back to the institutional problems I talked about earlier. Second, this will become less of an issue over time as less lethals become more and more prevalent. I think we can all agree that tasers have saved lives. Rubber bullets are another tool that can safely incapacitate bad guys without putting the officer at risk. I fully expect things to get better, not worse, going forward. | ||
|
On_Slaught
United States12190 Posts
On June 01 2016 08:41 Nyxisto wrote: It's called policing by consent, they do it in the United Kingdom. They've had like 10 dead officers in the last decade, sounds better than turning your cities into warzones This is a list of dead officers in the last 100 years, what does that pass as in the US, a bad weekend? This completely disregards the difference in cultures. Americans aren't exactly trusting of their government (even if it is sometimes justified). Requiring consent to do anything will mean nothing gets done. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
It’s like the story Kwark talked about earlier with the war vet with a knife. Knives can kill someone, but acting like they are this impossible problem we can’t solve without gunning someone down is just plain lazy. On June 01 2016 08:51 On_Slaught wrote: This completely disregards the difference in cultures. Americans aren't exactly trusting of their government (even if it is sometimes justified). Requiring consent to do anything will mean nothing gets done. Maybe our culture sucks and we need to get over it before the people our police keep shooting do something really serious. And I don't trust police, which are part of the goverment. | ||
| ||
