Qaanol wrote:With my proposed “We are all police” society, it effectively is. And even in our existing society with your own standards, the policing of police is exactly a peer relationship.
It invites chaos, because it provides no clear lines of authority.
Citation needed. It seems pretty obvious to me that “Everyone around you has the power to arrest you if you break the law” will strictly increase
morriswalters wrote:But it is the primary thing that they do and everything else follows from that.
Are you merely stating your own personal opinion about what police currently do, or do you have thoughts about what the role of police ought to be
Qaanol wrote:“…and therefore we should structure the system in a way that when police attempt to abuse their powers, other people have a way to stop them.”
How would that work? Who judges when the police exceed the mandate?
A judge. After someone has arrested the officers.
morriswalters wrote:I believe that you witnessed it as you said you did. What did you do about it? Did you file a complaint or use any of the avenues available to you currently to obtain justice? Not did it work, but did you try? If it happened as you related it it was excessive. Now tell me what you would have done if you were able to exercise the authority you desire? Could you have arrested the officer. And assuming you tried how would you have done so? Think about the times that you have seen this happen in front of you. Would you be prepared to use violence to enforce the law as you see it. How will you act differently from him assuming he chooses not to comply? And since you are acting as citizen can you bear the liability you would acquire if a court found you acted wrongly?
First, as I mentioned when I described the hypothetical, it was inspired by a situation that somebody else related, not my own experience.
Second, the point is that if the police don’t have a warrant to arrest a specific person, then I think they should only be able to do things that any other civilian could do.
Thus, if we want police to have the power to make spur-of-the-moment arrests, then civilians should have exactly the same power with exactly the same rules.
Whatever the punishment is for making an invalid arrest without a warrant, that should apply equally to police and civilians.
Whatever the punishment for assaulting someone during an arrest, that should apply equally to police and civilians.
Whatever the standard for judging whether an arrest was valid and whether excessive force was used, that should apply equally to police and civilians.
The principle of “self-defense” in most jurisdictions also applies to “defense of others”. So if I see one person assaulting another, then whatever the level of force that “self-defense” allows me to use in stopping that assault, should be allowed no matter who is doing the assaulting, no matter what costume they are wearing.
Qaanol wrote:Are you saying it should be a crime for you to refuse that obviously illegal demand?
I stated that you had to comply within the limits of the power that we grant them.
So you acknowledge that it can in fact be right and good and legal to refuse to comply with an order given by a police officer?
Qaanol wrote:I reconcile it by requiring a warrant for any special powers to be invoked.
He has no special power other than the power to enforce compliance within the law.1
He can't enter your house without a warrant for instance, except under well defined circumstances.2
Neither can he arrest you without cause.3
He can stop and detain you and he might be able to pat you down.4
Separate what the police are supposed to do under the law as it is versus their behavior in some cases.5
1. And when a police officer does
use the power of their position to issue an illegal order, to infringe a civilian’s basic rights, to physically injure someone, what would you have be the immediate
recourse to prevent
the rights from being violated and the injuries from being inflicted?
2. And when a police officer does
enter your house without a warrant, and kills your dog, why should you treat them any differently than anyone else who invades your home and opens fire?
3. And when a police officer does
arrest you, and the officer smashes your face into the pavement during the arrest, and the officer falsely claims
you resisted arrest, what ought
4. And when a police officer claims there is cause to stop you and detain you and pat you down, but presents no evidence for it, and the officer has no warrant to search nor arrest you, why should this be different from any other stranger doing the same thing?
5. That is exactly what I am trying to do. In particular, the question at hand is what to do in the “some cases” where a police officer abuses their position of authority. Simply saying “they shouldn’t do that” ignores the issue and doesn’t provide any guidance on what the rest of us
should do when it inevitably happens
morriswalters wrote:Better training, cameras, and the creation of some type of prosecutorial alternative specifically for police. But there is no perfect solution. The New York Times had an article on some procedural changes some departments are making just in training. One was a no chase rule where no hazard existed to the public. As well as another rule forbidding chases through yards and down alleys.
Now we’re getting somewhere!
What do you think about changing the role of police, so they focus exclusively on investigating crimes, and carrying out search and arrest warrants?