Police misbehavior thread

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
bentheimmigrant
Dotcor Good Poster
Posts: 1366
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2008 9:01 pm UTC
Location: UK

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby bentheimmigrant » Tue Oct 29, 2013 5:57 pm UTC

As I said earlier, the most helpful piece of information we could have in this is a comparison between unarmed people shot by police and police who are shot. This would give a much better indication of the cost/benefit of arming officers. As it stands, the closest to reasonable sources I can find of this are just for LA and Houston. In LA in 2010, as least 12 of 54 people killed by police were unarmed. In Houston, one in three people shot by police were unarmed from 1999-2004, at a rate of one [fatal or non fatal] shooting a month, or one shooting of an unarmed civilian every three months just in the Houston area.

c.f. the roughly 30 police who are shot and killed every year, and one might start to arrive at the conclusion that the police are posing a greater danger to the public than vice versa. Doesn't mean that they're premeditated murderers. Just that they've been given disproportionate power and often unnecessary means to use that power.
"Comment is free, but facts are sacred" - C.P. Scott

Chen
Posts: 5579
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 6:53 pm UTC
Location: Montreal

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Chen » Tue Oct 29, 2013 6:47 pm UTC

Note that the Houston article has 50% of those "unarmed" shootings as people in cars. I'm sure a bunch of those are just as unjustified as the other categories, but its somewhat disingenuous to call those people unarmed. Hell one of the examples cites someone in the car killed after the car hit an officer. A car can be a pretty effective weapon.

I'm also not sure why they include the off-duty officer killings. Especially the one quoted where it was an off-duty officer who was working private security who shot someone.

User avatar
bentheimmigrant
Dotcor Good Poster
Posts: 1366
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2008 9:01 pm UTC
Location: UK

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby bentheimmigrant » Tue Oct 29, 2013 6:56 pm UTC

Like I said... there's not much helpful stuff out there. There are some that compile lists, but no links or numbers, others that are just justified anti-authority rhetoric, like from the DailyKos or wsws.org. Honestly I'm kinda surprised nothing popped up.
"Comment is free, but facts are sacred" - C.P. Scott

User avatar
K-R
Posts: 1564
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 6:42 pm UTC
Location: Australia

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby K-R » Tue Oct 29, 2013 7:50 pm UTC

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-m ... 6852.story
A Sonoma County sheriff's deputy who fatally shot a boy holding a pellet gun is a firearms expert...

In his writings, Gelhaus, a 24-year veteran of the Sheriff's Office, has been a frequent advocate of a prepared, aggressive stance in law enforcement, a profession he has described as a "calling" and likened to a "contact sport," the Santa Rosa Press-Democrat reported.

He is also a firearms instructor and range master with special training in firearms safety and instruction.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Tyndmyr » Tue Oct 29, 2013 8:16 pm UTC

Shooting people without a weapon may be sometimes justified, but it's probably the best proxy available. In any case, if a significant percentage of people the cops are shooting are unarmed, it might at LEAST warrant collecting some detailed stats about why your cops are doing that.

The new information about the shooter would seem to reinforce the dangers of that mindset. It's also interesting to me that while he shot eight times, his partner did not shoot. Given that "contagious fire" is a known thing, this would suggest that his partner read the situation differently(and correctly).

The analogy of law enforcement to a "contact sport" is also somewhat worrying. It would appear to suggest an implicit acceptance of playing rough, etc. That's not exactly the attitude I hope for from law enforcement.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10547
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby CorruptUser » Tue Oct 29, 2013 8:27 pm UTC

Like I say, just require all police to lose a week's pay if they kill anyone.

Anyone know how to get that on a ballot for the public to vote on?

User avatar
davidstarlingm
Posts: 1255
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 4:33 am UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby davidstarlingm » Tue Oct 29, 2013 9:32 pm UTC

Relevant....

http://media.nbcbayarea.com/documents/Gelhaus_Ambush+(3).pdf
the officer who shot Andy Lopez to death wrote:Today is the day you may need to kill someone in order to go home. If you cannot turn on the “Mean Gene” for yourself, who will? If you find yourself in an ambush, in the kill zone, you need to turn on that mean gene. Taking some kind of action—any kind of action—is critical. If you shut down (physically, psychologically, or both), and stay in the kill zone, bad things will happen to you. You must take some kind of action.

I'm not trying to assassinate character here, and I'm sure this is only one of the many things that this officer has written in his lifetime. But still....


morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby morriswalters » Tue Oct 29, 2013 9:43 pm UTC

Training and policy. Clearly designed guides as to when deadly force is allowable and consistent training. They are already subject to civil and legal actions if the situation warrants it. The FBI is investigating this latest case. I suspect the reason bentheimmigrant didn't find a lot of data is because this isn't a statistically significant problem. It isn't that it is not a problem, any unjustified killing is. It is that compared to the 350 million people in the US the number is relatively small.

And police are charged.

User avatar
davidstarlingm
Posts: 1255
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 4:33 am UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby davidstarlingm » Tue Oct 29, 2013 9:48 pm UTC

bentheimmigrant wrote:As I said earlier, the most helpful piece of information we could have in this is a comparison between unarmed people shot by police and police who are shot. This would give a much better indication of the cost/benefit of arming officers.

Not exactly what you're talking about, but I saw where someone dug through all of the US police shootings listed on wikipedia the other day as part of a related discussion. This was the result:
There have been 190+ police killings this year.
In over 20% of those killings, the victim was *completely* unarmed.
In 5 of those 190+ cases (not the 20%), the victim was armed with scissors.
In the majority of cases where the victim had a gun-- even an air rifle-- the victim was running away from the officers when they killed them.
In four cases, police officers beat unarmed men to death.
In three cases, police officers ignored the victim making them aware of medical needs.
In one case, a woman begged for help for 7 hours before she died in police custody. She was told to "Shut up or you'll never get to even see a judge."
In many cases, the victim was armed with a single-edged knife, and were shot to death. Only in 6 of those cases did the police report attempting to pacify them with a tazer before opening fire.

In many of these cases, the police have released no details to the public. None. So, out of almost 200 cases, many of which we know absolutely nothing, almost 50 people have died at the hands of police brutality.

User avatar
bentheimmigrant
Dotcor Good Poster
Posts: 1366
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2008 9:01 pm UTC
Location: UK

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby bentheimmigrant » Tue Oct 29, 2013 11:16 pm UTC

morriswalters wrote:Training and policy. Clearly designed guides as to when deadly force is allowable and consistent training. They are already subject to civil and legal actions if the situation warrants it. The FBI is investigating this latest case. I suspect the reason bentheimmigrant didn't find a lot of data is because this isn't a statistically significant problem. It isn't that it is not a problem, any unjustified killing is. It is that compared to the 350 million people in the US the number is relatively small.

And police are charged.

Are you trolling? I found an article showing that as many as 1/3 of people shot by police are unarmed. That is not statistically insignificant, even if it is an overestimate. On top of that, the number of unarmed people killed in LA alone was a significant number compared to the number of police killed nationwide. And yet you don't consider that number insignificant.
"Comment is free, but facts are sacred" - C.P. Scott

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby morriswalters » Wed Oct 30, 2013 12:12 am UTC

There are about 316,000,000 people in the US. If 10000 were killed each year that would be .00003165 percent. And I don't think the rate is that high, I believe it is closer to 500. I call that a small number. About 400 or so people die of electrocution. About 400 or so die in workplace accidents. In my home town the murder rate will be about 63 this year and overall in the US the number will be 15000. And automobile accidents will kill somewhere south of 25000 people this year. And maim as many more. What I am suggesting is that we maintain a sense of proportion on the issue. If you consider that trolling then I guess it is.

curtis95112
Posts: 638
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2011 5:23 pm UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby curtis95112 » Wed Oct 30, 2013 1:17 am UTC

And disease will kill hundreds of millions. So lets not discuss anything until we've solved that.

Honestly, people ARE keeping a sense of proportion. That's why we're discussing this on a thread on an internet forum instead of ditching jobs to firebomb police stations.

As a side note, you might notice you're following a pattern often seen in people who are being wrong on the internetz.
You're slowly backtracking from a controversial position to a vacuous one. Ending up arguing "It's not that big of a problem" usually means you've dug yourself into a massive hole*. Stop digging.



*Unless you started out arguing that, in which case you may have been taking a nuanced view on a situation. But you didn't.
Mighty Jalapeno wrote:
Tyndmyr wrote:
Роберт wrote:Sure, but at least they hit the intended target that time.

Well, if you shoot enough people, you're bound to get the right one eventually.

Thats the best description of the USA ever.

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby morriswalters » Wed Oct 30, 2013 2:04 am UTC

curtis95112 wrote:And disease will kill hundreds of millions. So lets not discuss anything until we've solved that.

Honestly, people ARE keeping a sense of proportion. That's why we're discussing this on a thread on an internet forum instead of ditching jobs to firebomb police stations.

As a side note, you might notice you're following a pattern often seen in people who are being wrong on the internetz.
You're slowly backtracking from a controversial position to a vacuous one. Ending up arguing "It's not that big of a problem" usually means you've dug yourself into a massive hole*. Stop digging.



*Unless you started out arguing that, in which case you may have been taking a nuanced view on a situation. But you didn't.

Here's where I started.

Law enforcement, by definition, carries a high rate of risk, both to the public and to the officers. Eighty five officers have died in the line of duty to date this year. So fear of death by violence for law enforcement, here in the US is a reasonable fear. We have a culture that glorifies violence, through movies and games. And add to that the proliferation on guns through society as a whole, and this is the result. The surprise to me is that the death rate is so low. Here are some stats from the CDC.

I would say I have been pretty consistent. It is entirely possible that I have wandered, but not that far. Maybe we should disarm them and then they couldn't shoot anyone. Maybe that would suit you, it would most certainly suit me. I find the idea of fining them 1000 dollars per shooting(or a weeks pay) fairly ridiculous. They are already subject to civil penalties , Or rather I should say you and I are, since we pay them. Just as quickly as corruptuser's plan could be implemented a fund would be set up by someone to return that money to their salary, from the public, from people who like the job they do.

If you want to fix the problem than change the rules of engagement and improve training, and weed out those who shouldn't be doing the job. But how much money are you willing to spend to drive that number down? The latest trend seems to be head mounted cameras, a so called silent witness. But spend as much as you like. There are as many guns as there are citizens, people will continue to die.

User avatar
Red Hal
Magically Delicious
Posts: 1445
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2007 2:42 pm UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Red Hal » Wed Oct 30, 2013 9:47 am UTC

The head-mounted cameras are a good idea. A very good idea. Of course, they would need to be either always-on or rigged to go on every time the officer exited their car/put the blues and twos on. Any camera malfunction should also trigger an investigation.
Lost Greatest Silent Baby X Y Z. "There is no one who loves pain itself, who seeks after it and wants to have it, simply because it is pain..."

User avatar
bentheimmigrant
Dotcor Good Poster
Posts: 1366
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2008 9:01 pm UTC
Location: UK

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby bentheimmigrant » Wed Oct 30, 2013 11:17 am UTC

morriswalters wrote:There are about 316,000,000 people in the US. If 10000 were killed each year that would be .00003165 percent. And I don't think the rate is that high, I believe it is closer to 500. I call that a small number. About 400 or so people die of electrocution. About 400 or so die in workplace accidents. In my home town the murder rate will be about 63 this year and overall in the US the number will be 15000. And automobile accidents will kill somewhere south of 25000 people this year. And maim as many more. What I am suggesting is that we maintain a sense of proportion on the issue. If you consider that trolling then I guess it is.

The more relevant metric is innocents killed per (100,000) police officer(s). That rate appears to be significantly higher than the rate of officers killed. And to me, it's looking like the risk to the public is greater than the risk to the police.

Now, if you'll indulge me...

morriswalters wrote:Here's where I started.

Law enforcement, by definition, carries a high rate of risk, both to the public and to the officers.
...
The surprise to me is that the death rate is so low. Here are some stats from the CDC.


Perhaps if you're surprised by the low death rate you should revisit your premise of substantially higher risk.
"Comment is free, but facts are sacred" - C.P. Scott

Spambot5546
Posts: 1466
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2010 7:34 pm UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Spambot5546 » Wed Oct 30, 2013 12:59 pm UTC

davidstarlingm wrote:Relevant....

http://media.nbcbayarea.com/documents/Gelhaus_Ambush+(3).pdf
the officer who shot Andy Lopez to death wrote:Today is the day you may need to kill someone in order to go home. If you cannot turn on the “Mean Gene” for yourself, who will? If you find yourself in an ambush, in the kill zone, you need to turn on that mean gene. Taking some kind of action—any kind of action—is critical. If you shut down (physically, psychologically, or both), and stay in the kill zone, bad things will happen to you. You must take some kind of action.

I'm not trying to assassinate character here, and I'm sure this is only one of the many things that this officer has written in his lifetime. But still....

Maybe I spent too much time in the military, but that sounds pretty reasonable to me.
"It is bitter – bitter", he answered,
"But I like it
Because it is bitter,
And because it is my heart."

User avatar
davidstarlingm
Posts: 1255
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 4:33 am UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby davidstarlingm » Wed Oct 30, 2013 2:42 pm UTC

Spambot5546 wrote:
davidstarlingm wrote:Relevant....

http://media.nbcbayarea.com/documents/Gelhaus_Ambush+(3).pdf
the officer who shot Andy Lopez to death wrote:Today is the day you may need to kill someone in order to go home. If you cannot turn on the “Mean Gene” for yourself, who will? If you find yourself in an ambush, in the kill zone, you need to turn on that mean gene. Taking some kind of action—any kind of action—is critical. If you shut down (physically, psychologically, or both), and stay in the kill zone, bad things will happen to you. You must take some kind of action.

I'm not trying to assassinate character here, and I'm sure this is only one of the many things that this officer has written in his lifetime. But still....

Maybe I spent too much time in the military, but that sounds pretty reasonable to me.

It sounds perfectly reasonable if you're in a combat zone and everyone around you is a potential enemy combatant.

Treating citizens as potential enemy combatants is precisely the problem with the police force in the United States.

You know, all this debate about guns and police and firepower would be so much simpler if drugs were decriminalized and we got to see what a cartel-free and nearly-gang-free country looks like.

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby morriswalters » Wed Oct 30, 2013 3:16 pm UTC

bentheimmigrant wrote:The more relevant metric is innocents killed per (100,000) police officer(s). That rate appears to be significantly higher than the rate of officers killed. And to me, it's looking like the risk to the public is greater than the risk to the police.
I suspect, and am arguing from the viewpoint that as the death of innocents go down, the number of officers killed will rise. The first use of a weapon is a risk mitigation strategy. The faster an officer shoots the less likely he is to be shot. He has an incentive to shoot first.

The death rate among officers is not the whole picture. Any more than the death rate among workmen dealing with high voltages shows the whole picture of their risks. His total risk is related to the type of job he does. For his job the possibility of violence is much higher than yours or mine. And he shares those risks we face as well since he is a part of the general population. It is further modified by risk mitigation. Training being the primary mitigation, the use of a weapon as well as the ability to call for help and receive it are others.

The minute he puts on his gun the mindset changes. So as I said it isn't surprising that it happens. Given that they carry guns.

User avatar
Mighty Jalapeno
Inne Juste 7 Dayes I Wille Make You A Hero!
Posts: 11265
Joined: Mon May 07, 2007 9:16 pm UTC
Location: Prince George In A Can
Contact:

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Mighty Jalapeno » Wed Oct 30, 2013 3:26 pm UTC

Definitely agree. If that cop hadn't shot first, twice, at close range, after one warning, in a language the kid didn't understand, the kid might have killed the cop!

Oh, wait...

User avatar
natraj
Posts: 1895
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 10:13 pm UTC
Location: away from Omelas

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby natraj » Wed Oct 30, 2013 3:52 pm UTC

this thing kind of freaks me out because i have actually been assaulted pretty badly by a cop before because they were yelling orders at my back and i am deaf and... can't hear things people say to my back. but that's apparently license to attack; i guess i'm lucky i just got off with bruises and not a bullet.
You want to know the future, love? Then wait:
I'll answer your impatient questions. Still --
They'll call it chance, or luck, or call it Fate,
The cards and stars that tumble as they will.

pronouns: they or he

User avatar
davidstarlingm
Posts: 1255
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 4:33 am UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby davidstarlingm » Wed Oct 30, 2013 3:59 pm UTC

Mighty Jalapeno wrote:Definitely agree. If that cop hadn't shot first, twice eight times, at close range, after one warning, in a language the kid didn't understand, the kid might have killed the cop!

Oh, wait...

Corrected that for you.

I really don't understand this whole "shot first" thing. Even in the Wild West fantasy that's so often romanticized for us, the good guy wasn't supposed to shoot first. The reason we love Han Solo is because Han subverted this by shooting first.

On the topic of the Andy Lopez shooting....

I don't know how many of you have ever heard of John Piper before. Popular neocalvinist preacher and author who has started to veer into extremes even by fundamentalist standards (though for some fundamentalists he still isn't fundamentalist enough). Has a pretty big following, though.

He wrote a blog post yesterday claiming that Andy Lopez is dead because his parents were too lazy to teach him to instantly obey orders without question. Yeah. Don't click unless you want a heavy dose of victim-blaming mixed with extreme insensitivity and horrible, horrible advice. This is about as bad as it gets.
natraj wrote:this thing kind of freaks me out because i have actually been assaulted pretty badly by a cop before because they were yelling orders at my back and i am deaf and... can't hear things people say to my back. but that's apparently license to attack; i guess i'm lucky i just got off with bruises and not a bullet.

Willful deafness in the face of clear police instructions. What disrespect. /sarcasm

Just another reason why violence should not be used as a compliance tool. Curiosity (and apology if it's too personal): did anything happen to the officer who did it, or did he get off scot-free?

User avatar
natraj
Posts: 1895
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 10:13 pm UTC
Location: away from Omelas

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby natraj » Wed Oct 30, 2013 4:39 pm UTC

oh, they didn't even let me file a report much less have any actual repercussions happen to him. i did get some mild sexual harassment when i attempted though.

but i am a poor brown-skinned trans person and at the time was additionally homeless so i would not have really expected anything else.
You want to know the future, love? Then wait:
I'll answer your impatient questions. Still --
They'll call it chance, or luck, or call it Fate,
The cards and stars that tumble as they will.

pronouns: they or he

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby morriswalters » Wed Oct 30, 2013 4:40 pm UTC

Mighty Jalapeno wrote:Definitely agree. If that cop hadn't shot first, twice, at close range, after one warning, in a language the kid didn't understand, the kid might have killed the cop!

Oh, wait...

Oh, wait. I guess the point is too clear for you. The boy got shot because the public want the police to carry weapons. As long as they carry them the bias is for them to shoot first. The cure would be to disarm them. There isn't anything else that would stop it completely. Training reduces the risk, but it can't remove it.

davidstarlingm wrote:I really don't understand this whole "shot first" thing. Even in the Wild West fantasy that's so often romanticized for us, the good guy wasn't supposed to shoot first. The reason we love Han Solo is because Han subverted this by shooting first.
Let us fight, let me get in the first punch. The greater part of the time you will lose. Letting the other guy shoot first is a fairy tale.

User avatar
Mighty Jalapeno
Inne Juste 7 Dayes I Wille Make You A Hero!
Posts: 11265
Joined: Mon May 07, 2007 9:16 pm UTC
Location: Prince George In A Can
Contact:

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Mighty Jalapeno » Wed Oct 30, 2013 4:58 pm UTC

morriswalters wrote: The boy got shot because the public want the police to carry weapons.
No, he got shot because the cop wanted to shoot him. That's separate from the public wanting police to carry weapons.

morriswalters wrote:As long as they carry them the bias is for them to shoot first.
And I think that's where we're having a disconnect, because that's a truly horrifying mindset to have.

morriswalters wrote:Let us fight, let me get in the first punch. The greater part of the time you will lose. Letting the other guy shoot first is a fairy tale.
Disingenuous metaphor. In this case he was not "in a fight". He walked up, said "Hey!" and then killed the other person. That's not "a fight".

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Tyndmyr » Wed Oct 30, 2013 5:10 pm UTC

K-R wrote:http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-deputy-boy-fatally-shot-boy-holding-fake-rifle-20131028,0,5806852.story
A Sonoma County sheriff's deputy who fatally shot a boy holding a pellet gun is a firearms expert...

In his writings, Gelhaus, a 24-year veteran of the Sheriff's Office, has been a frequent advocate of a prepared, aggressive stance in law enforcement, a profession he has described as a "calling" and likened to a "contact sport," the Santa Rosa Press-Democrat reported.

He is also a firearms instructor and range master with special training in firearms safety and instruction.


Firearms expert, I doubt. The media is frigging horrible at identifying firearms experts. If I had a class on biology, and at some point, taught introductory biology to others, that does not mean I am an expert on the topic. I don't usually claim expert status on firearms, despite having done all of the above, been military, and modding and building guns from scratch. There's still a lot I don't know, despite it being a field I have some enthusiasm for.

In any case, this really isn't about his accuracy or ability to avoid accidents. The decision to pull the trigger seems quite intentional here, given, yknow, that he did it eight times. It isn't really an issue of lack of training or basic firearm competence. He did exactly what he intended to do. He shot the kid. The problem here is the intent.

davidstarlingm wrote:Relevant....

http://media.nbcbayarea.com/documents/Gelhaus_Ambush+(3).pdf
the officer who shot Andy Lopez to death wrote:Today is the day you may need to kill someone in order to go home. If you cannot turn on the “Mean Gene” for yourself, who will? If you find yourself in an ambush, in the kill zone, you need to turn on that mean gene. Taking some kind of action—any kind of action—is critical. If you shut down (physically, psychologically, or both), and stay in the kill zone, bad things will happen to you. You must take some kind of action.

I'm not trying to assassinate character here, and I'm sure this is only one of the many things that this officer has written in his lifetime. But still....


Sounds terrible. Absolutely terrible. Traditionally, self defense training, including that with a firearm, revolves around levels of alertness and awareness.
Condition White: Distracted, not alert. Reading a book, watching a movie, etc.
Condition Yellow: Reasonably alert. Paying attention to what's going on as you walk around or whatever.
Condition Orange: Specific threat appears. At this point, you pay particular attention to them and what they are doing, while keeping an eye out for other threats. You do NOT draw your weapon at this point.
Condition Red: You've gone from possible threat to imminent danger to life or limb. At this point, you draw and identify at what point you will need to shoot. It's a last resort.

I like the above chart. It's well known, and it emphasizes the need for alertness and threat analysis. It's also well known that you should NOT be walking around in condition orange all the time. Seeing everything as a threat is unhealthy as hell, and over the long term, will be damaging mentally. You adjust as the situation warrants, and think ahead to minimize the need for force.

In contrast, his seems to revolve around a mental willingness to kill.

Guess which one the USMC uses? Not the one focused on killing. Oh, sure, there's plenty of violent talk in team building stuff, but when they get to firearms training, the services all emphasize the need for alertness, the need for practicing situational escalation, and so forth. Given that the military tends to operate in more dangerous places than, yknow, cops...I can't see a good reason based on danger for arguing that cops need to be MORE aggressive than the military. Probably less, if anything.

morriswalters wrote:
Mighty Jalapeno wrote:Definitely agree. If that cop hadn't shot first, twice, at close range, after one warning, in a language the kid didn't understand, the kid might have killed the cop!

Oh, wait...

Oh, wait. I guess the point is too clear for you. The boy got shot because the public want the police to carry weapons. As long as they carry them the bias is for them to shoot first. The cure would be to disarm them. There isn't anything else that would stop it completely. Training reduces the risk, but it can't remove it.


The problem is them using violence for compliance. This remains a problem regardless of if tasers, batons, etc are used. At the core, it's an attitude problem. The rest of the world doesn't seem to have quite the same bias for shooting first, I see no reason why we should expect less of those who are ostensibly supposed to protect us.

If you have a mindset of "use violence first", you have a problem.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10547
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby CorruptUser » Wed Oct 30, 2013 5:41 pm UTC

natraj wrote:oh, they didn't even let me file a report much less have any actual repercussions happen to him. i did get some mild sexual harassment when i attempted though.

but i am a poor brown-skinned trans person and at the time was additionally homeless so i would not have really expected anything else.


Deaf, poor, brown, trans, homeless... Is it even possible to be in a more unwelcomed demographic? Overweight and atheist as well?

Spambot5546
Posts: 1466
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2010 7:34 pm UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Spambot5546 » Wed Oct 30, 2013 5:59 pm UTC

My highly religious coworkers were actually kind enough to inform me recently that us atheists actually have all the power and its the Christians who are being oppressed. Just, y'know, FYI.
"It is bitter – bitter", he answered,
"But I like it
Because it is bitter,
And because it is my heart."

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10547
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby CorruptUser » Wed Oct 30, 2013 6:16 pm UTC

Atheist is truly the most distrusted group in the US. Yes, even more than Muslims or Afro-Americans. Apparently even Gay is more acceptable than Atheist. No clue how Trans fits in there, though I would assume that's possibly the only demographic more hated than Atheist.

Although admittedly, I too would not approve of my daughter marrying a gay man.

Роберт
Posts: 4285
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 1:56 am UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Роберт » Wed Oct 30, 2013 6:35 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:Although admittedly, I too would not approve of my daughter marrying a gay man.

Haha. Presumably he'd have to be bi for you to be okay with it?
The Great Hippo wrote:[T]he way we treat suspected terrorists genuinely terrifies me.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10547
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby CorruptUser » Wed Oct 30, 2013 6:48 pm UTC

Sure, as long as my daughter knows what she's getting into and he's not sterile. Unless my daughter is also sterile, obviously.

Oddly, I'm not sure if I'd be more upset at a son in law cheating on a daughter with women or men. Sure, with men it's, umm, awkward, but I don't have to worry about him raising other kids on the side.

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby morriswalters » Wed Oct 30, 2013 6:49 pm UTC

Mighty Jalapeno wrote:No, he got shot because the cop wanted to shoot him. That's separate from the public wanting police to carry weapons.

What you have just stated is that he went there to shoot. In that case he committed murder. Try him and convict him.
Mighty Jalapeno wrote:And I think that's where we're having a disconnect, because that's a truly horrifying mindset to have.
I think so too. However it is the reality.
Mighty Jalapeno wrote:Disingenuous metaphor. In this case he was not "in a fight". He walked up, said "Hey!" and then killed the other person. That's not "a fight".
I disagree, it is exactly the metaphor. Once he starts to use the authority we have granted him the fight has effectively started. If it turns out that the person he is facing is armed and prepared to shoot he's a fool not to shoot first, and the law gives him that right. That doesn't make it right when his perception is incorrect.


Tyndmyr wrote:The problem is them using violence for compliance. This remains a problem regardless of if tasers, batons, etc are used. At the core, it's an attitude problem. The rest of the world doesn't seem to have quite the same bias for shooting first, I see no reason why we should expect less of those who are ostensibly supposed to protect us.

If you have a mindset of "use violence first", you have a problem.
I don't know about the rest of the world. I know that here the bias is built in. We have a National struggle going on over the use of guns for self protection. Is the NRA wrong? The very act of self defense with a handgun is exactly the same paradigm. Right or not, if someone invades your house, what will you do? Will you shoot first? I have managed to live my whole life without the need of any weapons. I will never shoot an innocent.

The practical fact is that their home in this case is their jurisdiction. Look at the government. They have the exact type of mindset that I am talking about. What do you think that drones do?

You can expect anything you wish. But you and everyone else have failed to define what number is acceptable. You're upset because the 13 year old was killed. But the feeling I get is that you would like to see the rate at zero. I say that it can't be done while the police carry guns. And I won't ask the police to go unarmed as long as the US in the gun capital of the planet.

User avatar
davidstarlingm
Posts: 1255
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 4:33 am UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby davidstarlingm » Wed Oct 30, 2013 6:53 pm UTC

morriswalters wrote:You can expect anything you wish. But you and everyone else have failed to define what number is acceptable. You're upset because the 13 year old was killed. But the feeling I get is that you would like to see the rate at zero. I say that it can't be done while the police carry guns. And I won't ask the police to go unarmed as long as the US in the gun capital of the planet.

I don't think the issue is the rate so much as it is the circumstances. Is it possible that no innocent child will ever be shot by police? No. If bank robbers armed with automatic weapons take a kid hostage before they open fire, it's quite possible that the kid will be struck by bullets that came from an officer's firearm. Some things are sadly unavoidable.

The thing that makes Andy Lopez's death so appalling is that everything about the situation was wrong. There were so many points where it could have gone differently, but it didn't.

Do we expect a zero rate of children shot by police? Sadly, no. Do we expect a zero rate of children shot by police under circumstances like these? Yes.

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby morriswalters » Wed Oct 30, 2013 8:20 pm UTC

I agree, for what it's worth. The circumstances stink. But the guns are always there. And innocents are going to get shot.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Tyndmyr » Wed Oct 30, 2013 8:31 pm UTC

morriswalters wrote:
Mighty Jalapeno wrote:Disingenuous metaphor. In this case he was not "in a fight". He walked up, said "Hey!" and then killed the other person. That's not "a fight".
I disagree, it is exactly the metaphor. Once he starts to use the authority we have granted him the fight has effectively started. If it turns out that the person he is facing is armed and prepared to shoot he's a fool not to shoot first, and the law gives him that right. That doesn't make it right when his perception is incorrect.


No. Not every encounter with the law is a fight, and it certainly shouldn't be that way. In this case, it should start as merely a conversation, because, even if it were a real gun, the violation isn't that big of a deal, and it's a non-violent offense.

Plus, fight implies some sort of force on both sides. A struggle, really. Shooting an unarmed kid sort of stretches that definition.

Tyndmyr wrote:The problem is them using violence for compliance. This remains a problem regardless of if tasers, batons, etc are used. At the core, it's an attitude problem. The rest of the world doesn't seem to have quite the same bias for shooting first, I see no reason why we should expect less of those who are ostensibly supposed to protect us.

If you have a mindset of "use violence first", you have a problem.
I don't know about the rest of the world. I know that here the bias is built in. We have a National struggle going on over the use of guns for self protection. Is the NRA wrong? The very act of self defense with a handgun is exactly the same paradigm. Right or not, if someone invades your house, what will you do? Will you shoot first? I have managed to live my whole life without the need of any weapons. I will never shoot an innocent.


A person breaking into your house is not an innocent. Now sure, if you can solve that situation without violence, great. The only time it's happened to me, words were enough, and if possible, words should be tried. However, it's situational. It is possible that in some cases of someone breaking into your house, the intent for harm is so clear(say, an armed gang shouting threats) that words may not be a viable option, and will open you up to increasing likelihood of harm.

However, it is your house, and they invited the confrontation by being there. It is NOT the policeman's street. It's everyone's street.

The practical fact is that their home in this case is their jurisdiction. Look at the government. They have the exact type of mindset that I am talking about. What do you think that drones do?

You can expect anything you wish. But you and everyone else have failed to define what number is acceptable. You're upset because the 13 year old was killed. But the feeling I get is that you would like to see the rate at zero. I say that it can't be done while the police carry guns. And I won't ask the police to go unarmed as long as the US in the gun capital of the planet.


Public property is not the policeman's home. This case has no probable defense, as in instances where you are shooting an intruder breaking into your home. The two are not really quite the same.

I doubt the rate of kids killed would be at zero even if the police lacked guns. This same guy, in this same situation, with a club instead, dya think he'd have used it? Probably. Do you think he would have shown restraint and only hit a little bit? Well...he fired eight bullets. I'm gonna go with no. Also, those suckers break bones. You have only to read through this thread to find other instances of police brutality where firearms were uninvolved. Removing firearms will NOT set these incidents to zero.

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby morriswalters » Wed Oct 30, 2013 9:18 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:I doubt the rate of kids killed would be at zero even if the police lacked guns. This same guy, in this same situation, with a club instead, dya think he'd have used it? Probably. Do you think he would have shown restraint and only hit a little bit? Well...he fired eight bullets. I'm gonna go with no. Also, those suckers break bones. You have only to read through this thread to find other instances of police brutality where firearms were uninvolved. Removing firearms will NOT set these incidents to zero.
The thing is this. However you say this, however you might think about it. Once they put on a gun, this is going to happen. He didn't beat the kid with a pipe, nor is it likely that he would have. That's BS and you know it. It's a distraction. It implies that he went there with murder in his mind. Nothing I read indicates that is true. If this is how you see it fine, more power to you. Just one more point. Emptying your gun is a sign of poor training.

Роберт
Posts: 4285
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 1:56 am UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Роберт » Wed Oct 30, 2013 9:21 pm UTC

I DO think guns make it easier to kill people. Do I think the kid would have gotten killed if the cops were not carrying guns? No, I don't think he would have been killed in that case.
The Great Hippo wrote:[T]he way we treat suspected terrorists genuinely terrifies me.

User avatar
davidstarlingm
Posts: 1255
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 4:33 am UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby davidstarlingm » Wed Oct 30, 2013 9:36 pm UTC

As natraj pointed out, police don't need a gun to jump an innocent person and beat them up.

User avatar
Coyne
Posts: 1109
Joined: Fri Dec 18, 2009 12:07 am UTC
Location: Orlando, Florida
Contact:

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Coyne » Thu Oct 31, 2013 2:37 am UTC

natraj wrote:oh, they didn't even let me file a report much less have any actual repercussions happen to him. i did get some mild sexual harassment when i attempted though.

but i am a poor brown-skinned trans person and at the time was additionally homeless so i would not have really expected anything else.


Even if the officer who originally accosted you was merely incompetent, this was criminal: Failure to take a report is a crime; and witness intimidation (which this was) is a crime.

This and related activities, make the police more like a criminal gang than protectors. Things like: Refusal to accept reports of abuses (above). Loss of evidence. Destruction of evidence. Sealing of evidence. Intimidation of witnesses (above). Bribery. Perjury and subornation of perjury. General obstruction of justice. "Soft" prosecution. "Soft" punishments.

So what about the death of the 13-year old? Will it be investigated? Not if the police have their way; they already wrote it off and sealed the evidence. Will the FBI do a better investigation? Maybe; after all it's a "member of the fraternity", likely to give benefit of the doubt, right? But let's assume a competent investigation: Will the police be hostile to the FBI investigation and try to hinder it? I think we can probably stipulate a yes. Will they intimidate witnesses? Probably. Lose evidence? It's truly amazing that no one seems to notice how evidence against police officers always seems to get lost, while evidence against citizens never does. Perjury? On the record, by my best judgement of the stories, it looks like the officer already perjured himself. If the FBI does decide to prosecute, will they get an indictment? (Odd how a prosecutor who can get a ham sandwich indicted, can't ever seem to get an officer indicted.) Will it be bargained down to reckless endangerment? If it does go to trial, will it be like Zimmerman's where the prosecution presented no experts to counter major theories of the defense, left major holes in its sequence of events, and basically did everything but tell the jury outright, "Okay, we've given you a reasonable doubt, now go find him innocent"? If he's convicted, will the judge give him a year, suspended?

I'm far less concerned about the individual events--even the sad and unfortunate death of a 13-year-old--than I am about the lack of accountability. Where there is no accountability, misbehavior follows as a given.
In all fairness...

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10328
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby addams » Thu Oct 31, 2013 3:42 am UTC

You are preaching to the choir, when you are writing to me.

Putting that uniform on Does seem to change the man inside.
"The clothes make the man." I don't want to believe it.

There are many things I do not want to believe.
Yes. You made some good points about evidence.

Evidence can appear and disappear. (poof)
Like Magic.

Why are these stories making it into mainstream internet?
If done correctly, very few of us would know anything happened to that woman's child.

Why do we get to know? Is it an intimidation?
Those of us that would have spoken to a uniformed Police Officer
the same way we talk to everyone else are learning to censor ourselves?

The self discipline and self control should come from both sides.
In a more perfect world our people treat all other persons well.
Police are people, we treat them well.

We are people. The words, The People, can be said in a way that will discourage wanting to meet The People..
Have you ever heard a person say, "I hate civilians." ?

I have. Those words did not come out of the mouth of a bad man.
Those words came out of the mouth of a good man. Civilians can be a pain in the ass.

A good man may bitch about civilians.
A good man may be very interested in public education.
A good man does not hurt or humiliate The People.
A good man may bitch about it.

What kinds of things can we do to earn the respect of the men in Blue?
We have been bitching about them. Now; What can we do?

I am afraid of them. I used to talk to them. They seemed so nice.
I am sure that is a Real memory. Not all of them were nice.

Some were, kind of, clueless and prejudiced. Not all.
Today that is the way to bet. Why? Cultural indoctrination from birth to TV to internet to viedio games?
Extra special training in Killing the Soft Animal Self Within, so that Killing the Soft Animal Other is easier?

What is your job? Protecting the uniform you wear?
What can The People, that is me, do to be not a target of petty Homeland Security bullshit.
I often think a clean shot to the head would be kinder. But; If that 13 year old was real; His mother is suffering.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Thesh and 9 guests