Police misbehavior thread

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

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10550
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby CorruptUser » Fri Oct 25, 2013 2:54 pm UTC

Politicians, real estate brokers, slumlords, repo-men, taxmen.

Also teachers.

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

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Red Hal » Fri Oct 25, 2013 3:00 pm UTC

davidstarlingm wrote:The timeline released by the sheriff's office indicates that fewer than ten seconds passed between the officers' first report of a suspicious person and the last shot being fired. Assuming that the deputy was able to fire two rounds per second, and it took at least four seconds to stop the car, get out, and take a "defensive" stance, that leaves less than two seconds for the officer to shout at him.

There's no way to describe this as anything other than a drive-up shooting. The boy was gunned down before he had a chance to do or say anything, just like the eyewitnesses said.
What I am about to say may be considered old-fashioned, even archaic.

For shame.
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
Red Hal
Magically Delicious
Posts: 1445
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2007 2:42 pm UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Red Hal » Fri Oct 25, 2013 3:03 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:Politicians, real estate brokers, slumlords, repo-men, taxmen.

Also teachers.
The current rate for teachers is one every 24 hours.
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..."

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

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby morriswalters » Fri Oct 25, 2013 3:36 pm UTC

davidstarlingm wrote:
morriswalters wrote:How many jobs in the civilian sector have a risk of death by gunfire related directly to their jobs?

Convenience store clerks, bank tellers, bartenders, liquor store cashiers, pawn shop employees, armored car drivers, security guards, pizza delivery drivers.

Your being slightly disingenuous. The violence faced by the general public is unrelated to their primary activity. We create Police forces so that we may go about our daily business with giving the thought of violence much concern, but at no time can any system make that risk disappear. Police jobs relate directly to crime and potentially violent people. Every contact with the public can and sometimes does end in gunfire. If say 60, are killed by guns, and considering the accuracy obtained in most violent exchanges, how many times will they, as a whole, will they have gunfire directed at them?

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 » Fri Oct 25, 2013 4:28 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:That number doesn't include those killed while off duty. The 3 per 100,000 is for all day every day, not 8 hrs during second shift M-F. Not to mention that police officers tend to be larger and healthier than the general public, meaning more likely to survive a gunshot.

That still doesn't add up to entering a situation assuming people are going to shoot you, which appears to be what morriswalters is advocating.

However, a more useful statistic would be unarmed people shot by police per 100,000 police officers...

morriswalters wrote:Your being slightly disingenuous.

How is that disingenuous? Are you saying they don't have a higher risk? Have they not willingly chosen to face that risk? You asked a poorly thought out rhetorical question.
"Comment is free, but facts are sacred" - C.P. Scott

User avatar
Diadem
Posts: 5654
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 11:03 am UTC
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Diadem » Fri Oct 25, 2013 4:35 pm UTC

What I'm missing from this story: Why did that cop even stop that kid? If carrying a weapon is legal, why stop people who are carrying a weapon? Was he responding to a report of a crime in the neighborhood? If there had just been a shooting incident 15 minutes earlier this cop's actions become a lot more understandable. Still wrong, obviously, but at least it the cop's initial paranoia would be somewhat understandable.

I'm reminded of a recent case in The Netherlands, where cops were responding to a report about someone threatening someone else with a gun. When they arrived on the scene they found someone matching the description given, and approached him with guns drawn, ordering him to stand still and show his hands. Instead, the guy ran away, and after a brief pursuit one officer fired a single shot, hitting the suspect in the neck and killing him. Surveillance footage confirmed the story told by police. In The Netherlands conditions under which police may fire at suspects are pretty strict. They are allowed to shoot a fleeing suspect if that suspect is a potential danger to others, but they are supposed to shoot at the feet. The officer claimed he did this, and there is no reason to doubt that statement, but he shot while running, instead of taking careful aim first, and the DA at least considered that an egregious enough error to charge the officer with manslaughter. As far as I know no verdict has yet been reached in this case, so I can't say how it ends, but regardless of how it ends, the contrast with the US is rather stark.
It's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it? I have an independent mind, you are an eccentric, he is round the twist
- Bernard Woolley in Yes, Prime Minister

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

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Роберт » Fri Oct 25, 2013 4:38 pm UTC

morriswalters wrote:Your being slightly disingenuous. The violence faced by the general public is unrelated to their primary activity.

The primary activity of Police is not shooting and being shot at. In the UK cops don't even carry guns by default.

@Diadem: that's definitely not something I would expect to hear in the U.S.
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 » Fri Oct 25, 2013 4:44 pm UTC

morriswalters wrote:
davidstarlingm wrote:
morriswalters wrote:How many jobs in the civilian sector have a risk of death by gunfire related directly to their jobs?

Convenience store clerks, bank tellers, bartenders, liquor store cashiers, pawn shop employees, armored car drivers, security guards, pizza delivery drivers.

Your being slightly disingenuous. The violence faced by the general public is unrelated to their primary activity. We create Police forces so that we may go about our daily business with giving the thought of violence much concern, but at no time can any system make that risk disappear. Police jobs relate directly to crime and potentially violent people. Every contact with the public can and sometimes does end in gunfire. If say 60, are killed by guns, and considering the accuracy obtained in most violent exchanges, how many times will they, as a whole, will they have gunfire directed at them?

I think there are probably too many unknowns to estimate that based solely on the figures you provided. :)

I dug up some statistics that said the average time-on-the-force for a Portland police officer to be involved in a fatal shooting is 193 years (that is, most officers never are).

But this is beside the point. The point is improper threat assessment and disproportionate response, resulting in gross overuse of lethal force.

Diadem wrote:What I'm missing from this story: Why did that cop even stop that kid? If carrying a weapon is legal, why stop people who are carrying a weapon?

My initial statement was inaccurate; California made open carry of rifles illegal last year. So the cop will surely claim that the appearance of a weapon constituted probable cause that the kid was committing a crime. Even so, the fact that this is a law which has only been in place for a year ought to produce a little more caution. Even if it had been illegal for many years, you don't pull up and start firing right away.

Even if open carry was legal, I can certainly understand why a police officer might want to stop and ask questions. The cop wouldn't have the right to demand ID, and the individual wouldn't necessarily be required to answer the questions, but it's still a reasonable precaution. But treating a kid with a toy gun as an active shooter situation (pull up, jump out, draw weapon, prepare to unload massive quantities of ammunition) is just wrong.

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

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby morriswalters » Fri Oct 25, 2013 5:49 pm UTC

davidstarlingm wrote:But this is beside the point. The point is improper threat assessment and disproportionate response, resulting in gross overuse of lethal force.
I agree, however it is rare.

bentheimmigrant wrote:How is that disingenuous? Are you saying they don't have a higher risk? Have they not willingly chosen to face that risk? You asked a poorly thought out rhetorical question.
I doubt the average convenience store clerk goes to work thinking he will have a shootout. He doesn't strap on a gun. The mindset of an officer has to be different or at least is different. The point was that if officers carry guns than this will happen.

Some data from the FBI's Uniform Crime Reports
Victim profile

The average age of the officers who were feloniously killed in 2011 was 38 years old.
The slain officers’ average length of law enforcement service was 12 years.
Of the 72 officers slain in 2011, 69 were male, and 3 were female.
By race, 68 of the victim officers were white, 3 were black, and 1 was American Indian/Alaskan Native.

More information about these topics is provided in Tables 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11.
Circumstances

23 officers were killed during arrest situations.
15 officers died in ambush situations.
11 officers were slain during traffic pursuits or stops.
9 officers were killed during tactical situations (barricaded offender, hostage taking, high-risk entry, etc.).
7 officers were murdered answering disturbance calls.
5 officers were slain while investigating suspicious persons or circumstances.
1 officer was killed while conducting investigative activity (surveillance, search, interview, etc.).
1 officer was killed while transporting or maintaining custody of a prisoner.

I don't think the pizza guy gets his like this. And while we are at it. How about assaults from the same source.
Overview

In 2011, the FBI collected assault data from 11,944 law enforcement agencies that employed 535,651 officers. These officers provided service to more than 251 million persons, or 80.6 percent of the nation’s population. (Based on Table 65.)
Law enforcement agencies reported that 54,774 officers were assaulted while performing their duties in 2011.
The rate of officer assaults in 2011 was 10.2 per 100 sworn officers.

More information about these topics is provided in Tables 65, 66, 70, and 71.
Injuries

26.6 percent of the officers assaulted sustained injuries.
28.5 percent of the officers who were attacked with personal weapons (e.g., hands, fists, or feet) suffered injuries.
15.7 percent of the officers who were assaulted with knives or other cutting instruments were injured.
9.4 percent of officers who were attacked with firearms were injured.
22.3 percent of officers who were attacked with other dangerous weapons were injured.

More information about this topic is provided in Tables 65, 66, and 70.
Times of incidents

For the thirteenth consecutive year, the largest percentage of assaults on officers (15.3 percent) happened from 12:01 a.m. to 2 a.m.
The smallest percentage of assaults on officers (2.6 percent) occurred between 6:01 a.m. and 8 a.m.

More information about this topic is provided in Table 67.
Circumstances

Of all officers who were assaulted in 2011:

33.3 percent were responding to disturbance calls (family quarrels, bar fights, etc.).
14.7 percent of the officers assaulted were attempting other arrests.
12.6 percent of the officers assaulted were handling or transporting prisoners.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10550
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby CorruptUser » Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:23 pm UTC

Slumlords do. Many slumlords bring a gun with them when collecting rent.

What, you think that every person living in a slum is an innocent sob story? Sometimes in the shitholes, there'll be pieces if shit.

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 » Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:41 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:What, you think that every person living in a slum is an innocent sob story? Sometimes in the shitholes, there'll be pieces if shit.

Along the same lines, you think every person working as a cop is a sensible, empathetic person?

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10550
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby CorruptUser » Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:56 pm UTC

Mighty Jalapeno wrote:
CorruptUser wrote:What, you think that every person living in a slum is an innocent sob story? Sometimes in the shitholes, there'll be pieces if shit.

Along the same lines, you think every person working as a cop is a sensible, empathetic person?



Ahahaahaha Nuuuuuuuuuu......

Many of them are little more than thugs with guns. One of my neighbors was one of those, in a goodish way. He had the best stories though. Two bullet wounds, though don't tell his parents. If he would wear the vest and wasn't so reckless, it'd be none...

Also, practically every firefighter is a pyromaniac.

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

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Tyndmyr » Fri Oct 25, 2013 7:02 pm UTC

morriswalters wrote:
davidstarlingm wrote:
morriswalters wrote:How many jobs in the civilian sector have a risk of death by gunfire related directly to their jobs?

Convenience store clerks, bank tellers, bartenders, liquor store cashiers, pawn shop employees, armored car drivers, security guards, pizza delivery drivers.

Your being slightly disingenuous. The violence faced by the general public is unrelated to their primary activity. We create Police forces so that we may go about our daily business with giving the thought of violence much concern, but at no time can any system make that risk disappear. Police jobs relate directly to crime and potentially violent people. Every contact with the public can and sometimes does end in gunfire. If say 60, are killed by guns, and considering the accuracy obtained in most violent exchanges, how many times will they, as a whole, will they have gunfire directed at them?


Risk is risk, regardless of cause. The purpose of the job does not enter into it.

Also, "every contact with the public can and sometimes does end in gunfire" is a ridiculously pessimistic view. People of all sorts, including police, engage in gunfire as a result of contact extremely rarely. Most people manage to get through their day, cop or not, without shooting at anybody.

morriswalters wrote:How many jobs in the civilian sector have a risk of death by gunfire related directly to their jobs? This fear doesn't give them a reason to shoot children, but it does give them reason to fear being shot. The risk to a child is greater from other children and from themselves when firearms are concerned. The police aren't killing mass numbers of children. It's senseless for the child who died to be shot by police. But as long as police carry guns the risk will exist.


Fear alone isn't a justification. If you have a fear of something ridiculously unlikely to the level that you whip out a gun and shoot kids, you have a problem.

The issue isn't the gun. The issue is the officer who reacted out of fear instead of logic and proper training. It would have also been inappropriate for him to taser, mace, strike, etc the child, would it not? The job is not sufficiently dangerous to justify this level of reaction.

Shit, cars kill more cops than guns. If you're worried about their safety, why not look at that aspect instead of excusing the police policy of armed escalation over the slightest thing? Why so much worry about being shot? There is always SOME risk in society, but when it is extremely small, it certainly doesn't excuse paranoid/sociopathic behavior.

What we need is a return to Peelian policing tradition, in which police are seen as part of the community, and not special, privileged, or apart from it. When cops are viewing the general public as a threat, an enemy, and the other police are seen as the friendly tribe, you're going to get terrible behavior. Humans instinctively work on tribe like behavior, and we don't really do well at treating others like our in-group in factionalized environments.

Diadem wrote:What I'm missing from this story: Why did that cop even stop that kid? If carrying a weapon is legal, why stop people who are carrying a weapon? Was he responding to a report of a crime in the neighborhood? If there had just been a shooting incident 15 minutes earlier this cop's actions become a lot more understandable. Still wrong, obviously, but at least it the cop's initial paranoia would be somewhat understandable.


*shrug* Maybe he looked like the "wrong sort" of person to be carrying a gun, I dunno. People are stupid sometimes. There wasn't any clear need for the stop, and even if so, the manner of the stop was kind of ridiculous. Even if the possibility of a toy hasn't crossed your mind, you should be trying to find the least violent way to solve the situation. That probably isn't "fire all the bullets after leaping from the car".

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

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby davidstarlingm » Fri Oct 25, 2013 7:15 pm UTC

morriswalters wrote:
davidstarlingm wrote:But this is beside the point. The point is improper threat assessment and disproportionate response, resulting in gross overuse of lethal force.
I agree, however it is rare.

Obviously not rare enough.

Tyndmyr wrote:Maybe he looked like the "wrong sort" of person to be carrying a gun, I dunno.

Well, he was wearing a hoodie.

There wasn't any clear need for the stop....

Well, to be fair, it's not legal to carry a rifle on a public road in California (though this is absolutely asinine), so a stop is understandable. But you're right that the response was completely messed up.

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

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby morriswalters » Fri Oct 25, 2013 7:44 pm UTC

davidstarlingm wrote:Obviously not rare enough.
Rare is a function of your expectations. The chances of being killed by a cop are pretty small.
Tyndmyr wrote:Risk is risk, regardless of cause. The purpose of the job does not enter into it.
Okay.

stevey_frac
Posts: 947
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 10:27 pm UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby stevey_frac » Fri Oct 25, 2013 7:47 pm UTC

Well, to be fair, it's not legal to carry a rifle on a public road in California (though this is absolutely asinine), so a stop is understandable. But you're right that the response was completely messed up.


Are you absolutely sure of this? If true, that would be kind of rediculous for legitimate, legal gun owners. For instance, if you owned a gun, and you had to park on the street, there would be no legal way for you to take your gun to your car so you could go shoot at a range.

I know in Canada, it's perfectly legal to care a long gun down the street so long as it is not concealed, and not pointed at anyone, and not loaded.

In any case... even if he was carrying, the cops first response should not be (I'm going to shoot this guy to hell). His first response should have been to back off, call for backup, and follow the person in question in case he/she threatened others. You never want to put a person in a situation where they have no good options... Oddly enough, when presented with a series of bad choices, they'll make bad choices...

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

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby davidstarlingm » Fri Oct 25, 2013 8:04 pm UTC

morriswalters wrote:
davidstarlingm wrote:Obviously not rare enough.
Rare is a function of your expectations. The chances of being killed by a cop are pretty small.

If a 13-year-old kid gets shot for no reason, it is not rare enough.

stevey_frac wrote:
Well, to be fair, it's not legal to carry a rifle on a public road in California (though this is absolutely asinine), so a stop is understandable. But you're right that the response was completely messed up.

Are you absolutely sure of this? If true, that would be kind of rediculous for legitimate, legal gun owners. For instance, if you owned a gun, and you had to park on the street, there would be no legal way for you to take your gun to your car so you could go shoot at a range.

I know in Canada, it's perfectly legal to care a long gun down the street so long as it is not concealed, and not pointed at anyone, and not loaded.

Yes, I'm certain. California outlawed open carry of handguns in 2011 and open carry of rifles and shotguns in 2012. California is rather bad about this. It's a completely asinine law because there is practically no way it can decrease the incidence of violence. A person who wishes to commit a crime is not going to be parading their firearm in the open to begin with.

Canada (and almost every US state) is far better than California in this regard.

With respect to your example, I think it's expected that a person would use a gun case to carry their gun to their car, or disassemble it.

In any case... even if he was carrying, the cops first response should not be (I'm going to shoot this guy to hell). His first response should have been to back off, call for backup, and follow the person in question in case he/she threatened others.

If police are trained to instigate violence, we should not be surprised when they instigate violence. We should, however, insist that they not instigate violence.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10550
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby CorruptUser » Fri Oct 25, 2013 8:21 pm UTC

California is so terrible in so many ways in part because what I fear to be true. That the demand for an extremely high burden of proof but the inability for that society to pay for said burden of proof results in pressure on the police to find a cheaper alternative to the court system.

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

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Tyndmyr » Fri Oct 25, 2013 8:52 pm UTC

davidstarlingm wrote:
stevey_frac wrote:
Well, to be fair, it's not legal to carry a rifle on a public road in California (though this is absolutely asinine), so a stop is understandable. But you're right that the response was completely messed up.

Are you absolutely sure of this? If true, that would be kind of rediculous for legitimate, legal gun owners. For instance, if you owned a gun, and you had to park on the street, there would be no legal way for you to take your gun to your car so you could go shoot at a range.

I know in Canada, it's perfectly legal to care a long gun down the street so long as it is not concealed, and not pointed at anyone, and not loaded.

Yes, I'm certain. California outlawed open carry of handguns in 2011 and open carry of rifles and shotguns in 2012. California is rather bad about this. It's a completely asinine law because there is practically no way it can decrease the incidence of violence. A person who wishes to commit a crime is not going to be parading their firearm in the open to begin with.

Canada (and almost every US state) is far better than California in this regard.

With respect to your example, I think it's expected that a person would use a gun case to carry their gun to their car, or disassemble it.


Casing a gun is pretty common, but disassembling it to go to the range and reassembling it there sounds like a hassle.

But yeah, even if casing is customary, and even if it were a real gun instead of a toy, that's a "this kid didn't case his gun, lets chat with him a bit" scenario. Make sure he knows what the law is, talk to his parents if he's causing trouble, etc. Nobody dies from that, and really, it doesn't put cops in danger, because this wasn't dangerous to begin with. "kids" is a range of people. Yeah, some of them are violent, but the younger they are, generally the less of an issue that is. 13yr old's bent on murdering cops with guns are incredibly rare. 13yr olds that maybe don't know a law, or are playing with a gun-like toy...pretty common.

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

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby davidstarlingm » Fri Oct 25, 2013 8:56 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:Even if casing is customary, and even if it were a real gun instead of a toy, that's a "this kid didn't case his gun, lets chat with him a bit" scenario. Make sure he knows what the law is, talk to his parents if he's causing trouble, etc. Nobody dies from that, and really, it doesn't put cops in danger, because this wasn't dangerous to begin with. "kids" is a range of people. Yeah, some of them are violent, but the younger they are, generally the less of an issue that is. 13yr old's bent on murdering cops with guns are incredibly rare. 13yr olds that maybe don't know a law, or are playing with a gun-like toy...pretty common.

The police, naturally, claim that he was tall for a 13-year-old and wore a hoodie, so they assumed he was an adult with a real AK47.

Which still doesn't help them. Even if you see a grown man walking down the street with what you assume to be a weapon, pulling up behind him, shouting, and opening fire two seconds later is still murder.

stevey_frac
Posts: 947
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 10:27 pm UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby stevey_frac » Fri Oct 25, 2013 9:46 pm UTC

davidstarlingm wrote:Yes, I'm certain. California outlawed open carry of handguns in 2011 and open carry of rifles and shotguns in 2012. California is rather bad about this. It's a completely asinine law because there is practically no way it can decrease the incidence of violence. A person who wishes to commit a crime is not going to be parading their firearm in the open to begin with.

Canada (and almost every US state) is far better than California in this regard.

With respect to your example, I think it's expected that a person would use a gun case to carry their gun to their car, or disassemble it.

If police are trained to instigate violence, we should not be surprised when they instigate violence. We should, however, insist that they not instigate violence.


See, once again, in Canada... Technically, casing the gun would mean carrying a concealed firearm... Not that anyone would ever get charged with that, but it meets the definition under the law.

Firearms law is just generally screwed in North America. There is pretty no way to be in perfect compliance with all the associated hunting and firearm laws. And even if you are, the cops don't actually know what the laws are, so you can get charged, and have to go through a years long expensive court process anyway.

</rant>

In any case, cops shouldn't (aren't??) be trained to instigate violence... They should be trying to slow and control the situation. I seriously think cops are a necessary evil at this point.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10338
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby addams » Sat Oct 26, 2013 1:45 am UTC

There was a day dream that came true on some days.
It could come true, again.

That day dream?
The Police are our friends.

They are nice. They are smart and went to school and know things.
The Police can tell you about many things. The Police are the people to turn to for anything.

They know where the Chinese Restaurant is.
They know what chemical makes green and what chemical makes orange.

Anyone can turn to one of those guys to settle any argument.
What is stronger a 425 Corvet or a F 450? Faster?

When will the moon rise? When is sunset?
They all have Tide Tables in their pockets.

The line to talk to one looks like Santa is in town.
We are proud of them and we don't let them down.

That is a Good DayDream. Of course, even in my DayDreams there are problems.
Little kids still pee on Santa's lap. Those little problems give the rest of us an opportunity to shine.

Get the kid. Help arrange for back up and a replacement officer. Laugh at him.
Someone must notice and laugh. That is an important function for civil people, too.

The person that laughs draws fire from the Spoil Sports.
It is good to label people sometimes. What are you such a spoil sport, about?

Do you need a nap?

We all know we have a problem. We have a Police problem.
Are we addicted to them. Often when people say, "I have a problem with this or that.", it is an addiction.
Are we addicted? To what? The Entertainment of Outrage?

There are other forms of Entertainment.
Are you afraid of men in blue? Really. Are you?

When did you last see one? How was that for you?
If you were a little child, would you want to be one of those?

It looks like a good jig. Right?
If you are not Police, why not?

Is the school too hard?
Are the physical requirements to tough?
Is it too much time in training for the money?
Can you pass the background check?

Why are you not Police?
If we are going to consider the professional lives of our employees, how should we do it?

Should we not take it personally?
Is it professional? Then we as citizens should be professional about it.

We may be doing it wrong. Why are You not a Police?
I will submit a Ten Point explanation in ten minutes, upon request.
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.

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

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby morriswalters » Sat Oct 26, 2013 1:47 am UTC

davidstarlingm wrote:If a 13-year-old kid gets shot for no reason, it is not rare enough.
Senseless death is always insane. Should the 13 year old have died. No. Tell the hundreds of others who get shot and killed each year, by family and friends. All of them just as senseless and all of them just as painful. The process will work its way through this. I trust the process.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10338
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby addams » Sat Oct 26, 2013 2:44 am UTC

morriswalters wrote:
davidstarlingm wrote:If a 13-year-old kid gets shot for no reason, it is not rare enough.
Senseless death is always insane. Should the 13 year old have died. No. Tell the hundreds of others who get shot and killed each year, by family and friends. All of them just as senseless and all of them just as painful. The process will work its way through this. I trust the process.

I don't.
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.

curtis95112
Posts: 639
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2011 5:23 pm UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby curtis95112 » Sat Oct 26, 2013 4:53 am UTC

addams wrote:
morriswalters wrote:
davidstarlingm wrote:If a 13-year-old kid gets shot for no reason, it is not rare enough.
Senseless death is always insane. Should the 13 year old have died. No. Tell the hundreds of others who get shot and killed each year, by family and friends. All of them just as senseless and all of them just as painful. The process will work its way through this. I trust the process.

I don't.


Seconded.
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.

Nordic Einar
Posts: 783
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 7:21 am UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Nordic Einar » Sat Oct 26, 2013 5:24 am UTC

morriswalters wrote:
davidstarlingm wrote:Obviously not rare enough.
Rare is a function of your expectations. The chances of being killed by a cop are pretty small.


If you're white, sure. Or middle class. Or non-queer.

curtis95112 wrote:
addams wrote:
morriswalters wrote:
davidstarlingm wrote:If a 13-year-old kid gets shot for no reason, it is not rare enough.
Senseless death is always insane. Should the 13 year old have died. No. Tell the hundreds of others who get shot and killed each year, by family and friends. All of them just as senseless and all of them just as painful. The process will work its way through this. I trust the process.

I don't.


Seconded.


You have to be willfully blind to trust the justice system of the USA.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10338
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby addams » Sat Oct 26, 2013 6:38 am UTC

Nordic Einar wrote:
morriswalters wrote:
davidstarlingm wrote:Obviously not rare enough.
Rare is a function of your expectations. The chances of being killed by a cop are pretty small.


If you're white, sure. Or middle class. Or non-queer.

curtis95112 wrote:
addams wrote:
morriswalters wrote:
davidstarlingm wrote:If a 13-year-old kid gets shot for no reason, it is not rare enough.
Senseless death is always insane. Should the 13 year old have died. No. Tell the hundreds of others who get shot and killed each year, by family and friends. All of them just as senseless and all of them just as painful. The process will work its way through this. I trust the process.

I don't.


Seconded.


You have to be willfully blind to trust the justice system of the USA.

White is not a Free Pass.
Middle Class will take you away from some of the worse of it.
Gay is a big mark in a person's favor!

If Gay is tastefully combined with Educated Middle to Upper Class it is not a strike against a person.
Is it? Really?

I have never seen it work against a person. Have you?
No! Do not slam me with Links. Do you ever go to court?

I do. One thing leads to another. I have been there because I was a guest of honor.
That was weird. I have also been in court to support others and as it turns out for the entertainment.

Some of the stuff I have seen and heard! well; It seems you would believe it.
Off Topic:
Spoiler:
My last few times in court taught me, court can be boring.
Sometimes I can not hear what is being said. Sometimes I miss juicy stuff.

The last time I went, (oh god, it is not nice to enjoy the suffering of others.)
But; It was so funny. Not to the man that had to stand there.
The rest of us were having a wonderful time.

I take notes. The charge was "Attempted Public Indecency" Attempted!?
That will get a person's attention. Attempted? Indecency?
Every ear in the room swung around and stood up.

Mooning was my first thought. I looked at the man and thought, "You are too old to be Mooning."
Well; As it turned out; It was not Mooning.

I think the punishment was too harsh.
He was convicted of nearly having sex with a Tammy.

It was 2 a.m. in a small town. They were outside. Two adults were interested in each other and nothing else.
Both had been drinking. Both were walking home. Both were arrested. They attempted to be indecent.

So wrong. It makes me wonder about the Police.
The Police don't have enough to do? At least they did not shoot the nearly indecent.

The Judge called an intermission.
I spoke to a lovely young woman that is living those strange months between Law School and The Bar.

She wanted to talk about that case. Who among us could not have been arrested for such a thing?
If you have not run that risk; Get Busy. You only have 75-80 years.

The poor man. The judge was harsh. The Police were in the room and they don't like the judge to be too easy on people.
The judge did a good job of disrupting that man's life. The poor man.

The Woman got 90 days in jail. (fuck)
It seems she is serially indecent. She did it before.

I am as much a prude as anyone.
But; At 2 a.m., if you are awake, you have seen worse.
Or; you are too tired to care.
Or; you are too young and/or naive to know what you are looking at.

Sure. The Police knew what they were looking at. still.
It is sad. It is funny. It does not have to be this way.

I think the judges are often not interested in The People.
I can't blame them. Yet; When I see a judge really engage with The People it is nice.

I saw that one time. The judge seemed to know and understand and care about how helpless the people were.
The nearly indecent man was not lucky in Judges.

Attempted Indecency. That is still funny. To me. The little attorney going to be laughed, too.
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.

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

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby morriswalters » Sat Oct 26, 2013 10:24 am UTC

addams wrote:
morriswalters wrote:
davidstarlingm wrote:If a 13-year-old kid gets shot for no reason, it is not rare enough.
Senseless death is always insane. Should the 13 year old have died. No. Tell the hundreds of others who get shot and killed each year, by family and friends. All of them just as senseless and all of them just as painful. The process will work its way through this. I trust the process.

I don't.
I'm sorry for you. For the vast majority of the things it does, it works pretty well. For a country with as much diversity and as many people it does exceptionally well. We could be more like some European countries, small. But it seems that they have there racial problems as well, police scandals, and justice gone awry.

edit

Something I was reading this morning. The FBI will investigate the shooting. And this article from Time magazine, with a quote.

The Department of Justice says the federal government doesn’t keep ongoing statistics on the trend, but in a 1990 paper funded by the Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. police reported that they had used or threatened to use force “in a confrontation where an imitation gun had been mistaken for a real firearm” at a rate of about 200 incidents per year. The paper’s authors suggested that this number was “significantly underreported.” A series of toy gun-related deaths in the late 80s helped pass a federal amendment, sponsored by Republican Sen. Bob Dole, that requires all toy, “look-alike,” or imitation firearms to have a bright orange plug or other salient marking. But manufacturers don’t always adhere to required standards and markings can be altered, according to law enforcement.

curtis95112
Posts: 639
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2011 5:23 pm UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby curtis95112 » Sat Oct 26, 2013 11:21 am UTC

Yes, the US does the vast majority of things pretty well. Which isn't saying much considering how rich it is. This thread is about the small part that's being atrociously handled.
And you should know you have a weak case if "other countries have problems too" is the best defense you can come up with.

The process doesn't work when it comes to police misbehavior. It's kind of a recurring theme here, if you haven't noticed.
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 » Sat Oct 26, 2013 12:08 pm UTC

Define your idea of working.

I'll clarify. Every shooting is a tragedy. Do you believe this is a case of wanton or willful behavior? Did the officer set out to shoot and kill an unarmed 13 year old? Do you have some reason to believe that these officers were sociopaths or psychopaths, devoid of emotion and the ability to feel remorse. You can't, as a member of society, arm these men and give them the right to use deadly force, and to risk the use of deadly force against them, and not have an expectation that this type of thing will not happen. If you believe so you are a fool. I have seen cops who were abusive, racist, and otherwise cruel and unjust. These cops may be described best as under trained and therefore, trigger happy. There was no intent, or desire to do something like this. No reason for them to want a dead 13 year old bleeding to death on the ground in front of them.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10550
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby CorruptUser » Sat Oct 26, 2013 2:29 pm UTC

curtis95112 wrote:Yes, the US does the vast majority of things pretty well. Which isn't saying much considering how rich it is.


Plenty of nations have a greater wealth of natural resources than the United States, yet are dirt poor. Nations don't do things well because they are rich, they are rich because they do things well. Singapore doesn't have any resources to speak of, yet is one of the richest nations with the lowest infant mortality and the highest life expectancy. "Democratic Republic" of Congo has a huge wealth of rubber, diamonds, oil, bauxite, etc etc, yet is one of the few countries that make North Korea look good.

Overall, the police force gets the majority of what they do right. But there are parts where it is failing. Sure, in some ways it's improved significantly since 50's America, but in other ways, it's getting much worse.

We have a bloated prison system which manufactures its own demand. The private prison system has long ago discovered that recidivism = profit, so there is absolutely no incentive to reform criminals. We are spending $100B a year just on prisons, money we will never get back. And the people that truly made a stupid childish mistake, who want to just put the horrid parts of their life behind them and do something with their life? Ha! Good luck doing anything beyond fast food! Did you know that if you hire someone with a violent past, even if the only evidence was something done decades ago, and on the job the person assaults someone, you may be held financially liable for 'not doing due diligence in screening employees'? This is a huge huge problem longterm, not just as a cost, not just as a quality of life for ex-criminals, but as total to our economy. How many quality plumbers and mechanics and nurses are we throwing away, simply because The System declares someone to be a criminal, and then if you hire a criminal The System will then punish you.

User avatar
KrO2
Posts: 236
Joined: Mon Sep 20, 2010 9:35 pm UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby KrO2 » Sun Oct 27, 2013 2:35 am UTC

morriswalters wrote:Define your idea of working.

I'll clarify. Every shooting is a tragedy. Do you believe this is a case of wanton or willful behavior? Did the officer set out to shoot and kill an unarmed 13 year old? Do you have some reason to believe that these officers were sociopaths or psychopaths, devoid of emotion and the ability to feel remorse. You can't, as a member of society, arm these men and give them the right to use deadly force, and to risk the use of deadly force against them, and not have an expectation that this type of thing will not happen. If you believe so you are a fool. I have seen cops who were abusive, racist, and otherwise cruel and unjust. These cops may be described best as under trained and therefore, trigger happy. There was no intent, or desire to do something like this. No reason for them to want a dead 13 year old bleeding to death on the ground in front of them.

I would accept some nonzero number of dead 13-year-olds in exchange for giving an effective and trustworthy police the ability to use deadly force, if that were the trade off being made. But it's not. These aren't isolated incidents of good cops making mistakes; they're instances of police being trained that whatever they do to the general public, they'll get away with it. That's probably not in any police training manual, but a police officer has loads of power over you and little accountability. I'm sure you'll agree that police shooting innocent people happens too often. If we make them less willing or able to shoot people, it will result in fewer shootings, both when that's good and when that's bad. I happen to think type I errors in this case are, like, way worse than type II. Do you disagree?

Let's clarify what you mean by trusting the system. Will this officer be convicted of manslaughter? Will he even be charged? Five bucks says he won't. If you look back at this incident after everything settles down, will you be satisfied with the lack of consequences? Of course, answering that would depend on finding out what happened to this particular shooter, when nobody will be reporting on it because they'll be talking about the latest story about a cop killing someone who didn't need killing. This one will be lost in the flood of stories about exactly that.

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

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Tyndmyr » Sun Oct 27, 2013 3:07 am UTC

addams wrote:
morriswalters wrote:
davidstarlingm wrote:If a 13-year-old kid gets shot for no reason, it is not rare enough.
Senseless death is always insane. Should the 13 year old have died. No. Tell the hundreds of others who get shot and killed each year, by family and friends. All of them just as senseless and all of them just as painful. The process will work its way through this. I trust the process.

I don't.


Agreed. It's imperfect, and while the justice system works right more often than not, cases involving the police seem particularly likely for the cop to get off with minor punishment if anything.

So no, I don't trust it.

morriswalters wrote:Define your idea of working.

I'll clarify. Every shooting is a tragedy. Do you believe this is a case of wanton or willful behavior? Did the officer set out to shoot and kill an unarmed 13 year old? Do you have some reason to believe that these officers were sociopaths or psychopaths, devoid of emotion and the ability to feel remorse. You can't, as a member of society, arm these men and give them the right to use deadly force, and to risk the use of deadly force against them, and not have an expectation that this type of thing will not happen. If you believe so you are a fool. I have seen cops who were abusive, racist, and otherwise cruel and unjust. These cops may be described best as under trained and therefore, trigger happy. There was no intent, or desire to do something like this. No reason for them to want a dead 13 year old bleeding to death on the ground in front of them.


The view that cops have a special right to use violence is part of the problem. If I did as they did, they wouldn't be giving me quite the same courtesies. I'd be in jail, and murder charges would already have been brought. This is correct and just. The problem is the idea that cops deserve extra defence even in cases of lost lives.

The trigger happy nature cannot be simply assigned to a lack of training. Private gun owners are vastly larger in number, many of them have a lack of training, yet we don't see them shooting up kids with toys. Sure, training is good, but the kids shot with toys problem is almost exclusive to cops. That indicates an additional problem. In this case, likely the aggressive attitude.

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

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby morriswalters » Sun Oct 27, 2013 3:31 am UTC

KrO2 wrote:Let's clarify what you mean by trusting the system. Will this officer be convicted of manslaughter? Will he even be charged? Five bucks says he won't. If you look back at this incident after everything settles down, will you be satisfied with the lack of consequences? Of course, answering that would depend on finding out what happened to this particular shooter, when nobody will be reporting on it because they'll be talking about the latest story about a cop killing someone who didn't need killing. This one will be lost in the flood of stories about exactly that.
I'm not really sure if there is any further point to this, but..... Will they be convicted of a crime? I doubt it. We armed them and set up the event. If you can show me any motive, or intent, I'll lead the hanging party. But I suspect that a jury of their peers will not convict them if it goes to trial. But the FBI is investigating and I am sure there will be some sort of civil action. But there aren't any happy endings to this for anybody. I suspect these men won't be worth a dime in the future, unless you believe them to be monsters. And it will happen again. The police are guilty of any number of sins, but this is a sin we all share with them. We, through the government, gave them the power to use deadly force. As long as they have that power it will be used. And as long as toy manufacturers make toy guns, the potential is there for another child to die. It has happened before.

Tyndmyr wrote:The trigger happy nature cannot be simply assigned to a lack of training. Private gun owners are vastly larger in number, many of them have a lack of training, yet we don't see them shooting up kids with toys. Sure, training is good, but the kids shot with toys problem is almost exclusive to cops. That indicates an additional problem. In this case, likely the aggressive attitude.
Call it gung ho or whatever suits you. But don't compare private gun owners to the police. The comparison is a straw man. Most men carry a gun to protect his self or his family. A cop carries a gun to enforce the law. And they go places that I won't go and intervene in events that most people would run from. I don't like it. But given the number of guns in circulation in the US, they would be fools not to. I'm sorry that you don't trust the police or the government. Perhaps you and addams would care to offer an alternative?

User avatar
KrO2
Posts: 236
Joined: Mon Sep 20, 2010 9:35 pm UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby KrO2 » Sun Oct 27, 2013 6:13 am UTC

Not murder, manslaughter. No motive or malice, but an unjustified and intentional killing. He did mean to pull the trigger. Should he be convicted of that?

morriswalters wrote:
Tyndmyr wrote:The trigger happy nature cannot be simply assigned to a lack of training. Private gun owners are vastly larger in number, many of them have a lack of training, yet we don't see them shooting up kids with toys. Sure, training is good, but the kids shot with toys problem is almost exclusive to cops. That indicates an additional problem. In this case, likely the aggressive attitude.
Call it gung ho or whatever suits you. But don't compare private gun owners to the police. The comparison is a straw man. Most men carry a gun to protect his self or his family. A cop carries a gun to enforce the law. And they go places that I won't go and intervene in events that most people would run from. I don't like it. But given the number of guns in circulation in the US, they would be fools not to. I'm sorry that you don't trust the police or the government. Perhaps you and addams would care to offer an alternative?
I actually agree with morris about the comparison. Police exist specifically to be state-sponsored users of violence, and that's not a bad thing. The problem is that they're so bad at it.

User avatar
Paul in Saudi
Posts: 262
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2012 12:52 pm UTC
Location: Dammam, Saudi Arabia

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Paul in Saudi » Sun Oct 27, 2013 2:15 pm UTC

It seems to me that if they shot the young man on purpose, it is murder and they ought to be charged. If they shot the young man by mistake it is manslaughter in some form. In either case, they are very bad police officers who ought to lose their jobs and be charged.

Let a trial, our most elaborate system for protecting the rights of the accused, sort it out.

Nordic Einar
Posts: 783
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 7:21 am UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Nordic Einar » Sun Oct 27, 2013 6:02 pm UTC

addams wrote:White is not a Free Pass.
Middle Class will take you away from some of the worse of it.
Gay is a big mark in a person's favor!

If Gay is tastefully combined with Educated Middle to Upper Class it is not a strike against a person.
Is it? Really?


I cannot express through text how wrong you are - I am literally incapable. Queer bodies are constantly victimized by the Criminal Justice System, and this holds true even in upper middle class queer circles.


addams wrote:I have never seen it work against a person. Have you?
No! Do not slam me with Links. Do you ever go to court?

I do. One thing leads to another. I have been there because I was a guest of honor.
That was weird. I have also been in court to support others and as it turns out for the entertainment.

Some of the stuff I have seen and heard! well; It seems you would believe it.


Well, since you apparently don't want citations to the ample research showing how wrong you are and just want to play the anecdote game: yes, I go to court. I'm a case manager working primarily w/ sex workers and injection drug users - probably 60% of my case load are queer. I come to the work through almost ten years now of community organizing in queer spaces. I've probably been to court more often than 90% of this board. Being queer isn't a benefit to someone facing charges.

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

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Tyndmyr » Tue Oct 29, 2013 4:49 pm UTC

morriswalters wrote:
KrO2 wrote:Let's clarify what you mean by trusting the system. Will this officer be convicted of manslaughter? Will he even be charged? Five bucks says he won't. If you look back at this incident after everything settles down, will you be satisfied with the lack of consequences? Of course, answering that would depend on finding out what happened to this particular shooter, when nobody will be reporting on it because they'll be talking about the latest story about a cop killing someone who didn't need killing. This one will be lost in the flood of stories about exactly that.
I'm not really sure if there is any further point to this, but..... Will they be convicted of a crime? I doubt it. We armed them and set up the event. If you can show me any motive, or intent, I'll lead the hanging party. But I suspect that a jury of their peers will not convict them if it goes to trial. But the FBI is investigating and I am sure there will be some sort of civil action. But there aren't any happy endings to this for anybody. I suspect these men won't be worth a dime in the future, unless you believe them to be monsters. And it will happen again. The police are guilty of any number of sins, but this is a sin we all share with them. We, through the government, gave them the power to use deadly force. As long as they have that power it will be used. And as long as toy manufacturers make toy guns, the potential is there for another child to die. It has happened before.


Ah, so the problem is not the police shooting people, it is the toy gun. Of course. What about toy knives? Are they also the problem? What toys justify police shootings?

Tyndmyr wrote:The trigger happy nature cannot be simply assigned to a lack of training. Private gun owners are vastly larger in number, many of them have a lack of training, yet we don't see them shooting up kids with toys. Sure, training is good, but the kids shot with toys problem is almost exclusive to cops. That indicates an additional problem. In this case, likely the aggressive attitude.
Call it gung ho or whatever suits you. But don't compare private gun owners to the police. The comparison is a straw man. Most men carry a gun to protect his self or his family. A cop carries a gun to enforce the law. And they go places that I won't go and intervene in events that most people would run from. I don't like it. But given the number of guns in circulation in the US, they would be fools not to. I'm sorry that you don't trust the police or the government. Perhaps you and addams would care to offer an alternative?


So....you're ok with a gun as a compliance tool, then?

I thought we were discussing danger to police, and therefore, the need for police to defend themselves. We've already established that police are not particularly likely to die on the job.

And yes, some places are dangerous. The general population lives there too. They have to. By it's nature, the general population lives everywhere, dangerous places and not.

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

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby morriswalters » Tue Oct 29, 2013 5:20 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:Ah, so the problem is not the police shooting people, it is the toy gun. Of course. What about toy knives? Are they also the problem? What toys justify police shootings?

Where it up to me I would disarm everyone and forbid the selling of replicas of weapons to children. Taking away everyone's guns would solve the problem, were it possible. It's not. So you reduce the degree of possible confusion by making sure toys are toys and look as such. It's a kludge. No more no less. You can't make a perfect police officer. As long as they carry guns and as long as guns can be confused with toys, this will be a problem. Contrary to popular opinion this isn't a new problem. And there is already an existing law on this type of thing.

Tyndmyr wrote:So....you're ok with a gun as a compliance tool, then?

I thought we were discussing danger to police, and therefore, the need for police to defend themselves. We've already established that police are not particularly likely to die on the job.

And yes, some places are dangerous. The general population lives there too. They have to. By it's nature, the general population lives everywhere, dangerous places and not.
We are talking about a society where the people we put in charge of our security carry lethal weapons and have the right to use them. If you believe that their jobs aren't risky and if you believe that we all share a common element of risk then why the hell do we have them? I call into question the apparent ability to hold conflicting points of view on this idea. Either they are armed because they need to be armed or they are cowboys hunting people to shoot. Which is it?

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

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Tyndmyr » Tue Oct 29, 2013 5:50 pm UTC

morriswalters wrote:
Tyndmyr wrote:Ah, so the problem is not the police shooting people, it is the toy gun. Of course. What about toy knives? Are they also the problem? What toys justify police shootings?

Where it up to me I would disarm everyone and forbid the selling of replicas of weapons to children. Taking away everyone's guns would solve the problem, were it possible. It's not. So you reduce the degree of possible confusion by making sure toys are toys and look as such. It's a kludge. No more no less. You can't make a perfect police officer. As long as they carry guns and as long as guns can be confused with toys, this will be a problem. Contrary to popular opinion this isn't a new problem. And there is already an existing law on this type of thing.


Anything can be confused for anything by a sufficiently unreasonable observer. If, at close range, you cannot tell the difference between plastic and metal, see color variations, note the obvious size, weight, muzzle diameter, etc differences, I have to conclude that you didn't put that much effort into discerning if the gun was real or not. The lack of time elapsed provides additional evidence here.

But even if this WAS a real gun, would this shooting have been legitimate? It doesn't appear that this is the case. So, confusion with a real weapon is not an adequate explanation for the shooting.

Tyndmyr wrote:So....you're ok with a gun as a compliance tool, then?

I thought we were discussing danger to police, and therefore, the need for police to defend themselves. We've already established that police are not particularly likely to die on the job.

And yes, some places are dangerous. The general population lives there too. They have to. By it's nature, the general population lives everywhere, dangerous places and not.
We are talking about a society where the people we put in charge of our security carry lethal weapons and have the right to use them. If you believe that their jobs aren't risky and if you believe that we all share a common element of risk then why the hell do we have them? I call into question the apparent ability to hold conflicting points of view on this idea. Either they are armed because they need to be armed or they are cowboys hunting people to shoot. Which is it?


I accept the need for defensive violence. If someone wishes to kill me or a cop, then violence to prevent this is justified.

I don't particularly like offensive violence. Thus, I don't like the use of a firearm as a compliance tool. Your logic for why they should have them went beyond mere self defense, contrasting them with "most men carry a gun to protect his self or his family". I would point out that protection is the same reason police should be armed. And the ONLY reason they should be armed.

Of course, ongoing events like these* demonstrate a willingness to employ firearms in a way far more aggressive manner than would be reasonably considered defensive by...anyone else. On a side note, I'd like to point out that sticking a rifle in arms reach of a person is tactically stupid if they ARE the guy you're looking for...but that's mostly irrelevant. The problem here is that use of the firearm for intimidation or as a compliance tool by law enforcement has way too much acceptance.

*The particular source isn't important, I originally found it through a different one, this merely happened to be the first result on a google search for it.


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Plasma_Wolf, The Great Hippo and 26 guests