The Jacob Blake Case; police actions

This discussion was created from comments split from: White and other… What about privilege?.
«1345

Comments

  • lilbuddha wrote: »
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    Twilight wrote: »
    I know it's hard for some people to believe that a man could die tragically and unfairly, be a victim of murder, and still be sort of a bad guy, but it's really very possible. It happens all the time.
    It doesn't matter what led up to the moment we see on the video of the cops kneeling on Floyd's neck. There are circumstances in which the actions leading up to explain why police went too far. Nothing in this case does.
    Adding: You might not be intending to do so, but what you are doing looks like what happens every-time a cop kills a black person wrongly and that is try the victim.

    The currently VERY-popular cop*bashing mood seems to have police officers just cruising around American towns and cities looking for perfectly innocent (generally, "of color") to abuse at random whim ...
    Bullshit. Complete bullshit, though I suppose it helps people who unreservedly support the police sleep better at night to believe the bullshit.
    Police harass and kill POC at a far greater rate than white people. That is the current mood.

    disclosure:
    I come from a law enforcement family, so I do have a perspective not shared by all ...
    One of my brothers was a sheriff's deputy, one of my nephews recently retired from a city cop career, our great uncle was a town cop who was murdered when he interrupted a burglary in progress ...
    I myself spent two years behind bars at a super-max for adult male felons (as a chaplain, thank God) ...
    For the last ten years I have been in charge of Security for a community organization I help lead ... EVERY *bust* I/we have made at one of our annual conventions was of a WHITE person, virtually ALL of whom loudly proclaim their *innocence* combined with threats made to us -- "DON'T TOUCH ME ... !!! ... I'LL SUE YOU ... !!!"

    These are not simple things, and EVERY case must be handled, judged, analyzed as its OWN case ... according to (1) the Laws, and (2) the FACTS ...
    We've had this discussion before. Yous is the argument people hide behind to avoid facing the bias inherent in the system and in almost every police officer officer because of their indoctrination in that system.
    In order for individual cases to be judged fairly, that bias must be acknowledged.

    Yes, the legal-justice system IS *biased* in favor of the police, the prosecutors and the courts ... (and in general, crime victims) ...

    E.g., that guy who was recently shot by police in Kenosha, Wisconsin, was wanted for sexual assault ... He went to the HOME of the woman he (reportedly) had raped and SHE called the cops (DUH !!!) (Instead, she should have apologized to HIM for being so mean to him and made him a nice breakfast ... ??? ... and invited him into her bed ... ??? ...) ...

    He resisted arrest, was tasered twice (with no effect), was trying to get into the driver side of his vehicle where there was a KNIFE visible on the floor ... So an officer SHOT him ...

    Picture this ... BEFORE he was able to get into the car, the cops throw a big net over him and so tangle him up and pull him to the ground ...
    "OH NO ... !!! ... They threw a NET over him like he was some kind of ANIMAL ... !!! ... He could have hit his head on the pavement and been HURT ... !!!"

    How about this instead:
    Go to: Google Video" by Chris Rock ( a BLACK guy):
    "How To Not Get Your Ass Kicked By The Police" ...
  • KarlLBKarlLB Shipmate
    edited September 8
    Until someone is actually advancing on you with a knife, and you've given them every opportunity to drop it, and every other avenue has been exhausted, there is no justification for lethal force in my view.

    This is exactly what I mean by the distinction between *justifying* lethal force and it being *unavoidable*.

    There's still too much of an idea that a bad guy getting shot is a good thing.

    Unarmed UK police deal with this sort of thing every day without anyone being shot.
  • lilbuddha wrote: »
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    Twilight wrote: »
    I know it's hard for some people to believe that a man could die tragically and unfairly, be a victim of murder, and still be sort of a bad guy, but it's really very possible. It happens all the time.
    It doesn't matter what led up to the moment we see on the video of the cops kneeling on Floyd's neck. There are circumstances in which the actions leading up to explain why police went too far. Nothing in this case does.
    Adding: You might not be intending to do so, but what you are doing looks like what happens every-time a cop kills a black person wrongly and that is try the victim.

    The currently VERY-popular cop*bashing mood seems to have police officers just cruising around American towns and cities looking for perfectly innocent (generally, "of color") to abuse at random whim ...
    Bullshit. Complete bullshit, though I suppose it helps people who unreservedly support the police sleep better at night to believe the bullshit.
    Police harass and kill POC at a far greater rate than white people. That is the current mood.

    disclosure:
    I come from a law enforcement family, so I do have a perspective not shared by all ...
    One of my brothers was a sheriff's deputy, one of my nephews recently retired from a city cop career, our great uncle was a town cop who was murdered when he interrupted a burglary in progress ...
    I myself spent two years behind bars at a super-max for adult male felons (as a chaplain, thank God) ...
    For the last ten years I have been in charge of Security for a community organization I help lead ... EVERY *bust* I/we have made at one of our annual conventions was of a WHITE person, virtually ALL of whom loudly proclaim their *innocence* combined with threats made to us -- "DON'T TOUCH ME ... !!! ... I'LL SUE YOU ... !!!"

    These are not simple things, and EVERY case must be handled, judged, analyzed as its OWN case ... according to (1) the Laws, and (2) the FACTS ...
    We've had this discussion before. Yous is the argument people hide behind to avoid facing the bias inherent in the system and in almost every police officer officer because of their indoctrination in that system.
    In order for individual cases to be judged fairly, that bias must be acknowledged.

    Yes, the legal-justice system IS *biased* in favor of the police, the prosecutors and the courts ... (and in general, crime victims) ...

    E.g., that guy who was recently shot by police in Kenosha, Wisconsin, was wanted for sexual assault ... He went to the HOME of the woman he (reportedly) had raped and SHE called the cops (DUH !!!) (Instead, she should have apologized to HIM for being so mean to him and made him a nice breakfast ... ??? ... and invited him into her bed ... ??? ...) ...

    He resisted arrest, was tasered twice (with no effect), was trying to get into the driver side of his vehicle where there was a KNIFE visible on the floor ... So an officer SHOT him ...

    Picture this ... BEFORE he was able to get into the car, the cops throw a big net over him and so tangle him up and pull him to the ground ...
    "OH NO ... !!! ... They threw a NET over him like he was some kind of ANIMAL ... !!! ... He could have hit his head on the pavement and been HURT ... !!!"

    How about this instead:
    Go to: Google Video" by Chris Rock ( a BLACK guy):
    "How To Not Get Your Ass Kicked By The Police" ...
    What he did in the past doesn't have any fucking relevance. This is not Judge Dredd, they are supposed to detain people, not fucking execute them.
    As Karl mentions, the UK police manage to disarm people whilst having no guns themselves.The motherfucking approach of American police is to shoot what they don't understand.
    They are poorly trained and think they must be obeyed. Their fucking job is to PROTECT citizens, but they see themselves as authority first, employees of the citizenry 10th or 11th.
    They are civil SERVANTS.
    Police are biased against POC. They disproportionately see black people as a threat in sitations where they do not so react to white people. They are biased against people with mental health issues. They have no appreciable training in dealing with mental health issues. They have poor training in de-escalation.
  • KarlLB wrote: »
    Until someone is actually advancing on you with a knife, and you've given them every opportunity to drop it, and every other avenue has been exhausted, there is no justification for lethal force in my view.

    This is exactly what I mean by the distinction between *justifying* lethal force and it being *unavoidable*.

    There's still too much of an idea that a bad guy getting shot is a good thing.

    Unarmed UK police deal with this sort of thing every day without anyone being shot.

    UK police don't do their work in a society which is awash in guns and in which outlaws are cultural heroes ...
  • lilbuddha wrote: »
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    Twilight wrote: »
    I know it's hard for some people to believe that a man could die tragically and unfairly, be a victim of murder, and still be sort of a bad guy, but it's really very possible. It happens all the time.
    It doesn't matter what led up to the moment we see on the video of the cops kneeling on Floyd's neck. There are circumstances in which the actions leading up to explain why police went too far. Nothing in this case does.
    Adding: You might not be intending to do so, but what you are doing looks like what happens every-time a cop kills a black person wrongly and that is try the victim.

    The currently VERY-popular cop*bashing mood seems to have police officers just cruising around American towns and cities looking for perfectly innocent (generally, "of color") to abuse at random whim ...
    Bullshit. Complete bullshit, though I suppose it helps people who unreservedly support the police sleep better at night to believe the bullshit.
    Police harass and kill POC at a far greater rate than white people. That is the current mood.

    disclosure:
    I come from a law enforcement family, so I do have a perspective not shared by all ...
    One of my brothers was a sheriff's deputy, one of my nephews recently retired from a city cop career, our great uncle was a town cop who was murdered when he interrupted a burglary in progress ...
    I myself spent two years behind bars at a super-max for adult male felons (as a chaplain, thank God) ...
    For the last ten years I have been in charge of Security for a community organization I help lead ... EVERY *bust* I/we have made at one of our annual conventions was of a WHITE person, virtually ALL of whom loudly proclaim their *innocence* combined with threats made to us -- "DON'T TOUCH ME ... !!! ... I'LL SUE YOU ... !!!"

    These are not simple things, and EVERY case must be handled, judged, analyzed as its OWN case ... according to (1) the Laws, and (2) the FACTS ...
    We've had this discussion before. Yous is the argument people hide behind to avoid facing the bias inherent in the system and in almost every police officer officer because of their indoctrination in that system.
    In order for individual cases to be judged fairly, that bias must be acknowledged.

    Yes, the legal-justice system IS *biased* in favor of the police, the prosecutors and the courts ... (and in general, crime victims) ...

    E.g., that guy who was recently shot by police in Kenosha, Wisconsin, was wanted for sexual assault ... He went to the HOME of the woman he (reportedly) had raped and SHE called the cops (DUH !!!) (Instead, she should have apologized to HIM for being so mean to him and made him a nice breakfast ... ??? ... and invited him into her bed ... ??? ...) ...

    He resisted arrest, was tasered twice (with no effect), was trying to get into the driver side of his vehicle where there was a KNIFE visible on the floor ... So an officer SHOT him ...

    Picture this ... BEFORE he was able to get into the car, the cops throw a big net over him and so tangle him up and pull him to the ground ...
    "OH NO ... !!! ... They threw a NET over him like he was some kind of ANIMAL ... !!! ... He could have hit his head on the pavement and been HURT ... !!!"

    How about this instead:
    Go to: Google Video" by Chris Rock ( a BLACK guy):
    "How To Not Get Your Ass Kicked By The Police" ...
    What he did in the past doesn't have any fucking relevance. This is not Judge Dredd, they are supposed to detain people, not fucking execute them.
    As Karl mentions, the UK police manage to disarm people whilst having no guns themselves.The motherfucking approach of American police is to shoot what they don't understand.
    They are poorly trained and think they must be obeyed. Their fucking job is to PROTECT citizens, but they see themselves as authority first, employees of the citizenry 10th or 11th.
    They are civil SERVANTS.
    Police are biased against POC. They disproportionately see black people as a threat in sitations where they do not so react to white people. They are biased against people with mental health issues. They have no appreciable training in dealing with mental health issues. They have poor training in de-escalation.

    The police had a warrant for his arrest ...
    He went to the HOME of the person he (reportedly) had RAPED ...
    He resisted arrest ...
    He was tasered (NON-lethal weapon) TWICE with no effect ...
    He continually refused to comply with police requests/commands ...
    He went into a vehicle were a KNIFE was seen ...

    Okay, cop critics ...
    WHAT would YOU have done ... ???
  • But, yes ...

    When I was a super-max prison chaplain -- in the mid 80s -- it was already obvious that a large percentage of the prison population belonged in a State Hospital rather than a prison ...

    But ... The voters/citizens acting through their elected reps. had CLOSED DOWN most of the State Hospitals in favor of "neighborhood group homes" (BUT ... then ... most of those same citizens/voters didn't want *those* people in group homes "in MY neighborhood" ... So ... )

    NONE of that is/was the fault of the cops ...

    Yes, American cops these days are far more heavily armed than anyone likes ...
    This is because the Good Old Days of Deputy Sheriff Barney Fife having a six shot .38 revolver -- with ONE(1) bullet ... are long gone ...
    Cops began to "arm up" because the CROOKS armed up ...

    THAT is NOT the fault of the cops ...

    These are broad longstanding problems in our SOCIETY ...
  • The police had a warrant for his arrest ...
    He went to the HOME of the person he (reportedly) had RAPED ...

    We could of course run the reputation game in the opposite direction:

    https://www.vox.com/2020/6/12/21288932/police-officers-sexual-violence-abuse-breonna-taylor

    But I’d assume you’d agree that you would want proper process to be followed in both cases (as lilbuddha alludes - an accusation doesn’t automatically imply an execution).
    NONE of that is/was the fault of the cops ...

    Except the police unions do have a history of lobbying against candidates they consider to be ‘soft on crime’.

    VOTERS have a history of voting AGAINST politicians who are perceived to be "soft on crime" ...

    But, okay ...
    If a distraught woman calls *911* asking for the police to come to her home because the man (she claims) RAPED her is THERE NOW ... you think it would be better to send a couple of social workers armed with coupons for free ice cream for everybody ... ??
  • lilbuddha wrote: »
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    Twilight wrote: »
    I know it's hard for some people to believe that a man could die tragically and unfairly, be a victim of murder, and still be sort of a bad guy, but it's really very possible. It happens all the time.
    It doesn't matter what led up to the moment we see on the video of the cops kneeling on Floyd's neck. There are circumstances in which the actions leading up to explain why police went too far. Nothing in this case does.
    Adding: You might not be intending to do so, but what you are doing looks like what happens every-time a cop kills a black person wrongly and that is try the victim.

    The currently VERY-popular cop*bashing mood seems to have police officers just cruising around American towns and cities looking for perfectly innocent (generally, "of color") to abuse at random whim ...
    Bullshit. Complete bullshit, though I suppose it helps people who unreservedly support the police sleep better at night to believe the bullshit.
    Police harass and kill POC at a far greater rate than white people. That is the current mood.

    disclosure:
    I come from a law enforcement family, so I do have a perspective not shared by all ...
    One of my brothers was a sheriff's deputy, one of my nephews recently retired from a city cop career, our great uncle was a town cop who was murdered when he interrupted a burglary in progress ...
    I myself spent two years behind bars at a super-max for adult male felons (as a chaplain, thank God) ...
    For the last ten years I have been in charge of Security for a community organization I help lead ... EVERY *bust* I/we have made at one of our annual conventions was of a WHITE person, virtually ALL of whom loudly proclaim their *innocence* combined with threats made to us -- "DON'T TOUCH ME ... !!! ... I'LL SUE YOU ... !!!"

    These are not simple things, and EVERY case must be handled, judged, analyzed as its OWN case ... according to (1) the Laws, and (2) the FACTS ...
    We've had this discussion before. Yous is the argument people hide behind to avoid facing the bias inherent in the system and in almost every police officer officer because of their indoctrination in that system.
    In order for individual cases to be judged fairly, that bias must be acknowledged.

    Yes, the legal-justice system IS *biased* in favor of the police, the prosecutors and the courts ... (and in general, crime victims) ...

    E.g., that guy who was recently shot by police in Kenosha, Wisconsin, was wanted for sexual assault ... He went to the HOME of the woman he (reportedly) had raped and SHE called the cops (DUH !!!) (Instead, she should have apologized to HIM for being so mean to him and made him a nice breakfast ... ??? ... and invited him into her bed ... ??? ...) ...

    He resisted arrest, was tasered twice (with no effect), was trying to get into the driver side of his vehicle where there was a KNIFE visible on the floor ... So an officer SHOT him ...

    Picture this ... BEFORE he was able to get into the car, the cops throw a big net over him and so tangle him up and pull him to the ground ...
    "OH NO ... !!! ... They threw a NET over him like he was some kind of ANIMAL ... !!! ... He could have hit his head on the pavement and been HURT ... !!!"

    How about this instead:
    Go to: Google Video" by Chris Rock ( a BLACK guy):
    "How To Not Get Your Ass Kicked By The Police" ...
    What he did in the past doesn't have any fucking relevance. This is not Judge Dredd, they are supposed to detain people, not fucking execute them.
    As Karl mentions, the UK police manage to disarm people whilst having no guns themselves.The motherfucking approach of American police is to shoot what they don't understand.
    They are poorly trained and think they must be obeyed. Their fucking job is to PROTECT citizens, but they see themselves as authority first, employees of the citizenry 10th or 11th.
    They are civil SERVANTS.
    Police are biased against POC. They disproportionately see black people as a threat in sitations where they do not so react to white people. They are biased against people with mental health issues. They have no appreciable training in dealing with mental health issues. They have poor training in de-escalation.

    The police had a warrant for his arrest ...
    He went to the HOME of the person he (reportedly) had RAPED ...
    He resisted arrest ...
    He was tasered (NON-lethal weapon) TWICE with no effect ...
    He continually refused to comply with police requests/commands ...
    He went into a vehicle were a KNIFE was seen ...

    Okay, cop critics ...
    WHAT would YOU have done ... ???
    Arrested him without shooting him. Knife crime is a big thin in the UK, but police manage to arrest perpetrators without killing them first.Without even trying to kill them.*
    The man was accused, not convicted. Even had he been convicted, it is not their job to be executioners.

    *The UK police are far from perfect, but they are well better than American ones in this regard. They receive more training even if they do not carry weapons.
  • CrœsosCrœsos Shipmate
    He resisted arrest, was tasered twice (with no effect), was trying to get into the driver side of his vehicle where there was a KNIFE visible on the floor ... So an officer SHOT him ...

    Or as The Simpsons put it:
    It coulda been a real ugly situation but, luckily, I managed to shoot him in the spine.

    Note that this is being used by an advocate of police violence as a success story.

    The superhuman (or inhuman) black criminal who can shrug off tasers (and sometimes bullets) keeps resurfacing in the annals of American policing.
  • mousethief wrote: »
    Crœsos wrote: »
    The currently VERY-popular cop*bashing mood seems to have police officers just cruising around American towns and cities looking for perfectly innocent (generally, "of color") to abuse at random whim ...

    There is a very long history of American police doing just that. Since American policing was formalized in the Jim Crow era (approximately 1877 to 1965, though you can argue other dates) this is hardly surprising. Laws against vagrancy (being unemployed is a crime) or loitering (doing nothing is a crime) and a whole host of other restrictions made their way into American law for the first time in the late nineteenth century. It was understood that these laws would be enforced in a racially-selective way. There was often profit motive involved in the system, since convicts could be auctioned off for their labor (sounds vaguely familiar) or put to work directly by the state. Given that the U.S. operates a system of for-profit prisons I don't think this connection can be dismissed out of hand.

    I suppose you could argue that it's just coincidence that complaints against modern American police just so happen to match up with a century-long practice from the birth of American policing, but a simple hand-wave seems insufficient.

    Thank you for illustrating my point so clearly ...
    I am SO glad that my nephew retired (early due to a medical issue) ...

    If you don't want people to speak ill of you, live in such a way that when somebody does, nobody believes it. American cops deserve whatever reputation they get until they, themselves, start cleaning their act up. Waiting for courts and legal bodies to do it won't serve. They need to clean their own act up. Until then, any rumour no matter how ugly is fair game, as far as I'm concerned.

    *ahem* ... *delicately*

    Assigning the shady characteristics of SOME persons
    to the entire *CLASS*/*group* of persons
    to which *they* belong is the definition of *bigotry* ...

    Show me a cop who stands up to brutality and corruption and I'll show you an ex-cop. The system can't tolerate good cops, and quickly flushes them out. The whole house is rotten.
  • lilbuddha wrote: »
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    Twilight wrote: »
    I know it's hard for some people to believe that a man could die tragically and unfairly, be a victim of murder, and still be sort of a bad guy, but it's really very possible. It happens all the time.
    It doesn't matter what led up to the moment we see on the video of the cops kneeling on Floyd's neck. There are circumstances in which the actions leading up to explain why police went too far. Nothing in this case does.
    Adding: You might not be intending to do so, but what you are doing looks like what happens every-time a cop kills a black person wrongly and that is try the victim.

    The currently VERY-popular cop*bashing mood seems to have police officers just cruising around American towns and cities looking for perfectly innocent (generally, "of color") to abuse at random whim ...
    Bullshit. Complete bullshit, though I suppose it helps people who unreservedly support the police sleep better at night to believe the bullshit.
    Police harass and kill POC at a far greater rate than white people. That is the current mood.

    disclosure:
    I come from a law enforcement family, so I do have a perspective not shared by all ...
    One of my brothers was a sheriff's deputy, one of my nephews recently retired from a city cop career, our great uncle was a town cop who was murdered when he interrupted a burglary in progress ...
    I myself spent two years behind bars at a super-max for adult male felons (as a chaplain, thank God) ...
    For the last ten years I have been in charge of Security for a community organization I help lead ... EVERY *bust* I/we have made at one of our annual conventions was of a WHITE person, virtually ALL of whom loudly proclaim their *innocence* combined with threats made to us -- "DON'T TOUCH ME ... !!! ... I'LL SUE YOU ... !!!"

    These are not simple things, and EVERY case must be handled, judged, analyzed as its OWN case ... according to (1) the Laws, and (2) the FACTS ...
    We've had this discussion before. Yous is the argument people hide behind to avoid facing the bias inherent in the system and in almost every police officer officer because of their indoctrination in that system.
    In order for individual cases to be judged fairly, that bias must be acknowledged.

    Yes, the legal-justice system IS *biased* in favor of the police, the prosecutors and the courts ... (and in general, crime victims) ...

    E.g., that guy who was recently shot by police in Kenosha, Wisconsin, was wanted for sexual assault ... He went to the HOME of the woman he (reportedly) had raped and SHE called the cops (DUH !!!) (Instead, she should have apologized to HIM for being so mean to him and made him a nice breakfast ... ??? ... and invited him into her bed ... ??? ...) ...

    He resisted arrest, was tasered twice (with no effect), was trying to get into the driver side of his vehicle where there was a KNIFE visible on the floor ... So an officer SHOT him ...

    Picture this ... BEFORE he was able to get into the car, the cops throw a big net over him and so tangle him up and pull him to the ground ...
    "OH NO ... !!! ... They threw a NET over him like he was some kind of ANIMAL ... !!! ... He could have hit his head on the pavement and been HURT ... !!!"

    How about this instead:
    Go to: Google Video" by Chris Rock ( a BLACK guy):
    "How To Not Get Your Ass Kicked By The Police" ...
    What he did in the past doesn't have any fucking relevance. This is not Judge Dredd, they are supposed to detain people, not fucking execute them.
    As Karl mentions, the UK police manage to disarm people whilst having no guns themselves.The motherfucking approach of American police is to shoot what they don't understand.
    They are poorly trained and think they must be obeyed. Their fucking job is to PROTECT citizens, but they see themselves as authority first, employees of the citizenry 10th or 11th.
    They are civil SERVANTS.
    Police are biased against POC. They disproportionately see black people as a threat in sitations where they do not so react to white people. They are biased against people with mental health issues. They have no appreciable training in dealing with mental health issues. They have poor training in de-escalation.

    The police had a warrant for his arrest ...
    He went to the HOME of the person he (reportedly) had RAPED ...
    He resisted arrest ...
    He was tasered (NON-lethal weapon) TWICE with no effect ...
    He continually refused to comply with police requests/commands ...
    He went into a vehicle were a KNIFE was seen ...

    Okay, cop critics ...
    WHAT would YOU have done ... ???

    This https://youtu.be/9mzPj_IaMzY
  • DoublethinkDoublethink Shipmate
    edited September 9
    Also, sometimes it is actually possible to arrest, rather than kill, dangerous armed criminals who have already committed a serious crime: https://www.cumbria.police.uk/News/News-Articles/2019/July/Cumbria-sergeant-recognised-with-prestigious-Bravery-Award.aspx

    But this does involve having at some point to go near them, rather than expecting behavioural compliance in response to shouting threats from a distance.
  • Crœsos wrote: »
    He resisted arrest, was tasered twice (with no effect), was trying to get into the driver side of his vehicle where there was a KNIFE visible on the floor ... So an officer SHOT him ...

    Or as The Simpsons put it:
    It coulda been a real ugly situation but, luckily, I managed to shoot him in the spine.

    Note that this is being used by an advocate of police violence as a success story.

    The superhuman (or inhuman) black criminal who can shrug off tasers (and sometimes bullets) keeps resurfacing in the annals of American policing.

    No ... But the fact is that police generally DO first use non-lethal force, which doesn't always work ...

    The *flip* side is that the critics expect the police officer on the scene to be a "god" ("bullet proof"), capable of giving a split second mental heath exam, able to see into the future, and a crack shot with a pistol ("Why didn't he just shoot the knife/gun out of the guy's hand ... ???")
  • Also, sometimes it is actually possible to arrest, rather than kill, dangerous armed criminals who have already committed a serious crime: https://www.cumbria.police.uk/News/News-Articles/2019/July/Cumbria-sergeant-recognised-with-prestigious-Bravery-Award.aspx

    But this does involve having at some point to go near them, rather than expecting behavioural compliance in response to shouting threats from a distance.

    Yes, which is why an occasional fatal tragedy makes the evening news, while routine arrests do not ...
  • If a distraught woman calls *911* asking for the police to come to her home because the man (she claims) RAPED her is THERE NOW ... you think it would be better to send a couple of social workers armed with coupons for free ice cream for everybody ... ??

    Yes, the because clearly only alternative is social workers armed with free ice-cream.
  • VOTERS have a history of voting AGAINST politicians who are perceived to be "soft on crime" ...

    Police unions have a history of painting attempts at oversight and reform as "soft on crime".
  • lilbuddha wrote: »
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    Twilight wrote: »
    I know it's hard for some people to believe that a man could die tragically and unfairly, be a victim of murder, and still be sort of a bad guy, but it's really very possible. It happens all the time.
    It doesn't matter what led up to the moment we see on the video of the cops kneeling on Floyd's neck. There are circumstances in which the actions leading up to explain why police went too far. Nothing in this case does.
    Adding: You might not be intending to do so, but what you are doing looks like what happens every-time a cop kills a black person wrongly and that is try the victim.

    The currently VERY-popular cop*bashing mood seems to have police officers just cruising around American towns and cities looking for perfectly innocent (generally, "of color") to abuse at random whim ...
    Bullshit. Complete bullshit, though I suppose it helps people who unreservedly support the police sleep better at night to believe the bullshit.
    Police harass and kill POC at a far greater rate than white people. That is the current mood.

    disclosure:
    I come from a law enforcement family, so I do have a perspective not shared by all ...
    One of my brothers was a sheriff's deputy, one of my nephews recently retired from a city cop career, our great uncle was a town cop who was murdered when he interrupted a burglary in progress ...
    I myself spent two years behind bars at a super-max for adult male felons (as a chaplain, thank God) ...
    For the last ten years I have been in charge of Security for a community organization I help lead ... EVERY *bust* I/we have made at one of our annual conventions was of a WHITE person, virtually ALL of whom loudly proclaim their *innocence* combined with threats made to us -- "DON'T TOUCH ME ... !!! ... I'LL SUE YOU ... !!!"

    These are not simple things, and EVERY case must be handled, judged, analyzed as its OWN case ... according to (1) the Laws, and (2) the FACTS ...
    We've had this discussion before. Yous is the argument people hide behind to avoid facing the bias inherent in the system and in almost every police officer officer because of their indoctrination in that system.
    In order for individual cases to be judged fairly, that bias must be acknowledged.

    Yes, the legal-justice system IS *biased* in favor of the police, the prosecutors and the courts ... (and in general, crime victims) ...

    E.g., that guy who was recently shot by police in Kenosha, Wisconsin, was wanted for sexual assault ... He went to the HOME of the woman he (reportedly) had raped and SHE called the cops (DUH !!!) (Instead, she should have apologized to HIM for being so mean to him and made him a nice breakfast ... ??? ... and invited him into her bed ... ??? ...) ...

    He resisted arrest, was tasered twice (with no effect), was trying to get into the driver side of his vehicle where there was a KNIFE visible on the floor ... So an officer SHOT him ...

    Picture this ... BEFORE he was able to get into the car, the cops throw a big net over him and so tangle him up and pull him to the ground ...
    "OH NO ... !!! ... They threw a NET over him like he was some kind of ANIMAL ... !!! ... He could have hit his head on the pavement and been HURT ... !!!"

    How about this instead:
    Go to: Google Video" by Chris Rock ( a BLACK guy):
    "How To Not Get Your Ass Kicked By The Police" ...
    What he did in the past doesn't have any fucking relevance. This is not Judge Dredd, they are supposed to detain people, not fucking execute them.
    As Karl mentions, the UK police manage to disarm people whilst having no guns themselves.The motherfucking approach of American police is to shoot what they don't understand.
    They are poorly trained and think they must be obeyed. Their fucking job is to PROTECT citizens, but they see themselves as authority first, employees of the citizenry 10th or 11th.
    They are civil SERVANTS.
    Police are biased against POC. They disproportionately see black people as a threat in sitations where they do not so react to white people. They are biased against people with mental health issues. They have no appreciable training in dealing with mental health issues. They have poor training in de-escalation.

    The police had a warrant for his arrest ...
    He went to the HOME of the person he (reportedly) had RAPED ...
    He resisted arrest ...
    He was tasered (NON-lethal weapon) TWICE with no effect ...
    He continually refused to comply with police requests/commands ...
    He went into a vehicle were a KNIFE was seen ...

    Okay, cop critics ...
    WHAT would YOU have done ... ???

    This https://youtu.be/9mzPj_IaMzY

    @Fr Teilhard the point of this video is that it is possible to have a planned non-lethal containment strategy. I get the vivid impression that a lot of American police officers don't know this - that in the situation portrayed in the video they would shoot the suspect and consider that to be appropriate.
  • CrœsosCrœsos Shipmate
    If a distraught woman calls *911* asking for the police to come to her home because the man (she claims) RAPED her is THERE NOW ... you think it would be better to send a couple of social workers armed with coupons for free ice cream for everybody ... ??
    Yes, the because clearly only alternative is social workers armed with free ice-cream.

    It's a rhetorical two-step. The first step is to express contempt at attempts to address any kind of social problem (drug addiction, mental health, runaway teens, etc.) through any means other than the criminal justice system. I suppose that's an argument, that government resources should be directed very heavily towards police, courts, and prisons and away from anything else because police/courts/prisons provide the most bang for the buck (metaphorically and literally).

    Then there's the deflection.
    But ... The voters/citizens acting through their elected reps. had CLOSED DOWN most of the State Hospitals in favor of "neighborhood group homes" (BUT ... then ... most of those same citizens/voters didn't want *those* people in group homes "in MY neighborhood" ... So ... )

    NONE of that is/was the fault of the cops ...
    There ARE still State Hospitals, but far fewer of them, with not nearly enough *beds* and the treatment programs offered are mostly *voluntary* (although not all) ...

    But, yes ... PART of the idea was to provide more *humane* and gentle situations for chronically mentally ill/defective persons ... Ironically, the default arrangement has been jails and prisons ...

    Got that? Despite the assumption that police are better at dealing with problems than "social workers" (such as trained mental health professionals, who apparently rely on ice cream based therapies) it's not the fault of the cops that they have trouble dealing with the mentally ill that the cops/courts/prisons are supposedly better at dealing with.
  • lilbuddha wrote: »
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    Twilight wrote: »
    I know it's hard for some people to believe that a man could die tragically and unfairly, be a victim of murder, and still be sort of a bad guy, but it's really very possible. It happens all the time.
    It doesn't matter what led up to the moment we see on the video of the cops kneeling on Floyd's neck. There are circumstances in which the actions leading up to explain why police went too far. Nothing in this case does.
    Adding: You might not be intending to do so, but what you are doing looks like what happens every-time a cop kills a black person wrongly and that is try the victim.

    The currently VERY-popular cop*bashing mood seems to have police officers just cruising around American towns and cities looking for perfectly innocent (generally, "of color") to abuse at random whim ...
    Bullshit. Complete bullshit, though I suppose it helps people who unreservedly support the police sleep better at night to believe the bullshit.
    Police harass and kill POC at a far greater rate than white people. That is the current mood.

    disclosure:
    I come from a law enforcement family, so I do have a perspective not shared by all ...
    One of my brothers was a sheriff's deputy, one of my nephews recently retired from a city cop career, our great uncle was a town cop who was murdered when he interrupted a burglary in progress ...
    I myself spent two years behind bars at a super-max for adult male felons (as a chaplain, thank God) ...
    For the last ten years I have been in charge of Security for a community organization I help lead ... EVERY *bust* I/we have made at one of our annual conventions was of a WHITE person, virtually ALL of whom loudly proclaim their *innocence* combined with threats made to us -- "DON'T TOUCH ME ... !!! ... I'LL SUE YOU ... !!!"

    These are not simple things, and EVERY case must be handled, judged, analyzed as its OWN case ... according to (1) the Laws, and (2) the FACTS ...
    We've had this discussion before. Yous is the argument people hide behind to avoid facing the bias inherent in the system and in almost every police officer officer because of their indoctrination in that system.
    In order for individual cases to be judged fairly, that bias must be acknowledged.

    Yes, the legal-justice system IS *biased* in favor of the police, the prosecutors and the courts ... (and in general, crime victims) ...

    E.g., that guy who was recently shot by police in Kenosha, Wisconsin, was wanted for sexual assault ... He went to the HOME of the woman he (reportedly) had raped and SHE called the cops (DUH !!!) (Instead, she should have apologized to HIM for being so mean to him and made him a nice breakfast ... ??? ... and invited him into her bed ... ??? ...) ...

    He resisted arrest, was tasered twice (with no effect), was trying to get into the driver side of his vehicle where there was a KNIFE visible on the floor ... So an officer SHOT him ...

    Picture this ... BEFORE he was able to get into the car, the cops throw a big net over him and so tangle him up and pull him to the ground ...
    "OH NO ... !!! ... They threw a NET over him like he was some kind of ANIMAL ... !!! ... He could have hit his head on the pavement and been HURT ... !!!"

    How about this instead:
    Go to: Google Video" by Chris Rock ( a BLACK guy):
    "How To Not Get Your Ass Kicked By The Police" ...
    What he did in the past doesn't have any fucking relevance. This is not Judge Dredd, they are supposed to detain people, not fucking execute them.
    As Karl mentions, the UK police manage to disarm people whilst having no guns themselves.The motherfucking approach of American police is to shoot what they don't understand.
    They are poorly trained and think they must be obeyed. Their fucking job is to PROTECT citizens, but they see themselves as authority first, employees of the citizenry 10th or 11th.
    They are civil SERVANTS.
    Police are biased against POC. They disproportionately see black people as a threat in sitations where they do not so react to white people. They are biased against people with mental health issues. They have no appreciable training in dealing with mental health issues. They have poor training in de-escalation.

    The police had a warrant for his arrest ...
    He went to the HOME of the person he (reportedly) had RAPED ...
    He resisted arrest ...
    He was tasered (NON-lethal weapon) TWICE with no effect ...
    He continually refused to comply with police requests/commands ...
    He went into a vehicle were a KNIFE was seen ...

    Okay, cop critics ...
    WHAT would YOU have done ... ???

    This https://youtu.be/9mzPj_IaMzY

    @Fr Teilhard the point of this video is that it is possible to have a planned non-lethal containment strategy. I get the vivid impression that a lot of American police officers don't know this - that in the situation portrayed in the video they would shoot the suspect and consider that to be appropriate.
    A massive problem is that even for the few that do receive training, they have been indoctrinated into, and still live inside, the warrior in a hostile battlezone mentality and still see anything but simpering compliance as a threat.
  • Crœsos wrote: »
    If a distraught woman calls *911* asking for the police to come to her home because the man (she claims) RAPED her is THERE NOW ... you think it would be better to send a couple of social workers armed with coupons for free ice cream for everybody ... ??
    Yes, the because clearly only alternative is social workers armed with free ice-cream.

    It's a rhetorical two-step. The first step is to express contempt at attempts to address any kind of social problem (drug addiction, mental health, runaway teens, etc.) through any means other than the criminal justice system. I suppose that's an argument, that government resources should be directed very heavily towards police, courts, and prisons and away from anything else because police/courts/prisons provide the most bang for the buck (metaphorically and literally).

    Then there's the deflection.
    But ... The voters/citizens acting through their elected reps. had CLOSED DOWN most of the State Hospitals in favor of "neighborhood group homes" (BUT ... then ... most of those same citizens/voters didn't want *those* people in group homes "in MY neighborhood" ... So ... )

    NONE of that is/was the fault of the cops ...
    There ARE still State Hospitals, but far fewer of them, with not nearly enough *beds* and the treatment programs offered are mostly *voluntary* (although not all) ...

    But, yes ... PART of the idea was to provide more *humane* and gentle situations for chronically mentally ill/defective persons ... Ironically, the default arrangement has been jails and prisons ...

    Got that? Despite the assumption that police are better at dealing with problems than "social workers" (such as trained mental health professionals, who apparently rely on ice cream based therapies) it's not the fault of the cops that they have trouble dealing with the mentally ill that the cops/courts/prisons are supposedly better at dealing with.

    Shme on you Crœsos! using reality and reason against arguments that contain neither.
  • UK police don't do their work in a society which is awash in guns and in which outlaws are cultural heroes ...

    The man who was shot seven times in the back was allegedly in the vicinity of a knife. That's something that the UK police encounter on a regular basis. I find it hard to imagine the victim in this case was channeling his inner Jesse James, but there you go.

    In this, as in all things, the first step towards making an improvement has to be wanting to change. The problem we have is that the police don't want to change.
  • UK police don't do their work in a society which is awash in guns and in which outlaws are cultural heroes ...

    The man who was shot seven times in the back was allegedly in the vicinity of a knife. That's something that the UK police encounter on a regular basis. I find it hard to imagine the victim in this case was channeling his inner Jesse James, but there you go.

    In this, as in all things, the first step towards making an improvement has to be wanting to change. The problem we have is that the police don't want to change.
    And police unions have a ve$ted interest in things not changing.
  • And when I think it was Colorado mooted holding police accountable for their actions, there was a goodly chorus of them threatening to quit.
  • stonespringstonespring Shipmate
    edited September 9
    tclune wrote: »
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    Ruth wrote: »
    Police unions are actively fighting reforms. And then they wonder why people don't like them.
    Police unions are a major part of the problem. The way they defend cops as automatically in the right would be insane even were the police not biased.

    I confess to being of two minds on this. I am thoroughly pro-union. The notion that workers are the problem is, to my mind, quintessentially classist bigotry. And it invariably arises when unions acquire any power. It is especially discordant when coming from the left.
    However, there is a real problem with policing in this country. We have dumped all manner of social work onto the laps of the police, when they are manifestly not the right people to deal with those problems. When we deinstitutionalized the mentally ill, for example, we did virtually nothing to provide an alternative structure for dealing with the social problems that would create. The militarization of the police that has arisen since the rise of SWAT teams and the like only aggravates the unfitness of police as an institution to respond to these kinds of needs.
    In reorganizing policing and social working tasks to better suit our needs, we can look at police unions as an impediment if we like. But that is the way management always views any voice but their own. It is appropriate for all stakeholders to have a seat at the table in this reorganization. Or so ISTM.

    It's worth noting that, at least in the US, police unions are very different from other unions, even other public sector unions, in that for some time now as local government budgets have been crunched (remember police in the US are for the most part locally run and funded), police unions have often negotiated/advocated for laws and policies that protect them from prosecution (or from investigations that could lead to prosecution) for misconduct on duty since that gives officers job security and costs the government less than other increases to compensation and benefits.

    I can't think of any other example where members of a union use collective bargaining and lobbying to shield themselves from legal consequences for the use of violence on the job. Granted, being a police officer is different from other professions, but for that reason police unions are different, while not entirely separate, from the rest of the labor movement.
  • Crœsos wrote: »
    If a distraught woman calls *911* asking for the police to come to her home because the man (she claims) RAPED her is THERE NOW ... you think it would be better to send a couple of social workers armed with coupons for free ice cream for everybody ... ??
    Yes, the because clearly only alternative is social workers armed with free ice-cream.

    It's a rhetorical two-step. The first step is to express contempt at attempts to address any kind of social problem (drug addiction, mental health, runaway teens, etc.) through any means other than the criminal justice system. I suppose that's an argument, that government resources should be directed very heavily towards police, courts, and prisons and away from anything else because police/courts/prisons provide the most bang for the buck (metaphorically and literally).

    Then there's the deflection.
    But ... The voters/citizens acting through their elected reps. had CLOSED DOWN most of the State Hospitals in favor of "neighborhood group homes" (BUT ... then ... most of those same citizens/voters didn't want *those* people in group homes "in MY neighborhood" ... So ... )

    NONE of that is/was the fault of the cops ...
    There ARE still State Hospitals, but far fewer of them, with not nearly enough *beds* and the treatment programs offered are mostly *voluntary* (although not all) ...

    But, yes ... PART of the idea was to provide more *humane* and gentle situations for chronically mentally ill/defective persons ... Ironically, the default arrangement has been jails and prisons ...

    Got that? Despite the assumption that police are better at dealing with problems than "social workers" (such as trained mental health professionals, who apparently rely on ice cream based therapies) it's not the fault of the cops that they have trouble dealing with the mentally ill that the cops/courts/prisons are supposedly better at dealing with.

    No ...
    Member of a law enforcement family here ...
    Former mental health professional here -- locked adult unit and community agency ...
    Former super-max prison chaplain here ...
    I've BEEN there DONE that, so don't lecture me ..

    I'm NOT an arm-chair woo-hoo "Monday-Morning-Quarterback" critic of any particular stance on these questions ...

    I am just real life familiar with the real world and the VERY difficult situations faced by -- and GENERATED by -- our society as a whole ...

    I don't see these as neatly theoretical matters but as real life CASES, one by one ...
  • tclune wrote: »
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    Ruth wrote: »
    Police unions are actively fighting reforms. And then they wonder why people don't like them.
    Police unions are a major part of the problem. The way they defend cops as automatically in the right would be insane even were the police not biased.

    I confess to being of two minds on this. I am thoroughly pro-union. The notion that workers are the problem is, to my mind, quintessentially classist bigotry. And it invariably arises when unions acquire any power. It is especially discordant when coming from the left.
    However, there is a real problem with policing in this country. We have dumped all manner of social work onto the laps of the police, when they are manifestly not the right people to deal with those problems. When we deinstitutionalized the mentally ill, for example, we did virtually nothing to provide an alternative structure for dealing with the social problems that would create. The militarization of the police that has arisen since the rise of SWAT teams and the like only aggravates the unfitness of police as an institution to respond to these kinds of needs.
    In reorganizing policing and social working tasks to better suit our needs, we can look at police unions as an impediment if we like. But that is the way management always views any voice but their own. It is appropriate for all stakeholders to have a seat at the table in this reorganization. Or so ISTM.

    It's worth noting that, at least in the US, police unions are very different from other unions, even other public sector unions, in that for some time now as local government budgets have been crunched (remember police in the US are for the most part locally run and funded), police unions have often negotiated/advocated for laws and policies that protect them from prosecution (or from investigations that could lead to prosecution) for misconduct on duty since that gives officers job security and costs the government less than other increases to compensation and benefits.

    I can't think of any other example where members of a union use collective bargaining and lobbying to shield themselves from legal consequences for the use of violence on the job. Granted, being a police officer is different from other professions, but for that reason police unions are different, while not entirely separate, from the rest of the labor movement.

    Very few other professions, unionized or not, are specifically particularly authorized deputized trained armed EXPECTED to use violence force -- including even deadly force -- in certain situations ... in order to protect and serve innocent others ...
  • fuck all that.
    @Fr Teilhard Do you acknowledge the racism inherent in policing?
  • lilbuddha wrote: »
    fuck all that.
    @Fr Teilhard Do you acknowledge the racism inherent in policing?

    Oh, "racism" in general pervades our society ...

    I'm 71+ ... I vividly remember the 60s protests and riots,
    MLK's murder, the looooong slooooow progress of legislation
    aimed at redressing and reversing racial and economic injustices ...

    But blaming "the cops" for those problems will not help the situation ...
    These are DEEP longstanding problems that must be addressed BROADLY ...
  • lilbuddha wrote: »
    fuck all that.
    @Fr Teilhard Do you acknowledge the racism inherent in policing?

    Oh, "racism" in general pervades our society ...

    I'm 71+ ... I vividly remember the 60s protests and riots,
    MLK's murder, the looooong slooooow progress of legislation
    aimed at redressing and reversing racial and economic injustices ...

    But blaming "the cops" for those problems will not help the situation ...
    These are DEEP longstanding problems that must be addressed BROADLY ...

    We don't blame the cops for those problems. We blame the cops for killing black men and hiding behind the blue wall and qualified immunity. We blame them for engineering the system so that they cannot be held accountable for their misdeeds. We blame them for rushing to the defence of the indefensible just because the evil actor wears blue.
  • lilbuddha wrote: »
    fuck all that.
    @Fr Teilhard Do you acknowledge the racism inherent in policing?

    Oh, "racism" in general pervades our society ...

    I'm 71+ ... I vividly remember the 60s protests and riots,
    MLK's murder, the looooong slooooow progress of legislation
    aimed at redressing and reversing racial and economic injustices ...

    But blaming "the cops" for those problems will not help the situation ...
    These are DEEP longstanding problems that must be addressed BROADLY ...
    No. The problem of the police has to be dealt with directly, because they are directly killing people and directly influencing what society thinks about POC. And because, as mt points out, they are ACTIVELY fighting against changing.
    Police are one of the fundamental building blocks of institutional racism.
  • @Fr Teilhard you haven’t responded to the video I posted.
  • orfeoorfeo Shipmate
    Frankly, a discussion about the bias of the legal system and of law enforcement is not advanced one iota by picking over the details of an individual case to show why that case is okay. Assuming that it actually makes sense to say that a given case is okay, which it seems is less and likely to be justifiable - the cases being put forward as outrageous examples of police behaviour are actually getting more and more outrageous in an implicit attempt to say "surely you can't find this one acceptable"... and yet people somehow still do.

    It also seems completely irrelevant to a discussion about how the police go about detaining someone or otherwise dealing with them to talk about whether the police were justified in dealing with someone at all. That's usually not the question. Sure, in some cases there's a question as to whether the police needed to do anything at all, but in lots of instances the issue is not about whether the police had authority to arrest or detain someone. The issue is why the hell the police seem to lack the skills to arrest or detain someone safely.

    And I think it's definitely fair to ask why police in the USA seem to have lower skills in this area than their overseas counterparts.

    Lack of accountability is probably part of it. Racism is probably part of it. Having thousands and thousands of completely separate law enforcement agencies so that better practices developed in any one location never have a chance to spread is probably part of it. Constantly having the subconscious thought that people you are dealing with might have guns is probably part of it. Subconsciously believing that your gun is a solution to any problem you might face (not least because every hero you've seen in the movies or TV solves their problems that way) is probably part of it.
  • @Fr Teilhard you haven’t responded to the video I posted.

    No, because it's ONE CASE ...
  • lilbuddha wrote: »
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    fuck all that.
    @Fr Teilhard Do you acknowledge the racism inherent in policing?

    Oh, "racism" in general pervades our society ...

    I'm 71+ ... I vividly remember the 60s protests and riots,
    MLK's murder, the looooong slooooow progress of legislation
    aimed at redressing and reversing racial and economic injustices ...

    But blaming "the cops" for those problems will not help the situation ...
    These are DEEP longstanding problems that must be addressed BROADLY ...
    No. The problem of the police has to be dealt with directly, because they are directly killing people and directly influencing what society thinks about POC. And because, as mt points out, they are ACTIVELY fighting against changing.
    Police are one of the fundamental building blocks of institutional racism.

    THE problem is SOCIETY ...
    Cops don't cause it, the reflect it ... and in the meantime, in American society there are far too many guns in hands of too many people who shouldn't have them ..
  • lilbuddha wrote: »
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    fuck all that.
    @Fr Teilhard Do you acknowledge the racism inherent in policing?

    Oh, "racism" in general pervades our society ...

    I'm 71+ ... I vividly remember the 60s protests and riots,
    MLK's murder, the looooong slooooow progress of legislation
    aimed at redressing and reversing racial and economic injustices ...

    But blaming "the cops" for those problems will not help the situation ...
    These are DEEP longstanding problems that must be addressed BROADLY ...
    No. The problem of the police has to be dealt with directly, because they are directly killing people and directly influencing what society thinks about POC. And because, as mt points out, they are ACTIVELY fighting against changing.
    Police are one of the fundamental building blocks of institutional racism.

    THE problem is SOCIETY ...
    Cops don't cause it, the reflect it ... and in the meantime, in American society there are far too many guns in hands of too many people who shouldn't have them ..
    Cops are causal. They treat POC badly, society sees this and it reinforces the systemic racism. They create an atmosphere of fear.
    And if they are merely a reflection of society, if they have no more agency than that, why the fuck should they have any authority?
  • I don't see these as neatly theoretical matters but as real life CASES, one by one ...

    And that's a problem. If you look at most of the individual examples of police officer - suspect interaction, you can justify the officer's actions. There are a few egregious examples, but most cases are not as clear-cut as a cop kneeling on someone's neck as he slowly dies.

    Just the other day we saw yet another example of a mother calling 911 because her mentally-ill teenage son was in distress, and the responding cops solved the problem by shooting the boy several times. Again, this is not an isolated problem. The standard modus operandi for most American cops is to start barking orders, and to escalate if their orders aren't immediately complied with.

    I don't know anyone without mental issues who responds well to being shouted at. For an autistic boy with anxiety issues, it's about the worst possible approach out of the entire universe of possible approaches.

    Cops aren't trained for this. On an individual level, you can expect a cop to do the best they can consistent with their training. You can't expect them to invent new doctrines out of whole cloth on the fly.

    The problem is that their training is bad. They aren't trained to avoid conflict - they're trained to provoke it.

    Like @orfeo says,
    The issue is why the hell the police seem to lack the skills to arrest or detain someone safely.

    Or, at least, that's one of the issues. There are multiple things in play here. There's racism, for example, and making the police less likely to kill someone won't make them less likely to hassle those of darker hue, or assume that they're criminals, but it would at least make them less likely to end up dead.

    In general, police-are-racist and police-kill-people-unnecessarily are separate problems that combine to produce an excessive number of dead black people.
  • I don't see these as neatly theoretical matters but as real life CASES, one by one ...
    @Fr Teilhard you haven’t responded to the video I posted.

    No, because it's ONE CASE ...

    Apparently each case needs to be addressed one by one . . . except that one.

    Of course one of the problems with one-off solutions to individual cases is that it means there's no such thing as rule of law or ability to regulate anything. No general principles or guidelines, just individual cases.
    THE problem is SOCIETY ...
    Cops don't cause it, the reflect it ...

    I saw this a lot during the various religious abuse scandals. The idea is that if everyone is to blame then no one is responsible and nothing either needs to be done or can be done. It's all either individual cases which must be addressed individually, or "society as a whole" which can't be effectively changed. There are apparently no organizational units in between individuals and society as a whole that can be addressed or changed.
    Cops aren't trained for this. On an individual level, you can expect a cop to do the best they can consistent with their training. You can't expect them to invent new doctrines out of whole cloth on the fly.
    The problem is that their training is bad. They aren't trained to avoid conflict - they're trained to provoke it.

    As @Fr Teilhard seems to be arguing, "training" is something that happens at a level above the individual and is thus irrelevant. I'd argue the contrary position. For example, if one cop in a department gets caught planting a toy gun on a citizen to provide a post facto justification for his actions that might be waved off as an individual bad actor. If multiple cops in the same department routinely have toy guns with them for the same reason we can either conclude that they all hit on the same idea independently or that there's some kind of institutional transmission of knowledge that this is an acceptable way for police to interact with the public. The latter seems a lot more likely than the former, and I don't think it's something that can be kicked upstairs to "society as a whole" since most people in society as a whole would find the utility of being able to plant evidence on someone else negligible.
  • tclunetclune Shipmate
    Crœsos wrote: »
    .... I don't think it's something that can be kicked upstairs to "society as a whole" since most people in society as a whole would find the utility of being able to plant evidence on someone else negligible.

    Ah, but that's the beauty of "stand your ground laws." It makes these ploys much more generally useful. ;)
  • Crœsos wrote: »
    As @Fr Teilhard seems to be arguing, "training" is something that happens at a level above the individual and is thus irrelevant.

    "Training" is a thing that we can do something about (and we agree that "training" includes both formal training, informal guidance from experienced officers, and general enculturation). "Cop making a bad choice" isn't something we can do anything about. The purpose of training is both to reduce the chance of the cop making a bad choice, and to reduce the scope and impact of his bad choice when he makes it.
  • DoublethinkDoublethink Shipmate
    edited September 10
    @Fr Teilhard you haven’t responded to the video I posted.

    No, because it's ONE CASE ...

    You asked for a credible account of what could have been done. For one thing the man who was shot you were talking about, hadn’t even been prevented by officers from getting to his vehicle. He wasn’t armed when he was shot, he *might* have been going to become armed - they couldn’t wait ?

    What is more the video is being discussed as an aid to police training and to clarify police strategy. That was not improv it was a trained tactical response.

    We have armed police in the U.K., they could have chosen to contain him and called in an armed response unit. They didn’t because they chose to use a minimum force response.
  • @Fr Teilhard you haven’t responded to the video I posted.

    No, because it's ONE CASE ...

    You asked for a credible account of what could have been done. For one thing the man who was shot you were talking about, hadn’t even been prevented by officers from getting to his vehicle. He wasn’t armed when he was shot, he *might* have been going to become armed - they couldn’t wait ?

    What is more the video is being discussed as an aid to police training and to clarify police strategy. That was not improv it was a trained tactical response.

    We have armed police in the U.K., they could have chosen to contain him and called in an armed response unit. They didn’t because they chose to use a minimum force response.

    The guy was tasered twice with no effect, they tried to physically restrain him, he continued to move into his vehicle where there was a knife on the floorboard ... (Doesn't EVERYBODY flatly refuse to comply with simple verbal police requests and commands, doesn't EVERYBODY actively resist arrest, doesn't EVERY accused rapist return to the scene of the reported assault, doesn't EVERYBODY keep a deadly weapon on the floor of his vehicle and head for it while resisting arrest ... ???) ... Okay, the cops COULD have offered him some coupons for free ice cream ... I guess ...
  • RuthRuth Admin Emeritus
    @Fr Teilhard: Perhaps you are unaware that all caps in bulletin board discussions indicates yelling?
  • orfeoorfeo Shipmate
    edited September 10
    @Fr Teilhard you haven’t responded to the video I posted.

    No, because it's ONE CASE ...

    You asked for a credible account of what could have been done. For one thing the man who was shot you were talking about, hadn’t even been prevented by officers from getting to his vehicle. He wasn’t armed when he was shot, he *might* have been going to become armed - they couldn’t wait ?

    What is more the video is being discussed as an aid to police training and to clarify police strategy. That was not improv it was a trained tactical response.

    We have armed police in the U.K., they could have chosen to contain him and called in an armed response unit. They didn’t because they chose to use a minimum force response.

    The guy was tasered twice with no effect, they tried to physically restrain him, he continued to move into his vehicle where there was a knife on the floorboard ... (Doesn't EVERYBODY flatly refuse to comply with simple verbal police requests and commands, doesn't EVERYBODY actively resist arrest, doesn't EVERY accused rapist return to the scene of the reported assault, doesn't EVERYBODY keep a deadly weapon on the floor of his vehicle and head for it while resisting arrest ... ???) ... Okay, the cops COULD have offered him some coupons for free ice cream ... I guess ...

    Well if we are going to pick over the details of an individual case, let's pick apart some of these statements.

    1. The fact that someone is outside a house doesn't miraculously justify every police choice. For one thing being outside the house and walking away from it to a car... you're implicitly trying to argue the police are defending someone, when that is completely different from walking into the house or being in it. You remind me of the particularly stupid dogs who see me on the footpath outside their house and then keep barking for the next 5 minutes as I walk on down the road. Smart dogs are the ones who stop making noise when they can see I'm not coming any closer.

    2. The notion that resisting arrest is a reason to shoot someone just taps back into this whole question of why American police believe shooting someone is a solution to a problem. You're talking about a situation where the police are still physically proximate. And for many police forces, possible escape is simply not a sufficient reason to open fire.

    3. You're talking about a knife on the floor of a car as justifying police opening fire... is this one of those post-factual justifications? Because how the hell do the police know there's a knife on the floor of the car? Were they busy peering downwards into the empty vehicle at some point? Unless the guy said "I'm going to get my knife" I'm finding it hard to work out how the police, at the time, could have factored the knife into their decision making. Feel free to enlighten me on that, because I haven't been spending my time obsessing over the facts.
  • orfeo wrote: »
    @Fr Teilhard you haven’t responded to the video I posted.

    No, because it's ONE CASE ...

    You asked for a credible account of what could have been done. For one thing the man who was shot you were talking about, hadn’t even been prevented by officers from getting to his vehicle. He wasn’t armed when he was shot, he *might* have been going to become armed - they couldn’t wait ?

    What is more the video is being discussed as an aid to police training and to clarify police strategy. That was not improv it was a trained tactical response.

    We have armed police in the U.K., they could have chosen to contain him and called in an armed response unit. They didn’t because they chose to use a minimum force response.

    The guy was tasered twice with no effect, they tried to physically restrain him, he continued to move into his vehicle where there was a knife on the floorboard ... (Doesn't EVERYBODY flatly refuse to comply with simple verbal police requests and commands, doesn't EVERYBODY actively resist arrest, doesn't EVERY accused rapist return to the scene of the reported assault, doesn't EVERYBODY keep a deadly weapon on the floor of his vehicle and head for it while resisting arrest ... ???) ... Okay, the cops COULD have offered him some coupons for free ice cream ... I guess ...

    Well if we are going to pick over the details of an individual case, let's pick apart some of these statements.

    1. The fact that someone is outside a house doesn't miraculously justify every police choice. For one thing being outside the house and walking away from it to a car... you're implicitly trying to argue the police are defending someone, when that is completely different from walking into the house or being in it. You remind me of the particularly stupid dogs who see me on the footpath outside their house and then keep barking for the next 5 minutes as I walk on down the road. Smart dogs are the ones who stop making noise when they can see I'm not coming any closer.

    2. The notion that resisting arrest is a reason to shoot someone just taps back into this whole question of why American police believe shooting someone is a solution to a problem. You're talking about a situation where the police are still physically proximate. And for many police forces, possible escape is simply not a sufficient reason to open fire.

    3. You're talking about a knife on the floor of a car as justifying police opening fire... is this one of those post-factual justifications? Because how the hell do the police know there's a knife on the floor of the car? Were they busy peering downwards into the empty vehicle at some point? Unless the guy said "I'm going to get my knife" I'm finding it hard to work out how the police, at the time, could have factored the knife into their decision making. Feel free to enlighten me on that, because I haven't been spending my time obsessing over the facts.

    (Reportedly) there was an active warrant for the guy for sexual assault, who showed up at the home of the woman whom he (reportedly) had raped ... SHE called *911* ... The guy resisted arrest, reused to comply with police requests and commands, was tasered twice with no effect, was getting into/reaching into his vehicle where a knife was visible on the floorboard ...

    What should the cops have done ... ???
  • Ruth wrote: »
    @Fr Teilhard: Perhaps you are unaware that all caps in bulletin board discussions indicates yelling?

    It indicates that I don't know how to do *bold* type to indicate emphasis ...
  • @Fr Teilhard you haven’t responded to the video I posted.

    No, because it's ONE CASE ...

    You asked for a credible account of what could have been done. For one thing the man who was shot you were talking about, hadn’t even been prevented by officers from getting to his vehicle. He wasn’t armed when he was shot, he *might* have been going to become armed - they couldn’t wait ?

    What is more the video is being discussed as an aid to police training and to clarify police strategy. That was not improv it was a trained tactical response.

    We have armed police in the U.K., they could have chosen to contain him and called in an armed response unit. They didn’t because they chose to use a minimum force response.

    Indeed, each and every case must be handled/understood/critiqued as the particular case that IT is ...
  • lilbuddha wrote: »
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    Twilight wrote: »
    I know it's hard for some people to believe that a man could die tragically and unfairly, be a victim of murder, and still be sort of a bad guy, but it's really very possible. It happens all the time.
    It doesn't matter what led up to the moment we see on the video of the cops kneeling on Floyd's neck. There are circumstances in which the actions leading up to explain why police went too far. Nothing in this case does.
    Adding: You might not be intending to do so, but what you are doing looks like what happens every-time a cop kills a black person wrongly and that is try the victim.

    The currently VERY-popular cop*bashing mood seems to have police officers just cruising around American towns and cities looking for perfectly innocent (generally, "of color") to abuse at random whim ...
    Bullshit. Complete bullshit, though I suppose it helps people who unreservedly support the police sleep better at night to believe the bullshit.
    Police harass and kill POC at a far greater rate than white people. That is the current mood.

    disclosure:
    I come from a law enforcement family, so I do have a perspective not shared by all ...
    One of my brothers was a sheriff's deputy, one of my nephews recently retired from a city cop career, our great uncle was a town cop who was murdered when he interrupted a burglary in progress ...
    I myself spent two years behind bars at a super-max for adult male felons (as a chaplain, thank God) ...
    For the last ten years I have been in charge of Security for a community organization I help lead ... EVERY *bust* I/we have made at one of our annual conventions was of a WHITE person, virtually ALL of whom loudly proclaim their *innocence* combined with threats made to us -- "DON'T TOUCH ME ... !!! ... I'LL SUE YOU ... !!!"

    These are not simple things, and EVERY case must be handled, judged, analyzed as its OWN case ... according to (1) the Laws, and (2) the FACTS ...
    We've had this discussion before. Yous is the argument people hide behind to avoid facing the bias inherent in the system and in almost every police officer officer because of their indoctrination in that system.
    In order for individual cases to be judged fairly, that bias must be acknowledged.

    Yes, the legal-justice system IS *biased* in favor of the police, the prosecutors and the courts ... (and in general, crime victims) ...

    E.g., that guy who was recently shot by police in Kenosha, Wisconsin, was wanted for sexual assault ... He went to the HOME of the woman he (reportedly) had raped and SHE called the cops (DUH !!!) (Instead, she should have apologized to HIM for being so mean to him and made him a nice breakfast ... ??? ... and invited him into her bed ... ??? ...) ...

    He resisted arrest, was tasered twice (with no effect), was trying to get into the driver side of his vehicle where there was a KNIFE visible on the floor ... So an officer SHOT him ...

    Picture this ... BEFORE he was able to get into the car, the cops throw a big net over him and so tangle him up and pull him to the ground ...
    "OH NO ... !!! ... They threw a NET over him like he was some kind of ANIMAL ... !!! ... He could have hit his head on the pavement and been HURT ... !!!"

    How about this instead:
    Go to: Google Video" by Chris Rock ( a BLACK guy):
    "How To Not Get Your Ass Kicked By The Police" ...
    What he did in the past doesn't have any fucking relevance. This is not Judge Dredd, they are supposed to detain people, not fucking execute them.
    As Karl mentions, the UK police manage to disarm people whilst having no guns themselves.The motherfucking approach of American police is to shoot what they don't understand.
    They are poorly trained and think they must be obeyed. Their fucking job is to PROTECT citizens, but they see themselves as authority first, employees of the citizenry 10th or 11th.
    They are civil SERVANTS.
    Police are biased against POC. They disproportionately see black people as a threat in sitations where they do not so react to white people. They are biased against people with mental health issues. They have no appreciable training in dealing with mental health issues. They have poor training in de-escalation.

    Our entire society needs updating in many respects, including the American love of guns and disdain for social rather that individualistic considerations ...
  • orfeoorfeo Shipmate
    edited September 10
    orfeo wrote: »
    @Fr Teilhard you haven’t responded to the video I posted.

    No, because it's ONE CASE ...

    You asked for a credible account of what could have been done. For one thing the man who was shot you were talking about, hadn’t even been prevented by officers from getting to his vehicle. He wasn’t armed when he was shot, he *might* have been going to become armed - they couldn’t wait ?

    What is more the video is being discussed as an aid to police training and to clarify police strategy. That was not improv it was a trained tactical response.

    We have armed police in the U.K., they could have chosen to contain him and called in an armed response unit. They didn’t because they chose to use a minimum force response.

    The guy was tasered twice with no effect, they tried to physically restrain him, he continued to move into his vehicle where there was a knife on the floorboard ... (Doesn't EVERYBODY flatly refuse to comply with simple verbal police requests and commands, doesn't EVERYBODY actively resist arrest, doesn't EVERY accused rapist return to the scene of the reported assault, doesn't EVERYBODY keep a deadly weapon on the floor of his vehicle and head for it while resisting arrest ... ???) ... Okay, the cops COULD have offered him some coupons for free ice cream ... I guess ...

    Well if we are going to pick over the details of an individual case, let's pick apart some of these statements.

    1. The fact that someone is outside a house doesn't miraculously justify every police choice. For one thing being outside the house and walking away from it to a car... you're implicitly trying to argue the police are defending someone, when that is completely different from walking into the house or being in it. You remind me of the particularly stupid dogs who see me on the footpath outside their house and then keep barking for the next 5 minutes as I walk on down the road. Smart dogs are the ones who stop making noise when they can see I'm not coming any closer.

    2. The notion that resisting arrest is a reason to shoot someone just taps back into this whole question of why American police believe shooting someone is a solution to a problem. You're talking about a situation where the police are still physically proximate. And for many police forces, possible escape is simply not a sufficient reason to open fire.

    3. You're talking about a knife on the floor of a car as justifying police opening fire... is this one of those post-factual justifications? Because how the hell do the police know there's a knife on the floor of the car? Were they busy peering downwards into the empty vehicle at some point? Unless the guy said "I'm going to get my knife" I'm finding it hard to work out how the police, at the time, could have factored the knife into their decision making. Feel free to enlighten me on that, because I haven't been spending my time obsessing over the facts.

    (Reportedly) there was an active warrant for the guy for sexual assault, who showed up at the home of the woman whom he (reportedly) had raped ... SHE called *911* ... The guy resisted arrest, reused to comply with police requests and commands, was tasered twice with no effect, was getting into/reaching into his vehicle where a knife was visible on the floorboard ...

    What should the cops have done ... ???

    Well done on not actually responding to any of my points.

    And the fact that you think you can just slap "getting into his vehicle" and "reaching into his vehicle" together as if it doesn't matter which is part of the problem.

    I've already said to you, in many parts of the world escaping is not a basis for shooting someone, so that answers the getting into. What should the cops have done? Options include following him, arresting him later including at his home, etc etc. If he leaves then the 911 call is effectively resolved.

    And I've also already asked you about the knife and whether the police could have known about it at the time. Now you just say it was "visible on the floorboard". Oh right, because you've added the word "visible" I'm immediately satisfied that there's some sort of configuration where the police can see past the guy into his car at a sufficiently steep angle to check out the floor, all while keeping an eye on the man himself. Have you actually tried looking into your own car lately, and considered what it takes to look at the floor from outside?

    I'm not interested in whether a knife was found in the car after the man was shot. I'm interested in what evidence there is that the police knew about the knife before the man was shot.

    You repeating all the same material is not a meaningful response. I'm asking you to examine the narrative, not regurgitate it.
  • orfeo wrote: »
    orfeo wrote: »
    @Fr Teilhard you haven’t responded to the video I posted.

    No, because it's ONE CASE ...

    You asked for a credible account of what could have been done. For one thing the man who was shot you were talking about, hadn’t even been prevented by officers from getting to his vehicle. He wasn’t armed when he was shot, he *might* have been going to become armed - they couldn’t wait ?

    What is more the video is being discussed as an aid to police training and to clarify police strategy. That was not improv it was a trained tactical response.

    We have armed police in the U.K., they could have chosen to contain him and called in an armed response unit. They didn’t because they chose to use a minimum force response.

    The guy was tasered twice with no effect, they tried to physically restrain him, he continued to move into his vehicle where there was a knife on the floorboard ... (Doesn't EVERYBODY flatly refuse to comply with simple verbal police requests and commands, doesn't EVERYBODY actively resist arrest, doesn't EVERY accused rapist return to the scene of the reported assault, doesn't EVERYBODY keep a deadly weapon on the floor of his vehicle and head for it while resisting arrest ... ???) ... Okay, the cops COULD have offered him some coupons for free ice cream ... I guess ...

    Well if we are going to pick over the details of an individual case, let's pick apart some of these statements.

    1. The fact that someone is outside a house doesn't miraculously justify every police choice. For one thing being outside the house and walking away from it to a car... you're implicitly trying to argue the police are defending someone, when that is completely different from walking into the house or being in it. You remind me of the particularly stupid dogs who see me on the footpath outside their house and then keep barking for the next 5 minutes as I walk on down the road. Smart dogs are the ones who stop making noise when they can see I'm not coming any closer.

    2. The notion that resisting arrest is a reason to shoot someone just taps back into this whole question of why American police believe shooting someone is a solution to a problem. You're talking about a situation where the police are still physically proximate. And for many police forces, possible escape is simply not a sufficient reason to open fire.

    3. You're talking about a knife on the floor of a car as justifying police opening fire... is this one of those post-factual justifications? Because how the hell do the police know there's a knife on the floor of the car? Were they busy peering downwards into the empty vehicle at some point? Unless the guy said "I'm going to get my knife" I'm finding it hard to work out how the police, at the time, could have factored the knife into their decision making. Feel free to enlighten me on that, because I haven't been spending my time obsessing over the facts.

    (Reportedly) there was an active warrant for the guy for sexual assault, who showed up at the home of the woman whom he (reportedly) had raped ... SHE called *911* ... The guy resisted arrest, reused to comply with police requests and commands, was tasered twice with no effect, was getting into/reaching into his vehicle where a knife was visible on the floorboard ...

    What should the cops have done ... ???

    Well done on not actually responding to any of my points.

    And the fact that you think you can just slap "getting into his vehicle" and "reaching into his vehicle" together as if it doesn't matter which is part of the problem.

    I've already said to you, in many parts of the world escaping is not a basis for shooting someone, so that answers the getting into. What should the cops have done? Options include following him, arresting him later including at his home, etc etc. If he leaves then the 911 call is effectively resolved.

    And I've also already asked you about the knife and whether the police could have known about it at the time. Now you just say it was "visible on the floorboard". Oh right, because you've added the word "visible" I'm immediately satisfied that there's some sort of configuration where the police can see past the guy into his car at a sufficiently steep angle to check out the floor, all while keeping an eye on the man himself. Have you actually tried looking into your own car lately, and considered what it takes to look at the floor from outside?

    I'm not interested in whether a knife was found in the car after the man was shot. I'm interested in what evidence there is that the police knew about the knife before the man was shot.

    You repeating all the same material is not a meaningful response. I'm asking you to examine the narrative, not regurgitate it.

    I wasn't there and neither were you ...
    All I know is the facts that have been reported, including the brief video footage that has been shared with the public ...

    If you have more known documented facts, you are free to share them ...
  • orfeo wrote: »
    Oh the irony.

    So do you actually know that the knife was visible and known to the police, or did you just fill that in in your mind from what was reported?

    I wasn't there, so obviously I don't know, nor does anyone else who wasn't THERE at the time ... So this will go to the courts ...

    What seems undisputed at this time is that:

    (1) a woman had reported having been raped by the guy,
    so there was an active warrant for his arrest

    (2) he showed up at her address and she called the police

    (3) he refused to comply with any police commands

    (4) he was tasered without effect

    (5) he was getting into his vehicle

    (6) he was shot by police

    This wasn't a case of some nasty racist cops just picking on an innocent person of color at random on the street ...

Sign In or Register to comment.