Cop in America doing a bad job, again

entropy said:
The only solution is to recognize cops for who they are and start by defunding, demilitarizing, and dismantling them. What we are witnessing are police riots. And unless one is willing to call BS on cops and their role in inciting violence, we will never fully understand them. Like someone else who pointed out in this thread, what we are witnessing is just the tip of the iceberg. My list is long but here are some fundamental changes that are long overdue.
--Police Unions are terrible and make it impossible to hold any officers accountable. Every time any kind of reform is passed, unions just veto them or change the language to shield officers from any form of accountability. Ban them from interfering or framing the guidelines under which officers are investigated.
--Ban police unions from donating to state legislators. Why is this not the norm already?
--Ban cops from receiving military-grade weapons. No grenades, no tanks, no armored vehicles
--Make it illegal for them to hire back officers who were fired or under investigation for serious misconduct
--Make a national database of officers who were fired while on duty
--End policing of minor offenses. Just kill the practice of broken window policing. It only perpetuates the cycle of shuffling poor people through jails, courts, prisons endlessly
Click to expand...

Great post.

Grinner said:
Not really. Why can't police unionise too and support political candidates? They have rights as workers.
Click to expand...

You're probs playing devil's advocate @Grinner , but we know that the Police aren't like normal industry, in the sense that they're enforcing the legislature. Mix em up [edit-with politics] and it get's fecked up dunnit?
 
Last edited:
Carolina Red said:
Solid suggestions and thank you for the response!
Click to expand...
I think it is important to understand that any reform or changes moving forward Should be done on the basis of defunding and demilitarizing them. We can’t pick and choose or mix and match reforms. Because once the protests die down, all police chiefs are going to be asking for more money and more power. And mayors have to reckon with doing something they’ve never done before, saying no to them.
 
Grinner said:
Not really. Why can't police unionise too and support political candidates? They have rights as workers.
Click to expand...
This is why its much simpler to be on the liberal side of the economic spectrum. I don't want anyone to unionize, the police included.
 
entropy said:
I think it is important to understand that any reform or changes moving forward Should be done on the basis of defunding and demilitarizing them. We can’t pick and choose or mix and match reforms. Because once the protests die down, all police chiefs are going to be asking for more money and more power. And mayors have to reckon with doing something they’ve never done before, saying no to them.
Click to expand...
I see your point. I agree, if the mayors don’t say no, I can definitely see this leading to the police getting more military equipment.
 
Grinner said:
Not really. Why can't police unionise too and support political candidates? They have rights as workers.
Click to expand...
I don't think the point is that police shouldn't be allowed to unionise, just that in their current iteration, police unions are a major part of the problem. If you're going to make sweeping reforms to policing, there needs to be sweeping reforms to police unions as well.
MTF said:
This is why its much simpler to be on the liberal side of the economic spectrum. I don't want anyone to unionize, the police included.
Click to expand...
Because if there's one thing we clearly need more of, it's exploitation of workers.
 
iluvoursolskjær said:
Great post.



You're probs playing devil's advocate @Grinner , but we know that the Police aren't like normal industry, in the sense that they're enforcing the legislature. Mix em up [edit-with politics] and it get's fecked up dunnit?
Click to expand...


Not really. I think they should be able to unionise but striking is another thing. If everybody else can influence politics via a union then why not them? Don't get me wrong, I'd prefer if the US political system were reformed to prevent political contributions but that's as likely as cops stopping murdering black people for fun.
 
entropy said:
Well for starters possession of marijuana, loitering, drinking in public, playing loud music, disorderly conduct. Also, stop jailing homeless people.
Click to expand...

In many of these cases, people are not arrested but given a citation and must pay it off and be attend a local court hearing. Possession of weed is getting more difficult to get around unless you're a dealer or within the drug trafficking system because many states have legalized weed and/or medicinal purposes. Local police do not jail homeless people like they once did maybe a handful of years, they have protocols that are much more in place now.

And these jailings are for hours or a couple days until a court hearing, or until they are bailed, etc.

If you're calling on police to be accountable, which is correct, then why should we "lessen" that same standard for the public. If you're breaking a law, no matter what, you should deal with some consequences...and with minor offences, it should be financial and put on your record but be allowed to expire in due time/due course.
 
entropy said:
Well for starters possession of marijuana, loitering, drinking in public, playing loud music, disorderly conduct. Also, stop jailing homeless people.
Click to expand...
You’ll be happy to know that due to covid19 people aren’t being arrested and even felony crimes are being released with a citation. But yes those are all minor offenses and depending on the department or state it’s a waste of time. Unfortunately as you know police have an obligation to respond to all calls for service and have to take action if necessary in the event joe blow citizen demands to press charges for an arrest.
 
edcunited1878 said:
In many of these cases, people are not arrested but given a citation and must pay it off and be attend a local court hearing. Possession of weed is getting more difficult to get around unless you're a dealer or within the drug trafficking system because many states have legalized weed and/or medicinal purposes. Local police do not jail homeless people like they once did maybe a handful of years, they have protocols that are much more in place now.

And these jailings are for hours or a couple days until a court hearing, or until they are bailed, etc.

If you're calling on police to be accountable, which is correct, then why should we "lessen" that same standard for the public. If you're breaking a law, no matter what, you should deal with some consequences...and with minor offences, it should be financial and put on your record but be allowed to expire in due time/due course.
Click to expand...

My point is you shouldn't even be jailing them, to begin with. Because these are BS laws that actually don't result in anything. And most of the people who get charged come from poor backgrounds, to begin with. Not only are you charging them for dumb shit but you are robbing them to pay for bail. Not to mention it goes on their record and stays with them for the rest of their life.

choiboyx012 said:
But yes those are all minor offenses and depending on the department or state it’s a waste of time. Unfortunately as you know police have an obligation to respond to all calls for service and have to take action if necessary in the event joe blow citizen demands to press charges for an arrest.
Click to expand...
Bingo. You are basically weaponizing their background against them. Being poor is their crime and the only solution "according to the law" is to find money that they don't have or just rot in jail.
 
Last edited:
entropy said:
My point is you shouldn't even be jailing them, to begin with. Because these are BS laws that actually don't result in anything. And most of the people who get charged come from poor backgrounds, to begin with. Not only are you charging them for dumb shit but you are robbing them to pay for bail. Not to mention it goes on their record and stays with them for the rest of their life.
Click to expand...

You're right, you probably shouldn't be jailing them. But then what do you do when/if they commit a crime or an act of illegal activity?

Being born poor or Black isn't a crime (although it's obvious there are cases that unfortunately completely defy that), but it's a systemic failure (which could be classified as a white collar crime or act of suppression/racism) that too many people have to go up against. It's a severe disadvantage that people are oblivious to or do not have to experience it.
 
edcunited1878 said:
You're right, you probably shouldn't be jailing them. But then what do you do when/if they commit a crime or an act of illegal activity?

Being born poor or Black isn't a crime (although it's obvious there are cases that unfortunately completely defy that), but it's a systemic failure (which could be classified as a white collar crime or act of suppression/racism) that too many people have to go up against. It's a severe disadvantage that people are oblivious to or do not have to experience it.
Click to expand...
Well, these laws were BS to even begin with and that should tell you more about how crooked those enforcing them or writing them really are. And more importantly, they are designed to wreak havoc on black and other minority communities that are already struggling with poverty, lack of resources from the govt and are the most vulnerable amongst us. And what is being done to rectify that? Because those paying the price for it have their entire lives destroyed by it.
 
Last edited:
Grinner said:
Not really. I think they should be able to unionise but striking is another thing. If everybody else can influence politics via a union then why not them? Don't get me wrong, I'd prefer if the US political system were reformed to prevent political contributions but that's as likely as cops stopping murdering black people for fun.
Click to expand...

I'm totally against private industry and large corporations having lobbying power, but giving the same to an evidently structurally racist police force - I just don't get what it'd achieve other than support the arbitrary notion - in this context anyways - of fairness for "workers"? How does that do anything but make it worse as things stand?
 
2mufc0 said:
https://www.amnestyusa.org/with-who...-with-a-chronic-human-rights-violator-israel/
Click to expand...
I think I’ve seen something similar on this thread a few years ago. Article is poorly written with no real evidence of anything and drawing unsupported conclusions.
If it’s any comfort i can assure you it’s not like departments are sending out dozens of officers at a time to Israel to do any training (like the article is trying to imply). I have however, heard of SWAT teams doing training with israeli forces. My dept’s swat team has had officers take a trip to Israel years ago. But that’s because we patrol a terrorism-sensitive target. I have friends in other departments that are in SWAT and none of them have gone to Israel for training, let alone regular officers.
 
I have a weird question, some may not even like it.

And don't get me wrong, the cop is an arsehole and deserves the hardest punishment for what he did. And my feelings are with Floyd and his family.

But why is this about racism? Is it known that the cop is a racist? Why is it different, if a white person kills a black person to if a black kills a black or a white kills a white? Shouldn't we be ahead of this in time?

Would there be a debate like this if a black cop kills a white? If the cop had no racial intends (but other assholerys), wouldn't it be racism against white people to accuse them of racism like that in general (not talking about the cop as an idividual, but about all white people in US)?


Sorry, to me stuff like this is always hard to understand, because for me every human is just a human, no matter the race or color. But i witnessed many times that a black killed a white and never a racism debate comes up (at least not to this extent), while the world goes crazy if the opposite thing happens. I obviously know about the past of black people in US, but times have changed drastically compared to the last centuries. However, unfortunately human beings will keep killing each other in future, no matter where they are coming from, so topics like this are always likely to come up, or not?

In a topic like this i just wonder what would happen, if for example a stupid and criminal german would kill a jew in Germany. Would the whole country have to suffer because of one idiot? It basically shows to me, how fragile this world and its peace really is.
 
OutlawGER said:
I have a weird question, some may not even like it.

And don't get me wrong, the cop is an arsehole and deserves the hardest punishment for what he did. And my feelings are with Floyd and his family.

But why is this about racism? Is it known that the cop is a racist? Why is it different, if a white person kills a black person to if a black kills a black or a white kills a white? Shouldn't we be ahead of this in time?

Would there be a debate like this if a black cop kills a white? If the cop had no racial intends (but other assholerys), wouldn't it be racism against white people to accuse them of racism like that in general (not talking about the cop as an idividual, but about all white people in US)?


Sorry, to me stuff like this is always hard to understand, because for me every human is just a human, no matter the race or color. But i witnessed many times that a black killed a white and never a racism debate comes up (at least not to this extent), while the world goes crazy if the opposite thing happens. I obviously know about the past of black people in US, but times have changed drastically compared to the last centuries. However, unfortunately human beings will keep killing each other in future, no matter where they are coming from, so topics like this are always likely to come up, or not?

In a topic like this i just wonder what would happen, if for example a stupid and criminal german would kill a jew in Germany. Would the whole country have to suffer because of one idiot? It basically shows to me, how fragile this world and its peace really is.
Click to expand...

I think it's pretty clear that institutional racism exists within the US police force. Black people are way more likely to be charged with an offence than a white person (for the same offence). However, that doesn't mean that white Americans don't face injustices too, just that they may be less frequent and the injustice may not have the persons skin colour as a factor but solely due to the incompetence of the officers.

The police in America needs vast improvement. Some suggestions which I think are very sensible would be these from Campaign Zero:



https://www.joincampaignzero.org/solutions#solutionsoverview
 
choiboyx012 said:
I think I’ve seen something similar on this thread a few years ago. Article is poorly written with no real evidence of anything and drawing unsupported conclusions.
If it’s any comfort i can assure you it’s not like departments are sending out dozens of officers at a time to Israel to do any training (like the article is trying to imply). I have however, heard of SWAT teams doing training with israeli forces. My dept’s swat team has had officers take a trip to Israel years ago. But that’s because we patrol a terrorism-sensitive target. I have friends in other departments that are in SWAT and none of them have gone to Israel for training, let alone regular officers.
Click to expand...

Are you joking? The article is not poorly written - care to point out which parts you believe to be so?

You say it provides 'no real evidence' - now with this point I am truly astounded. The article provides at least 25 external links to evidence for its claims. To deny that, you are either being wholly disingenuous or have not actually read the article. To have read that and concluded it provides 'no real evidence' is so laughably and demonstrably wrong.
 
BobbyManc said:
Are you joking? The article is not poorly written - care to point out which parts you believe to be so?

You say it provides 'no real evidence' - now with this point I am truly astounded. The article provides at least 25 external links to evidence for its claims. To deny that, you are either being wholly disingenuous or have not actually read the article. To have read that and concluded it provides 'no real evidence' is so laughably and demonstrably wrong.
Click to expand...
Ahh my bad, didn’t see the links on the states. But they confirm what I already knew in that it’s mostly top brass law enforcement officials going there to learn counter terrorism practices. probably because they’ve dealt with terrorism/active shooter incidents in their respective departments (like we have), or they have a terrorist target (like we do). But I can understand how citizens cities be concerned of their tax dollars paying for these police chiefs/sheriffs to go on these expensive trips.
 
choiboyx012 said:
Ahh my bad, didn’t see the links on the states. But they confirm what I already knew in that it’s mostly top brass law enforcement officials going there to learn counter terrorism practices. probably because they’ve dealt with terrorism/active shooter incidents in their respective departments (like we have), or they have a terrorist target (like we do). But I can understand how citizens cities be concerned of their tax dollars paying for these police chiefs/sheriffs to go on these expensive trips.
Click to expand...

It’s a bit strange you missed the links though, and dismissed it as poorly written when it’s a perfectly lucid article. And ‘counter-terrorism’ just seems like the most politically justifiable label to put on the links - it doesn’t sound like training is confined solely to that domain and does not carry over any crossover purposes in regular policing.

As for the rest, personally I don’t feel entirely comfortable focusing on Israel’s links to police training in America anyway. US has been brutalising its citizens way before Israel ever existed. Not that it’s not legitimate to draw attention to the links but I’d question the motive of someone treating it as one of the most important issues in police violence in America. It’s a footnote, and a concern for US taxpayers to raise, but that’s all.
 

Right decision. Never understood how putting your knee and body weight on someone's neck for 9 minutes doesn't show intent to kill.
Victim family's layer said the other officers told the cnut that Floyd didn't have a pulse and he still insisted on kneeling on his neck.
 
What happens if they fail to secure a second degree murder conviction? Is it a binary guilty or not guilty situation? Or can he still be convicted of a lesser third degree murder charge?
 
sullydnl said:
What happens if they fail to secure a second degree murder conviction? Is it a binary guilty or not guilty situation? Or can he still be convicted of a lesser third degree murder charge?
Click to expand...
Not a lawyer but I believe he can be found "not guilty" for murder, but can be "guilty" for other charges, so long as they meet the elements of the crime, and the DA files for those additional charges.
 
https://www.sfchronicle.com/crime/a...fies-SF-resident-fatally-shot-by-15315301.php

The man fatally shot by Vallejo police as the city erupted in chaos Tuesday was kneeling outside a Walgreens and not carrying a firearm when an officer opened fire — sending five bullets through his own windshield.

Sean Monterrosa, 22, of San Francisco died after the shooting at around 12:30 a.m. Tuesday, but police did not tell the public the man was killed — or disclose the circumstances of the shooting — until Wednesday at a news conference outside City Hall, a day after calling in 50 troops from the National Guard to help control protests and rioting sparked by the Minnesota police killing of George Floyd.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.