Jump to content

Who wants to defund / abolish the police?


Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, Grrr... said:

It's really unfortunate that the police triggered the increase in homicide in 2020 through their targeted racism. 

There is no evidence for targeting.  It's naïve to expect that blacks with their higher crime rates will have the same rate of police involvement as other racial groups.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The foot soldiers that former President Trump sent to the Capitol used fire extinguishers to abolish the police. I’m guessing that Officer Sicknick’s family doesn’t support abolishing the police. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it should be refunded, and cops/police should use their minds not there battle gear.

It seems today police are too afraid to do their job , it's much easier to kill some one then to talk to them.

The latest a 9 year old handcuffed is pepper sprayed so 2 adult cops could get her in a car, as the were afraid for their life, WTF My suggestion to them is look for a new career.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Not for nothing said:

I think it should be refunded, and cops/police should use their minds not there battle gear.

It seems today police are too afraid to do their job , it's much easier to kill some one then to talk to them.

The latest a 9 year old handcuffed is pepper sprayed so 2 adult cops could get her in a car, as the were afraid for their life, WTF My suggestion to them is look for a new career.

Have you ever fought with a struggling 9 year old?  I have (to prevent him from hurting himself).  Fingernails and teeth can be nasty weapons.  It's amazingly difficult.

I think we've short changed our police.  They need non-lethal non-dangerous forms of crowd and personal control, and we just haven't delivered those to them.  Somehow we can spend trillions to make bombs that can hit a toothpick in a cave under a mountain, but we can't give cops something that incapacitates people safely.  Tasers were a start, but we HAVE to be able to do better than that.

The sick-sticks from Demolition man spring to mind.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dog said:

There is no evidence for targeting.  It's naïve to expect that blacks with their higher crime rates will have the same rate of police involvement as other racial groups.

Bullshit.

xEE.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Grrr... said:

Have you ever fought with a struggling 9 year old?  I have (to prevent him from hurting himself).  Fingernails and teeth can be nasty weapons.  It's amazingly difficult.

I think we've short changed our police.  They need non-lethal non-dangerous forms of crowd and personal control, and we just haven't delivered those to them. 

Wrong. It is extremely easy to control a struggling 9 year old for anyone with even a modicum of training. The obvious problem is that somehow cops are allowed to keep their jobs despite being slow, fat, and not keeping up on any training whatsoever. Wide consensus on this from the entire martial arts and military community. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, MR.CLEAN said:

Wrong. It is extremely easy to control a struggling 9 year old for anyone with even a modicum of training. The obvious problem is that somehow cops are allowed to keep their jobs despite being slow, fat, and not keeping up on any training whatsoever. Wide consensus on this from the entire martial arts and military community. 

Should we fund more education or more violence?  https://www.ajc.com/news/crime/apd-officers-fired-for-using-tasers-on-college-students-reinstated/U2D7PVGZGVAI3DYQHYQ5COVVU4/

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Grrr... said:

Have you ever fought with a struggling 9 year old?  I have (to prevent him from hurting himself).  Fingernails and teeth can be nasty weapons.  It's amazingly difficult.

I think we've short changed our police.  They need non-lethal non-dangerous forms of crowd and personal control, and we just haven't delivered those to them.  Somehow we can spend trillions to make bombs that can hit a toothpick in a cave under a mountain, but we can't give cops something that incapacitates people safely.  Tasers were a start, but we HAVE to be able to do better than that.

The sick-sticks from Demolition man spring to mind.

Cast Net

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w6swnJXwEws

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Grrr... said:

Have you ever fought with a struggling 9 year old?  I have (to prevent him from hurting himself).  Fingernails and teeth can be nasty weapons.  It's amazingly difficult.

I think we've short changed our police.  They need non-lethal non-dangerous forms of crowd and personal control, and we just haven't delivered those to them.  Somehow we can spend trillions to make bombs that can hit a toothpick in a cave under a mountain, but we can't give cops something that incapacitates people safely.  Tasers were a start, but we HAVE to be able to do better than that.

The sick-sticks from Demolition man spring to mind.

First it was a 9 year old girl, which granted could be a hand full, that all she wanted was her father ( as most 9 yr girls want) and it was 3 adult male cops,

at on point :Three officers suspended after police pepper spray 9-year-old girl in Rochester, N.Y. (nbcnews.com)

“You’re acting like a child,” one of the officers says at one point.

“I am a child,” she can be heard responding.

so I agree that the police were in this case under trained, which is my point, I wonder if any of the officers had children, and how they would handle it at home?

So my ordinal statement don't defund the police refund them with training, 

Luckily in this case no one was killed

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Dog said:

The results are in, 2020 saw a 30 % increase in homicides despite a pandemic. The increase coincides with the BLM's war on police and the resulting defund the police movement. It coincides with less aggressive policing that shows up in a decline in stops and arrests.

Did anything else happen in 2020 that might have led to increased friction, or tension in society? Anything oppressive, or contributing to an economic slowdown? Anything that might have led to the usual predictors of crimes, such as food insecurity, homelessness, mental health crises and poor mental health care? 

Any interruption in educational or athletic opportunities that provide structure to young men’s lives, or  provide a safe outlet for energy and aggression?

Violence and homicide is best understood as a disease, one with risk factors, modifiable conditions and predictive circumstances.

It’s obvious to anyone seriously considering the subject that societal stressors and civilian health metrics were significantly altered by the pandemic.

To the extent that BLM recognized and spoke up for blacks who felt threatened not just by policing techniques and policies, but also threatened by an overt resurgence in white supremacy aided and abetted by our nations leaders, there was a racial element to crime last year.

But to completely ignore the impact of the pandemic on crime speaks either of raw stupidity or an asshole with a racist agenda.

Which motivation fuels @Dog I wonder?

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Dog said:

There is no evidence for targeting.  It's naïve to expect that blacks with their higher crime rates will have the same rate of police involvement as other racial groups.

You are lying, as usual. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, phillysailor said:

Did anything else happen in 2020 that might have led to increased friction, or tension in society? Anything oppressive, or contributing to an economic slowdown? Anything that might have led to the usual predictors of crimes, such as food insecurity, homelessness, mental health crises and poor mental health care? 

Any interruption in educational or athletic opportunities that provide structure to young men’s lives, or  provide a safe outlet for energy and aggression?

Violence and homicide is best understood as a disease, one with risk factors, modifiable conditions and predictive circumstances.

It’s obvious to anyone seriously considering the subject that societal stressors and civilian health metrics were significantly altered by the pandemic.

To the extent that BLM recognized and spoke up for blacks who felt threatened not just by policing techniques and policies, but also threatened by an overt resurgence in white supremacy aided and abetted by our nations leaders, there was a racial element to crime last year.

But to completely ignore the impact of the pandemic on crime speaks either of raw stupidity or an asshole with a racist agenda.

Which motivation fuels @Dog I wonder?

Like many things, they aren't mutually incompatible. However, the "asshole with a racist agenda" is certainly a big part of it. Some folks here say that Dog is smart, but I disagree. Maybe he used to be before the senility ramped up.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, mathystuff said:

My money is on him just liking the abuse.

If that's the case, I wish he would just stay in the basement and whack his dick with a rubber mallet instead of spewing garbage here.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The results are in, 2020 saw a 30 % increase in homicides despite a pandemic. The increase coincides with the time when our solar system's two biggest worlds – the mighty Jupiter followed by the glorious ringed Saturn – appeared in the sky next to each other at their closest since 1623 and closest visible from Earth since the Middle Ages in 1226. This happened in 2020, during an event called a “great conjunction.”

(Insert eerie music here.)

Correlation does not imply causation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess we could go full Stazi and clamp down on all members of society in a misguided attempt to decrease crime. But you'd just shift the nature and instigators of crime, not really reduce its impact on society. There are certain deleterious effects of authoritarian and totalitarian governments which speak against this approach, much as some aggressively righty types might proclaim their virtues.

It's better to reduce the desire or perceived need of members of society to solve their problems with violence, and to afford them more options which help avoid criminality in general. A lot of simple behaviors or petty offenses are punished monetarily by cities and state, and then nonpayment punished according to a system of judicial culture and established sentencing patterns. Unfortunately, there is a profit motive for both the state and the for-profit prison industry which has driven incarceration rates to among the highest in the world. 

I guess @Dog doesn't have the mental honesty or fortitude to face up to this obvious example of socialism. Those who chant "law and order" and "support our troops" (not meaning veterans affairs but weapons purchases) are supporting the two biggest examples of socialism in America today. Too bad they won't see the hypocrisy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Dog said:

There is no evidence for targeting.  It's naïve to expect that blacks with their higher crime rates will have the same rate of police involvement as other racial groups.

But there is evidence.

12 hours ago, Dog said:

The results are in, 2020 saw a 30 % increase in homicides despite a pandemic. The increase coincides with the BLM's war on police and the resulting defund the police movement. It coincides with less aggressive policing that shows up in a decline in stops and arrests.

The best, currently available evidence strongly supports the conclusion that the Great 2020 Homicide Spike resulted from the widespread anti-police protests, which in turn lead to a reduction in policing activity directed at fighting gun crimes. To save lives in 2021, we need urgent action to restore proactive policing to its pre-protest levels”.

Explaining the Great 2020 Homicide Spike – Reason.com

Of course the destructive effects of progressive hostility towards police is most severe for the minority communities of the nation's inner cities where a majority of the population does not want weakened policing.


And one good Reason article deserves two more. That one's not so good, IMO, advocating as it does for Bloomberg's failed stop and frisk programs. Those are where the stupid drug war meets the stupid gun war, and a prime example of the idea that we have a Stupid Party and an Evil Party in this country, and now and then they come up with something both stupid and evil and blessed bipartisan unity is achieved, making me long for gridlock.

7 Race-Neutral Solutions to Racially Skewed Law Enforcement

Racially Skewed Policing Is Not a Statistical Mirage

For those who object to the source, please just use Remodel's source, or maybe professor Oliver's, above.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like this may be a great way to address mental health crisis calls and worth further examination.

Denver successfully sent mental health professionals, not police, to hundreds of calls

Another U.S. city is reporting early success with a program that replaces traditional law enforcement responders with health care workers for some emergency calls.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Dog said:

Mugged by reality...the same city council that voted to abolish the police has in the wake of retirements and the resulting crime wave voted to spend $6.4M to hire new police officers.

Minneapolis to spend $6.4M to recruit more police officers | Daily Mail Online

It is true that the police cannot stop disfunction.  The schools lack the tools also.  We need to enable people with jobs.  With work comes self respect.

Who knows dog, even a woman or a puppy might like you if you knew how to find a job.

The cops could be fewer in number and more friendly if the chief didn't let Barney have a bullet.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So I'm curious.  The title of this thread talks about 'abolishing' the police.  Has anyone here actually responded that they want to get rid of police forces entirely?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Grrr... said:

So I'm curious.  The title of this thread talks about 'abolishing' the police.  Has anyone here actually responded that they want to get rid of police forces entirely?

This is anarchy.  As a political philosophy you should read about the Hay Market Massacre.  In a perfect world, no one needs rules.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, hasher said:

This is anarchy.  As a political philosophy you should read about the Hay Market Massacre.  In a perfect world, no one needs rules.

I am only very slightly familiar with that.  But I'm really interested if there is actually proof to this narrative that one individual has been so voraciously pushing that there is a large movement, and are people here who want to abolish police entirely.  I haven't seen evidence of it.  Even in anarchy, a liar is a liar.

I suspect, rather, that he's been running with what just a few people say in order to paint an entire political group as radicals.  That would be highly dishonest, but it's what we've come to expect.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Grrr... said:

I am only very slightly familiar with that.  But I'm really interested if there is actually proof to this narrative that one individual has been so voraciously pushing that there are people here who want to abolish police entirely.  I haven't seen evidence of it.  Even in anarchy, a liar is a liar.

There is an autobiography out there.  I think it tended to focus his mind knowing that hanging awaits him.

I admire the police.  I respect them.  Any thing they ask, I will comply.  It is a very difficult job and unfortunately, necessary.

Militarizing the police remains wrong.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, hasher said:

It is true that the police cannot stop disfunction.  The schools lack the tools also.  We need to enable people with jobs.  With work comes self respect.

Who knows dog, even a woman or a puppy might like you if you knew how to find a job.

The cops could be fewer in number and more friendly if the chief didn't let Barney have a bullet.

You're right, “we need to enable people with jobs”. Controlling crime is an absolute prerequisite for the creation of jobs in any community and the police are the institution that provides that condition. Sure there are some bad apples but if we want to reverse the deterioration of our failing communities the last thing we should be doing is defunding the police.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, hasher said:

There is an autobiography out there.  I think it tended to focus his mind knowing that hanging awaits him.

I admire the police.  I respect them.  Any thing they ask, I will comply.  It is a very difficult job and unfortunately, necessary.

Militarizing the police remains wrong.

I agree.  There would a reduced need for weaponizing the police if the criminals weren't weaponized as well.  But unfortunately the same people who oppose de-militarizing (and I'm coming to hate that overly generalized phrase)  also oppose improved firearm control.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Dog said:

You're right, “we need to enable people with jobs”. Controlling crime is an absolute prerequisite for the creation of jobs in any community and the police are the institution that provides that condition. Sure there are some bad apples but if we want to reverse the deterioration of our failing communities the last thing we should be doing is defunding the police.

It doesn't begin or end with police or schools.  There are places closing prisons for lack of candidates.  I'd like to see that here.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Grrr... said:

I agree.  There would a reduced need for weaponizing the police if the criminals weren't weaponized as well.  But unfortunately the same people who oppose de-militarizing (and I'm coming to hate that overly generalized phrase)  also oppose improved firearm control.

Come on, surely you want to know that the person next to you in the grocery store is strapping?  It will make you more careful with your shopping cart.  All is good.  There might be a bear or a tiger in the parking lot.  Where is the peace officer then?

Link to post
Share on other sites

'Controlling Crime' through force of arms is impossible.  If anyone would like proof of that, take a look at any of the many guerilla wars that have been fought (and almost universally LOST) by the larger of the two combatants.

The real way to control crime is through a change in the culture.  That includes stringent gun control (NOT gun removal, but control).

Any talk of controlling crime through force of arms is the same as spanking a child.  Eventually they begin to call your bluff.  How much are you willing to punish?  There's a limit, and the child knows it.  So do the criminals.

How far are people willing to go to 'stop' crimes?  Israel's tried a pretty pro-punishment with the Palestinians.  Have all those guns and rockets and deaths taught them the error of their ways?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Grrr... said:

'Controlling Crime' through force of arms is impossible.  If anyone would like proof of that, take a look at any of the many guerilla wars that have been fought (and almost universally LOST) by the larger of the two combatants.

The real way to control crime is through a change in the culture.  That includes stringent gun control (NOT gun removal, but control).

Any talk of controlling crime through force of arms is the same as spanking a child.  Eventually they begin to call your bluff.  How much are you willing to punish?  There's a limit, and the child knows it.  So do the criminals.

My father was an educator.  He inherited a school with discipline problems.  He organized games.  The problems dissipated.

There was one child who had a mother who replied that her son was possessed by a demon.  You might guess who that demon was. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, hasher said:

Come on, surely you want to know that the person next to you in the grocery store is strapping?  It will make you more careful with your shopping cart.  All is good.  There might be a bear or a tiger in the parking lot.  Where are the peace officer's then?

Well, I'd be careful about phrasing it that way.  I don't think it's right for us to tell other people what they need or don't need.  But I fully support making it as hard as fuck (not expensive - that's two different things) to get a weapon.

I can GET a explosive materials license.  But it's damn hard.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Grrr... said:

'Controlling Crime' through force of arms is impossible.  If anyone would like proof of that, take a look at any of the many guerilla wars that have been fought (and almost universally LOST) by the larger of the two combatants.

The real way to control crime is through a change in the culture.  That includes stringent gun control (NOT gun removal, but control).

Any talk of controlling crime through force of arms is the same as spanking a child.  Eventually they begin to call your bluff.  How much are you willing to punish?  There's a limit, and the child knows it.  So do the criminals.

How far are people willing to go to 'stop' crimes?  Israel's tried a pretty pro-punishment with the Palestinians.  Have all those guns and rockets and deaths taught them the error of their ways?

What about another Apartheid? Think of the possibilities!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Sol Rosenberg said:

What about another Apartheid? Think of the possibilities!

Where do you live?  I live on the right side of the tracks and I only cross them for drugs and sex.  Be real.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Some people have the cart before the horse.  They believe that you first have to control crime before you can create jobs.  When, in fact, a lack of well paying jobs is one of the driving forces behind crimes.

When more people are employed, fewer people commit crimes.

Very rarely are areas in cities 'recovered' by putting a guy with a rifle on every corner.  Much more often, they are recovered by removing blight, employing the resident, and supply them with ways to make meaningful changes in their communities.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Grrr... said:

Some people have the cart before the horse.  They believe that you first have to control crime before you can create jobs.  When, in fact, a lack of well paying jobs is one of the driving forces behind crimes.

When more people are employed, fewer people commit crimes.

I've been working for 53 years.  When I "retire" , I will find a new occupation.  My ass may be fat, but it is not lazy.  The world is the oyster.  May all of mankind enjoy it.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Grrr... said:

The real way to control crime is through a change in the culture.  That includes stringent gun control (NOT gun removal, but control). 

In your dreams, but various "removal" programs are underway in several states. Did you hear the roar of the crowd?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Pedagogical Tom said:

In your dreams, but various "removal" programs are underway in several states. Did you hear the roar of the crowd?

 

I don't like guns.  I respect them.  I taught my children to shoot.  We need to know the violence that is inherent in firearms.  We won't save the Republic by toting guns.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, hasher said:

I don't like guns.  I respect them.  I taught my children to shoot.  We need to know the violence that is inherent in firearms.  We won't save the Republic by toting guns.  

Toting, or touting.  Both.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Grrr... said:

Toting, or touting.  Both.

Words are wonderful things.  I wish I was better at the task of expression.

Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Grrr... said:
36 minutes ago, hasher said:

I don't like guns.  I respect them.  I taught my children to shoot.  We need to know the violence that is inherent in firearms.  We won't save the Republic by toting guns.  

Toting, or touting.  Both.

B-b-b-but GOD, GUNZ, and GUTS!

There's a lotta bad guys out there! Bad hombres! The only thing stops a bad guy with a gun is to build a wall!! oh wait, that didn't work out.... the only thing stops a bad guy with a gun is to get rid of police unions that protect bad hombres when they become police officers! No, too long..... wait a minute, I'll have something... how about if we give the bad guys jobs instead of guns?

Worth a try?

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Steam Flyer said:

B-b-b-but GOD, GUNZ, and GUTS!

There's a lotta bad guys out there! Bad hombres! The only thing stops a bad guy with a gun is to build a wall!! oh wait, that didn't work out.... the only thing stops a bad guy with a gun is to get rid of police unions that protect bad hombres when they become police officers! No, too long..... wait a minute, I'll have something... how about if we give the bad guys jobs instead of guns?

Worth a try?

- DSK

No.  We give jobs to prison guards.  Get with the problem (program).  I'm sure you don't want to continue...  we have your address.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/2/2021 at 7:34 PM, Pedagogical Tom said:

or maybe professor Oliver's, above.

You need not call me "professor". 

It's usually Your Supreme Highness 

Link to post
Share on other sites

More info here on De-Militarizing the Police - getting rid of the Pentagon's 1033 program. 

(De-funding is almost entirely a bad faith red herring - which we have come to expect from the Dogster) 

(Vets For Peace, not surprisingly, supports the de-militarization of just about everything . . )

Will Biden End the Militarization of Police? -- Interviews Available

 
 
NETFA FREEMAN, netfa@ips-dc.org, @Netfafree
  Hill and Freeman are both on the coordinating committee of the Black Alliance for Peace. Freeman is writing a forthcoming book: Community Control Over Police.
 
  The group recently released a statement calling for an executive order to end the Pentagon's 1033 program, which siphons military equipment to police in the U.S.
 
  The group states: "The gratuitous militarization of police forces across the United States through this program has helped to turn these agencies into brutal weapons of repression. Therefore, nothing short of complete abolition of this program is acceptable.

  "BAP has demanded abolition of the 1033 program since BAP’s 2017 founding. It now asks the public to sign a petition (available in English and Spanish) demanding the Biden administration and Democrats commit to abolishing this racist and brutal program."

  Hill is also executive director of the Mississippi Workers’ Center for Human Rights. She added: “Here in the belly of the Deep South beast, we understand the harsh and irreversible effects measures like 1033 have had and continue to have on those who languish in poverty, forced to live in shanty shacks and tenements." She formerly served as municipal judge for the city of Hollandale and is a human rights attorney and a veteran community organizer.

      The group noted: "The National Defense Authorization Act of 1997 that then-Senator Joe Biden (D-Delaware) supported and President Bill Clinton (D) signed into law created the 1033 program by expanding on a previous program.

  "Responding to outrage about the heavily militarized police response to protests after Michael Brown’s murder in Ferguson, Missouri, President Barack Obama enacted a policy in 2015 that appeared to limit the program, but made little difference in any department’s ability to acquire and use military weapons.

  "Even with the scale-back, the Obama administration managed to transfer a $459 million arsenal to police agencies. ...

  "President Donald Trump came into office and reversed Obama’s cosmetic changes. What the Biden administration is now proposing by reversing Trump’s reversal to the Obama policy is not enough, as reverting the policy to Obama’s altered version is not justice."
 
 
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, AJ Oliver said:

      The group noted: "The National Defense Authorization Act of 1997 that then-Senator Joe Biden (D-Delaware) supported and President Bill Clinton (D) signed into law created the 1033 program by expanding on a previous program.

That's not correct. The program began in 1990 but was expanded (and got the 1033 moniker) in 1997.

It's also worth noting that

Quote

The 1033 program is not the most significant federal source of police militarization, though. The program is dwarfed by Department of Homeland Security anti-terrorism grants to local police, as well as shared revenue from property seizures and forfeitures.

 

6 hours ago, AJ Oliver said:

What the Biden administration is now proposing by reversing Trump’s reversal to the Obama policy is not enough

Are they still in the "proposing" stage on this one? It was three weeks ago that I posted about it and gave Biden what I guess was a premature hat tip on taking at least a baby step to undo an unwise part of his career.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Pedagogical Tom said:

Are they still

Dude, take that up with "The Institute for Public Accuracy", not me. 

I find them to be quite reliable. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Grrr... said:

Some people have the cart before the horse.  They believe that you first have to control crime before you can create jobs.  When, in fact, a lack of well paying jobs is one of the driving forces behind crimes.

Would you open a business today in West Baltimore? What do you think your insurance premiums would be?  There will be no investment there until crime is under control and that won't happen as long as the "Defund the Police" crew is running the city.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dog said:

Would you open a business today in West Baltimore? What do you think your insurance premiums would be?  There will be no investment there until crime is under control and that won't happen as long as the "Defund the Police" crew is running the city.

I don't have a clue about West Baltimore.  I can tell you about Hotlanta and the heroin and the women sold on the street.

It is disgusting.

Are you part of the solution?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
On 8/9/2020 at 4:41 PM, Mark K said:

More evidence it's primarily a training issue. The US public is showing disapproval with the Grossman creed of police being justified in anything they wish to do if they can make even a small case that they personally were at risk. All that is done in the pursuit of their mission?  Not working out real real well, that.  It's working on juries, but the case presented to the juries is, essentially, this is how we are trained. 

Speaking of cops and juries,

Police Officers Brutally Beat an Undercover Cop During the St. Louis Protests. A Jury Declined To Hold Them Accountable.
 

Quote

 

In September 2017, St. Louis police officers sought to quell riots in the city after a jury acquitted former officer Jason Stockley for the 2011 killing of Anthony Lamar Smith.

On September 15, a group of cops zeroed in on one protester in particular. They proceeded to beat him, according to an indictment filed against former officers Dustin Boone, Randy Hays, Christopher Myers, and Bailey Colletta, even though the man was not participating in the riots themselves. The cops allegedly shoved him to the ground, struck him with a baton, kicked him in the face, and assaulted him so brutally that he required multiple surgeries. Another officer, Steven Korte, who is still employed by the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department, was charged separately.

But the man, Luther Hall, was not actually a protester. He was an undercover police officer dispatched to take down information about property destruction in the city.

...

A jury on Monday declined to convict the three officers—Korte, Myers, and Boone—who pleaded not guilty. Specifically, they acquitted Korte and Myers of deprivation of rights and deadlocked on that count as it pertained to Boone. They also failed to reach a verdict on a charge against Korte for lying to the FBI and on a charge against Myers for destruction of evidence after he allegedly smashed Hall's phone.

Hays, who pleaded guilty to one count of deprivation or rights, testified that he hit Hall repeatedly with his baton and saw Korte kick him in the face. When asked twice if Hall was resisting, he said no. "After hindsight and reflection, I was in the wrong," he said on the stand, according to the local CBS affiliate.

Colletta also pleaded guilty to making false statements to the grand jury.

Text messages in the indictment show some of the officers expressing a mix of glee and satisfaction at the idea of assaulting protesters without consequence.

"It's gonna get IGNORANT tonight!!" reads a message from Boone. "But it's gonna be a lot of fun beating the hell out of these shitheads once the sun goes down and nobody can tell us apart!!!!" He later added that "we really need these fuckers to start acting up so we can have some fun" and that "it's still a blast beating people that deserve it."

"This shit is crazy ……. but it's fucking AWESOME too!" Boone wrote the day after he allegedly attacked Hall. He added unironically: "Except for cops getting hurt. People on the streets got FUCKED UP!"

On October 5, with some civil unrest still ongoing, Hays tried to share some strategy with the overeager Boone. "Remember were [sic] are in south city," wrote Hays. "They support us but also cameras. So make sure you have an old white dude as a witness." Hall is black.

...

 

Not sure what the jury was told but I hope it was NOT that standard training requires lying to the FBI or smashing phones.

Sounds like Boone already achieved his goal of getting ignorant. Also sounds like Hays is the more dangerous cop.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Shambolic Tom said:

Speaking of cops and juries,

Police Officers Brutally Beat an Undercover Cop During the St. Louis Protests. A Jury Declined To Hold Them Accountable.
 

Not sure what the jury was told but I hope it was NOT that standard training requires lying to the FBI or smashing phones.

Sounds like Boone already achieved his goal of getting ignorant. Also sounds like Hays is the more dangerous cop.

I think they had a damn good lawyer. Managed to slyly convince the jury this is blue-on-blue crime and it was handled internally. Probably mentioned that officer Hall will never have to work another day in his life and it's possible Hall himself showed no hatred towards the officers when he was on the stand. Coached his boys to show embarrassment and excruciating contrition for what they've done and insinuate it's a lesson they will never evereverevereversohelpmegod make again. That part is probably true too. Let the jury know that when it comes to groups fighting it's always a frat. Locker room talk abounds. Have you ever seriously prepared to do and receive real violence with a bunch of other men? Not in theory, not tomorrow...today...like within the hour or next few minutes? Maybe (of course!) not, but we've all seen those scenes from the movies. All American good ol' boys yakking about "...gettin' some". Not that far from an NRA convention, really.     

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/3/2021 at 2:36 PM, Mark K said:

Let the jury know that when it comes to groups fighting it's always a frat. Locker room talk abounds. Have you ever seriously prepared to do and receive real violence with a bunch of other men? Not in theory, not tomorrow...today...like within the hour or next few minutes?

This line of thought seems more appropriate for soldiers than cops to me. They're supposed to be there to fight only if they must. I doubt there was any pressing need to beat up officer Hall. He was beaten because people like Boone think it's "fucking awesome" that "People on the streets got FUCKED UP!"

And the cops seemed to know that heading out to pummel and sever is not heading out to protect and serve. Although Boothe seems to have achieved ignorance, he did know enough to wait until "the sun goes down and nobody can tell us apart!!!"

Hays seemed to have a better-developed consciousness of guilt, saying, "Remember were [sic] are in south city," wrote Hays. "They support us but also cameras. So make sure you have an old white dude as a witness."

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Shambolic Tom said:

This line of thought seems more appropriate for soldiers than cops to me. They're supposed to be there to fight only if they must. I doubt there was any pressing need to beat up officer Hall. He was beaten because people like Boone think it's "fucking awesome" that "People on the streets got FUCKED UP!"

And the cops seemed to know that heading out to pummel and sever is not heading out to protect and serve. Although Boothe seems to have achieved ignorance, he did know enough to wait until "the sun goes down and nobody can tell us apart!!!"

Hays seemed to have a better-developed consciousness of guilt, saying, "Remember were [sic] are in south city," wrote Hays. "They support us but also cameras. So make sure you have an old white dude as a witness."

 

 You've parsed my statement to make explanation appear to be advocacy there, Thesaurus Tom. I think you just want to argue. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Mark K said:

 You've parsed my statement to make explanation appear to be advocacy there, Thesaurus Tom. I think you just want to argue. 

Which is why I never respond to any of his posts. Ever.  Ever being since a time a couple of years ago when he managed to get me pissed off and then posted those quotes everywhere incessantly.

Dogballs.

Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, d'ranger said:

Which is why I never respond to any of his posts. Ever.  Ever being since a time a couple of years ago when he managed to get me pissed off and then posted those quotes everywhere incessantly.

Dogballs.

I've chased him down one of his rabbit holes, way too often.  Starts off reasonable.  Then, he plays some insipid "gotcha" and tries to nail you down to a position against which he wants to argue.  Meanwhile, apologizes for Koch $ponsored cheerleading and links to one of his many threads in an attempt to impress you with how awesome he is.

Not worth the electrons inconvenienced.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

I've chased him down one of his rabbit holes, way too often.  Starts off reasonable.  Then, he plays some insipid "gotcha" and tries to nail you down to a position against which he wants to argue.  Meanwhile, apologizes for Koch $ponsored cheerleading and links to one of his many threads in an attempt to impress you with how awesome he is.

Not worth the electrons inconvenienced.

 

And if you’re lucky he will stalk you outside of PA.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Mark K said:

 You've parsed my statement to make explanation appear to be advocacy there, Thesaurus Tom. I think you just want to argue. 

Not my intent. The part of your explanation that I quoted just doesn't seem to apply to cops to me. Well, not good cops anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Shambolic Tom said:

Not my intent. The part of your explanation that I quoted just doesn't seem to apply to cops to me. Well, not good cops anyway.

What is your intent? 

Yo, after nine years of intercourse, I regret meeting you...and I loathe libertarians. 

 

Tom and Taney.JPG

Link to post
Share on other sites

Police don't have rights in Maryland any more
 

Quote

 

Maryland lawmakers defied Republican Gov. Larry Hogan over the weekend and eliminated the state's Law Enforcement Officers' Bill of Rights (LEOBR). Since the '70s, that law has made it harder to investigate and fire bad cops.

When police unions pushed through such laws, which still exist in 15 other states, they argued that the legislation would make sure cops receive due process when they're accused of misconduct. But in reality, these laws give officers special protections that shield them during investigations. They mandate a "cooling off" period before a cop can be interviewed after a citizen files a complaint, giving accused officers time to plan out how they'll respond to questioning—a privilege not granted to most people accused of criminal behavior. They make it harder (or impossible) to access police discipline records. And they mandate that the panels that determine the fate of officers accused of misconduct be made up of fellow police officers. They forbid independent investigations of cops, and they overrule the judgment of police chiefs.

Maryland was the first state to pass a LEOBR in 1972, and now it's the first to get rid of one. House Bill 670 replaces that police board with an independent Police Accountability Board in each county; it will be staffed by civilians, not police officers. They will recommend disciplinary action. A police chief will have the authority to impose additional discipline, but he or she can't water down the board's recommendations. The accused officer is entitled to a trial if he or she wants to appeal the discipline, and the trial board will consist of a judge, a civilian, and a police officer.

In other words, the new system includes due process but it's not a kind that the police union can control.

...

 

So that's nice.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Bad cops have rights.  Bad cops don't deserve special protection for their misdeeds/criminal actions.

The repeal of that law strips bad cops of the special protections they have enjoyed for a few decades.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Bus Driver said:

the special protections they have enjoyed for a few decades.

Centuries ?? Millenia ?? Eons ?? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, AJ Oliver said:
8 hours ago, Bus Driver said:

the special protections they have enjoyed for a few decades.

Centuries ?? Millenia ?? Eons ?? 

I was speaking specifically to the "Police Officer's Bill of Rights", enacted in Maryland in 1974.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Florida's 'Anti-Rioting' Bill Gives the Government New Powers That Have Nothing to Do With Riots
 

Quote

 

Florida lawmakers passed a new anti-rioting bill Thursday supported by Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis despite the objections of civil rights groups, which argue the legislation can and will be abused to target and punish peaceful protesters.

...

It gives a commission in the governor's office veto power over municipalities within the state if they attempt to reduce the budget of their own police departments.

...

Some of the worst parts of the bill have nothing to do with rioting at all. It's absolutely absurd, and certainly a violation of separation of powers in Florida, for the governor's office to attempt to seize control of budget allocation for a municipal police department at the request of the state attorney who works the area. It's literally the executive branch attempting to seize control of the funding of executive branch activities.

The "cyberintimidation by publication" component essentially gives government officials a "heckler's veto" over the publication of critical information about them online and encouragement for public reaction by claiming it has created a "reasonable fear of bodily harm." It will most certainly be used by law enforcement officers to attempt to force censorship of images and videos of them online engaging in what people might see as violent or abusive behavior.

...

DeSantis will sign the bill. He praised it in a statement: "This legislation strikes the appropriate balance of safeguarding every Floridian's constitutional right to peacefully assemble, while ensuring that those who hide behind peaceful protest to cause violence in our communities will be punished. Further, this legislation ensures that no community in the state engages in defunding of their police."

A small-government Republican, DeSantis is not.

 

There are other terrible aspects to this legislation but the quoted parts have to do with the thread topic question. Well, and camera-shy cops, which is really another thread.

In addition to the problems noted, the anti-defunding provision strikes me as usurpation of local taxing and spending powers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m starting to think the police need more funding, not less. Our system needs reform. Weeding out the white supremacist piles of shit is going to be expensive but it must be done. Weeding out the Oath Keepers or others who put allegiance to the Pride of the GOP over allegiance to USA will be expensive but it must be done. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am all for re-defining the role of police.  No longer should they be the primary response to deal with those things for which they have not received adequate training.  Stuff like homelessness issues, drug addiction, and mental health crises.  No doubt all of these could involve crime, but the response must be centered around experts to deal with the actual issue before the police step in.

If they are needed to respond to a person in a mental health crisis, they should be there in a supportive role to the mental health professional.  Same with homelessness and drug addiction.  Decriminalize drugs and deal with addiction as the public health issue it really is.

Oh, and put a stop to the idea that police need to purchase military grade equipment.  They are there to serve and protect.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

Mississippi Cops Protect Kidnapped Baby
 

Quote

 

As if we need any more evidence of police officers being reckless with human life, here's an especially horrifying story out of Mississippi and Louisiana. Police shot more than 20 bullets at a car in which they knew there was a four-month-old baby, killing the child along with his father, Eric Derell Smith.

Smith, of Baton Rouge, was suspected of killing his ex-girlfriend's nephew and his ex-girlfriend and fleeing with the couple's child on Monday. "Our top priority is locating that child safely," East Baton Rouge Sheriff Sid Gautreaux said in a press release.

Police did eventually locate the child safely.

Then they killed him.

...

"It's possible that the driver—the baby's father who has just kidnapped the baby after murdering the mother/ex and her relative—shot at the cops. The video is unclear," tweeted Fordham University law professor John Pfaff. "But they KNEW the baby was there. They are supposed to be trained for this. A 20-shot fusillade? At a hostage?"

...

 

The car got stuck in the median and was going nowhere. A bystander took video.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/19/2021 at 11:23 AM, Bus Driver said:

I am all for re-defining the role of police.  No longer should they be the primary response to deal with those things for which they have not received adequate training.  Stuff like homelessness issues, drug addiction, and mental health crises.  No doubt all of these could involve crime, but the response must be centered around experts to deal with the actual issue before the police step in.

If they are needed to respond to a person in a mental health crisis, they should be there in a supportive role to the mental health professional.  Same with homelessness and drug addiction.  Decriminalize drugs and deal with addiction as the public health issue it really is.

Oh, and put a stop to the idea that police need to purchase military grade equipment.  They are there to serve and protect.  

Peace officers:  https://www.gapost.org/

When you live in the wild west, Matt Dillon gets into gun fights.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

Baton Rouge Cops Strip-Searched a Minor During a Traffic Stop and Entered a Family's Home Without a Warrant. The City Just Settled for $35,000.

Quote

 

...

A civil suit filed by the family of Clarence Green was formally dismissed last week after the Baton Rouge Metropolitan Council agreed to the payout in lieu of a jury trial. Such a result is highly unusual and is perhaps a commentary on just how much of a legal loser the city knew this case to be. It's also a reminder of how difficult it is to get meaningful accountability when the government violates our rights. After all, the modest sum awarded to Green's family will ultimately be paid by the taxpayers, the criminal charges against Green were only dropped after he spent five months behind bars, and the cop at the center of the scandal already had multiple complaints against him prior to that day.

...

According to the police report, Camallo claimed he "smelled marijuana," so the officers placed Clarence and his brother in handcuffs. The officers then pulled down their underwear while they stood on the public street, exposing their genitals, and searched for drugs.

According to the initial incident report, the officers found a firearm in Green's "underware." Because he was then on probation for possession of Oxycodone, Green was prohibited from possessing a gun. The report also stated that the cops found marijuana on Green's younger brother.

The officers then paid a visit to the Greens' home. "Sgt. transported GREEN and his co-defendant juvenile brother to their residence (REDACTED) in an attempt to release the juvenile to his mother," according to the report. The cops entered the residence with guns brandished and without a warrant.

It wasn't until after they finished the search that they allowed the mother, Tanya Green, to see her children. At that time, the officers sought to convince Clarence's 16-year-old brother to consent to a DNA swab.

"Call a lawyer," said Clarence, his statement captured in the body camera footage, while he sat handcuffed in the back of a police cruiser.

"If you don't shut the fuck up," responded Officer Troy Lawrence Jr., "I'm gonna come in and I'm gonna fuck you up…You think I'm playing with you? I will fuck you up.

Green was ultimately indicted for unlawful possession of a firearm. He would sit in jail for several months—until the government abruptly sought to drop the charges with little explanation.

The federal judge overseeing the case granted the state's request. Then, in an unorthodox move, he issued a scathing rebuke to the prosecution, noting that the cops involved may very well be guilty of criminal wrongdoing.

"The state agents in this case demonstrated a serious and wanton disregard for Defendant's constitutional rights, first by initiating a traffic stop on the thinnest of pretext, and then by haphazardly invading Defendant's home (weapons drawn) to conduct an unjustified, warrantless search," wrote Judge Brian A. Jackson of the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana. "Such an intrusion, in abject violation of the protections afforded by the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution, which protects citizens against unwarranted governmental intrusions in their homes, may justifiably be considered to be a trespass subject to prosecution under" Louisiana law.

And that may not be the extent of the officers' misdeeds. Thomas Frampton, the lawyer for the Green family, argues that the officers also violated both the Constitution and state law when they strip-searched the brothers on the street. "The Supreme Court has said that officers may conduct a 'frisk'—meaning a brief pat-down of the outer garments—if the offer has a reasonable suspicion that the individual is armed," Frampton says. "The reason that's okay, according to the Court, is because a properly conducted pat down is ostensibly non-invasive. A strip search on a public sidewalk, however, is something else altogether."

In his opinion, Judge Jackson also noted that Sergeant Camallo "gave multiple conflicting accounts when describing the circumstances leading up to [Green's] traffic stop, and failed to offer a satisfactory explanation for why the police reports in this investigation were revised nearly one dozen times" after Green was arrested.

A review of a November 2020 hearing transcript, where Camallo testified, shows that his story indeed evolved. Though he mentioned the "drug house," Camallo centered the traffic stop around "a small child who was in the front passenger seat" sitting in someone's lap, a traffic infraction that he said he enforced regularly.

The justification for the officers' entry into the Greens' home is also under dispute. An updated police report stated that Tanya Green provided "written consent" to search Clarence's bedroom, where the police found two additional firearms, though the body camera footage does not corroborate any such consent, and Tanya denies providing it. Camallo was not pressed on that inconsistency while under oath.

During that same November 2020 hearing, Judge Jackson did ask the prosecution if there was anything the court needed to know about the officers involved. "The court has the right to test the credibility of the officer," Jackson said. "And if there are events that occurred with respect to the officer's credibility, either before the incident or after the incident, the court is certainly entitled to be aware of any such information."

"I would agree with that judge," responded Assistant U.S. Attorney Kashan Pathan.

It would appear that there was plenty of material about "the credibility of the officer" for Pathan to share with the court, though the prosecutor did not do so. In 2017, a different federal judge discarded all the evidence in a case against a man who was facing similar illegal weapons and drug charges. The reason? Sergeant Ken Camallo conducted a warrantless search on the man's trailer and improperly seized materials when there were "no exigent circumstances present."

"This officer has served on the force for 20 plus years," Pathan said at the November hearing. "He's been found to be credible." Yet it was the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Middle District of Louisiana, Pathan's own office, that was forced to drop the 2017 case based on Camallo's misconduct. When asked under oath, Camallo responded that his record was clean.

Camallo had also racked up a laundry list of complaints reaching back to 2007. He currently has several open actions against him for untruthfulness, according to the internal affairs documentation of his history on the force. The latest disciplinary charge was filed against him on February 21 of this year. (That same internal affairs review shows no pending discipline against Officer Lawrence, who told Green, "I'm gonna fuck you up," for his actions that day.)

Neither the Baton Rouge Police Department, East Baton Rouge District Attorney Hillar Moore III, nor the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Middle District of Louisiana replied to multiple requests for comment.

This case is replete with the sort of eyebrow-raising conduct that bleeds into much of modern policing. There was the stop itself, set in motion with minimal pretext and an ever-changing story that Camallo himself never fully nailed down.

What came next—a strip search of a juvenile in public and a man spending months behind bars—was inspired by the supposed stench of marijuana. Remember that Camallo had been looking for someone who was suspected of committing theft, a cause he tossed aside in favor of a traffic stop. Perhaps there is a reason that BRPD's violent crime clearance rate—the statistic used to evaluate how effectively police are at solving such offenses—is a mere 26.6 percent. That's 16.7 percent below the national average, which is already dismal.

Judge Jackson said it best when he upbraided the prosecutors and police. "It is appropriate to remind the Government," he wrote, "of its paramount obligation to seek and serve justice, not convictions."

 

$35k? I think a jury might have awarded a whole bunch more.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/7/2021 at 6:58 AM, hasher said:

Peace officers:  https://www.gapost.org/

When you live in the wild west, Matt Dillon gets into gun fights.

My daughter has been dating a kid for 3 years who started going to school to become a cop in NH. He changed his mind last year. Doesn’t want to get shot, sued or protested against for $50K per year and thought the other people in his class were dumb gun nuts who wanted to shoot somebody. And don’t get me wrong, this kid is no genius, he’s dumb as a box of rocks; if my daughter marries him (I put her through private school, ballet lessons, good college, WTF??) I will pay for the wedding after which I’m going to borrow ExcodedTom’s ordinary .22 and shoot myself. And he’s not anti gun, he’s a deer hunter, and a standard issue kid from New Hampshire, he and his dumbass friends drink beers and shoot at the old car out behind the barn on weekends. If the police can’t recruit a kid like this that would rather keep being unskilled labor, they’re not going to get anybody smart enough to figure out whether or not it’s ok to shoot black people for speeding.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...
  • 5 months later...

A Proper Stop and Frisk Policy Might Help
 

Quote

 

Writing in the Daily News, New York Mayor-elect Eric Adams is vaguely promising a kinder, gentler "stop and frisk" policing.

On the campaign trail, Adams had said that he didn't fully oppose the concept of "stop and frisk"—the police practice stopping people with very little suspicion to make sure they aren't carrying guns or drugs—but that he believed the New York Police Department (NYPD) had abused its authority with the mass targeting of minorities for searches. He agreed that the police had implemented "stop and frisk" in an illegal way, but he didn't think the practice itself was entirely bad.

...

It is true, as Adams notes in his opinion piece, that the courts have recognized the police power to stop and search people if they have a reasonable suspicion that said person is suspected of a crime and they believe he is armed. But in New York City, "stop and frisk" actually resulted in hundreds of thousands of annual searches of predominantly minority men who it turned out were not armed and ended up not being arrested. In a 2014 report by the New York Civil Liberties Union, only two percent of police encounters under "stop and frisk" ever uncovered weapons. At the policy's height, NYPD officers were stopping nearly 700,000 people a year.

...

 

Sure, it's fixable. Simply eradicate all racist attitudes from all cops. Easy! Until then, at least 2% of those 700,000/yr discovered weapons, and that's a lot better than 0% and fully justifies at least trying to fix "stop and frisk."

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...