About Police Shootings (in America, Duh)

OB1Shinobi wrote: guy
"im walking, dont harm me"

cop
"ok"

guy
"keep your word"

cop
"now!"

dead

Ok 99.999999999% of those video clips were brutality. However the first clip of the first video was not. That man came at the officers with a pipe bending jig which is a solid metal bar and that is a lethal threat. You do not play games in that situation. Further you shoot until the threat stops that means the weapon is down and the threat is not trying to move.

yeah, i thought that was an ironic first choice of that video also

but thats appropriate to the discussion in ins own right, as a reminder not to be too quick to judge in either direction

Miss_Leah wrote: I completely agree that police brutality is real.

But it's a symptom, not the root problem.

what IS the problem?

OB1Shinobi wrote:

Miss_Leah wrote: I completely agree that police brutality is real.

But it's a symptom, not the root problem.

what IS the problem?

Well, I'm no expert, but my read of it is that the problem has a lot to do with the fact that our society sees certain people as less than human, and so, expendable - ethnic minorities (especially youth), the homeless, Muslims, etc.

And this stems from an "us vs. them" mentality. THEY are lesser, THEY are the enemy, THEY are not deserving of what we have, THEY are not worthy, THEY don't matter...

This is why politics of fear are so dangerous, they propagate this mindset of other humans being less worthy of being here, of having life, even. The police are a branch of our government, and so, a branch of our society. They represent us, they ARE us. And when our society devalues the lives of others who are "other" or "not us" or "them", it's too easy to treat them like second class citizens.

Miss_Leah wrote:

ren wrote: People who "talk smack" about Jediism or "insult" the faith are irrelevant, and protecting the faith does not involve them. Jedi should not feel insulted, and informing the misinformed isn't defense, but sharing.
People who promote ignorance over knowledge, blind obedience over wisdom (to use tenets as an example) are a different story, and opposing that is defending the faith. Nothing to do with defending Jediism's imaginary honour or defending a Jedi's feelings as these are supposed to be imaginary as well.

It's far more useful to encourage harmony, serenity, peace and knowledge in the people who we have contact with on a day-to-day basis than to shout to the world at large "I'm against this!!!!!!" Whatever your "this" may be. It's the difference between opposing something negative and encouraging something positive:

"Where you tend a rose, my lad, a thistle cannot grow"

Positive reinforcement creates SJW zombies. And they in turn cause a backlash, in the form of Trump-like characters. I'd rather tell people they can believe and do what they like with minimal restrictions, than brainwash them into believing what I believe...

Defending the faith is what you do once it's under attack. When you use positive reinforcement (which is a form of brainwashing and an affront to freedom of conscience), you shoot first and others defend against it.

I won't tell the cop who gets shot at 9 out of 10 times by blacks to love blacks. That's insulting to his intelligence and simply aggravating. I'll just prevent him from spreading racism when and if it ever reaches that point.

ren wrote:

Miss_Leah wrote:

ren wrote: People who "talk smack" about Jediism or "insult" the faith are irrelevant, and protecting the faith does not involve them. Jedi should not feel insulted, and informing the misinformed isn't defense, but sharing.
People who promote ignorance over knowledge, blind obedience over wisdom (to use tenets as an example) are a different story, and opposing that is defending the faith. Nothing to do with defending Jediism's imaginary honour or defending a Jedi's feelings as these are supposed to be imaginary as well.

It's far more useful to encourage harmony, serenity, peace and knowledge in the people who we have contact with on a day-to-day basis than to shout to the world at large "I'm against this!!!!!!" Whatever your "this" may be. It's the difference between opposing something negative and encouraging something positive:

"Where you tend a rose, my lad, a thistle cannot grow"

Positive reinforcement creates SJW zombies. And they in turn cause a backlash, in the form of Trump-like characters. I'd rather tell people they can believe and do what they like with minimal restrictions, than brainwash them into believing what I believe...

Defending the faith is what you do once it's under attack. When you use positive reinforcement (which is a form of brainwashing and an affront to freedom of conscience), you shoot first and others defend against it.

I won't tell the cop who gets shot at 9 out of 10 times by blacks to love blacks. That's insulting to his intelligence and simply aggravating. I'll just prevent him from spreading racism when and if it ever reaches that point.

Ok, so rather than criticizing someone else's examination of the problem, why not offer some of your own?

What's your analysis of the root cause of police brutality and how do you think it could be managed?

ren wrote:

Miss_Leah wrote:

ren wrote: People who "talk smack" about Jediism or "insult" the faith are irrelevant, and protecting the faith does not involve them. Jedi should not feel insulted, and informing the misinformed isn't defense, but sharing.
People who promote ignorance over knowledge, blind obedience over wisdom (to use tenets as an example) are a different story, and opposing that is defending the faith. Nothing to do with defending Jediism's imaginary honour or defending a Jedi's feelings as these are supposed to be imaginary as well.

It's far more useful to encourage harmony, serenity, peace and knowledge in the people who we have contact with on a day-to-day basis than to shout to the world at large "I'm against this!!!!!!" Whatever your "this" may be. It's the difference between opposing something negative and encouraging something positive:

"Where you tend a rose, my lad, a thistle cannot grow"

Positive reinforcement creates SJW zombies. And they in turn cause a backlash, in the form of Trump-like characters. I'd rather tell people they can believe and do what they like with minimal restrictions, than brainwash them into believing what I believe...

Defending the faith is what you do once it's under attack. When you use positive reinforcement (which is a form of brainwashing and an affront to freedom of conscience), you shoot first and others defend against it.

I won't tell the cop who gets shot at 9 out of 10 times by blacks to love blacks. That's insulting to his intelligence and simply aggravating. I'll just prevent him from spreading racism when and if it ever reaches that point.

Insulting to his intelligence? Yea failing to tell him to take people on a case by case basis and allowing him to judge based on one factor alone is a good way good for him to end up dead or killing the innocent. When in use of force or potential use of force situations assuming based on anything but the facts of that exact moment is an good way to die or kill the innocent. All people and situations should be judged on a case by case anything else is a lack of intelligence and a good way to foul up big time.

http://www.fox2detroit.com/the-americans-with-charlie-leduff/173584868-story

Here's something to think about. We like to pin it to the whole of the white population. But there's a lot more to consider. As this article suggests, we might need to adjust the numbers to look at economic demographics and see what happens to the race killed by cops ratio. There are other things that are problematic, such as the fact that Killed by Police (cited in a few articles) includes data on off-duty officers shooting people- in one case an accidental discharge while cleaning their weapon. We need to adjust for the fact that "White" in the US Census of 2010 includes the Latino population (I checked, checked and rechecked just to make sure that's an accurate statement), and that the black hispanic population is not included in African American in the US Census (which is a very specific definition), but the Killed by Police lumps all together (it's difficult to discern looking at the raw information, so I don't hold it against them or anything). There are so many issues with the way we look at the numbers, because of our limited access to what the full demographics are- not to mention the difference that occurs over the course of 5-6 years- that any estimates we produce don't necessarily tell the whole story. I'm not saying there aren't issues, but what I will say, is that we can't look at the problem without fully knowing all of the variables involved. Maybe, just maybe, if we stopped screaming "BLACK LIVES MATTER", "ALL LIVES MATTER", "(INSERT GROUP HERE) LIVES MATTER", we could find solutions. There are plenty of white people out there that don't have this "privilege" that everyone keeps talking about, and it hurts them to see others tell them that they have something which they don't have access too.

You'd think mandatory body camera's and vehicle camera's would reduce or even eliminate the inappropriate/illegal conduct by Police. But they might have to have all actions reviewed by an independent third party in ongoing terms, to vet for misconduct. Then it should be safe to assert that its not the Police's fault for the proportion of any particular group in shootings, if the conduct is proper, and it might point to a higher criminal activity of those particular groups more then anything else.

Adder wrote: You'd think mandatory body camera's and vehicle camera's would reduce or even eliminate the inappropriate/illegal conduct by Police. But they might have to have all actions reviewed by an independent third party in ongoing terms, to vet for misconduct. Then it should be safe to assert that its not the Police's fault for the proportion of any particular group in shootings, if the conduct is proper, and it might point to a higher criminal activity of those particular groups more then anything else.

But is the issue truly being solved if police are only conducting themselves properly because they're being watched?

Miss_Leah wrote:

Adder wrote: You'd think mandatory body camera's and vehicle camera's would reduce or even eliminate the inappropriate/illegal conduct by Police. But they might have to have all actions reviewed by an independent third party in ongoing terms, to vet for misconduct. Then it should be safe to assert that its not the Police's fault for the proportion of any particular group in shootings, if the conduct is proper, and it might point to a higher criminal activity of those particular groups more then anything else.

But is the issue truly being solved if police are only conducting themselves properly because they're being watched?

yes and no

there are a lot of things that should happen to "solve" the issue

obviously, police need media coverage to be fair to the trth of events and not just to getting attention

and we need more programs that allow and encourage citizens to be able to volunteer to be police ourselves for a duration of time, and/or to accompany police from time to time so we can see first hand what the demands of the job are

police should be part of the communities they patrol

imo there should be an officer whose only weapon is his or her body cam and radio, and these should be the first (and only) officers most people see, most of the time

and all of them should have cams at al times
cams should be like miranda rights, if the footage is compromised, so is the arrest

but these are all just ideas to change the undesired outcome (inappropriate killing by police) and not the cause

if we identify the "cause" of the problem as simply "us vs them" then there is no solution.
i have no idea what is the ratio of "average citizen who isnt trying to hurt anybody" to "genuine bad guy who IS trying to hurt somebody" but the police DO have to work together to deal with people who ARE dangerous and violent and unstable

and even dealing with average citizens is tough because lets be real, its never good as a citizen to be talking to the police

bad things happen to people who interact with the police and no one wants to have to accept the lousy thing thats about to happen

so even people who are otherwise decent can be hostile, although its usually only a mental "youre a fucking jerk" kind of hostile, not really anything that intends physical harm

but when someone is treating you like a jerk its only natural to be defensive and feel "us vs them" because in a way it IS "us vs them"

not to mention that the "us vs them" is a basic component of the human psyche; im sure it can be traced to our evolution and its not going anywhere in and of itself

so if the external events and the unacceptable outcomes can be reduced, i think thats as good of a solution as anyone can hope for

??

we can attempt to to redefine who the "us" is and who the "them" is/are

but the definitions have to hold up under fire, and coming up with definitions (more complex than "we are the police and you are not") that can really do so is not very easy to do

Yes, that's exactly what I mean, cams may help undesirable outcomes, but they don't solve the underlying issue. It's breaking off a weed by the stem without pulling out the roots.

In order to improve the "us vs them" mentality, we need to take a hard look at those who lead us (both directly, as in politics, and indirectly, as in other areas: media, education, corporations, etc) - they are supposed to act as representatives of the population at large, so if the leaders of a country are racist, misogynistic, bigots, is it any wonder why so many people are following suit?

Miss_Leah wrote: Yes, that's exactly what I mean, cams may help undesirable outcomes, but they don't solve the underlying issue. It's breaking off a weed by the stem without pulling out the roots.

In order to improve the "us vs them" mentality, we need to take a hard look at those who lead us (both directly, as in politics, and indirectly, as in other areas: media, education, corporations, etc) - they are supposed to act as representatives of the population at large, so if the leaders of a country are racist, misogynistic, bigots, is it any wonder why so many people are following suit?

I'd imagine even a family dynamic can be enough to entrench bigotry and I don't think government can reach there, but it could happen anywhere or entirely in ones head even, so maybe better screening for employment along with the better monitoring. We cannot 'fix' everyone, the system just needs to be as robust as possible.... tangible things which can be done to make improvements might not solve the problem entirely but progress is a good thing (if it can happen). I just don't think its one root which can be pulled.

Miss_Leah wrote: Yes, that's exactly what I mean, cams may help undesirable outcomes, but they don't solve the underlying issue. It's breaking off a weed by the stem without pulling out the roots.

In order to improve the "us vs them" mentality, we need to take a hard look at those who lead us (both directly, as in politics, and indirectly, as in other areas: media, education, corporations, etc) - they are supposed to act as representatives of the population at large, so if the leaders of a country are racist, misogynistic, bigots, is it any wonder why so many people are following suit?

what im getting from your post is. "we need to reevaluate and reorganize our entire civilization" which is all well and good and i agree
but even after we do this there will still be the reality that cops deal with in an adversarial context

us vs them is inescapable when there is really an US and there is really a THEM

and there is an us and them in police work

even the average citizen who isnt out to get anyone will see police as antagonists simply because the only time police deal with you is in situations where they are likely to arrest or ticket you

so its inherently adversarial

we cant change that really, but we can (maybe) structure the organization and protocol so as to emphasize that the role of public servant is just as important as or maybe even more important than the role of enforcer and disciplinarian

i think thats a more workable solution than reordering the whole culture

which i think we do need to reorder our culture, but thats so vast that it is difficult imo to make a case that its the solution for any specific problem

There is only one solution and that is for everyone to learn to love one another. There is too much hate in existance.

There are alot that will watch from the outsides and say that it's not a race thing.
There are also those that are inside of the situation , meaning this is their lives or a deep look was taken on the matter. These people will say it is a race thing.

Personally, I have alot of police officers in my family and I feel as though it is a race thing. The wrong people have been given guns and badges and the country as a whole will support the death until it happens to someone they see as more important.

In a personal situation, at the age of 5 , i remember my mother being pulled out of her car and forced to lay on the ground with police pointing guns at her. Officers then searched the vehicle and let her go after seeing me and my brother in the back seat watching. We never found out why this happened.

I also have a few friends (one who is the lapd academy) who were rather attacked by officers but never reported because
( who do you call? them? ). I've personally been stopped and searched by officers a few times , however , I am a straight edge , dorky looking guy so all they would find on me would be a cellphone ,wallet and a nintendo ds. They are extremely rude when you ask them why you are being searched but i know the reason is due to race. Of course I do not resist because I do not want give a them a valid reason.

The scary part about this is if the officer decides to shoot, unless someone has full footage, reports will say that i was an armed gang member (even without tattoos ) attacked an officer and the world will believe it. I'd only have family and the anime club to vouch for me. :laugh:

The point of this is; The violence ends when HATE does. We cannot ask for peace nor demand it until we sacrifice our ill feelings for that of love & compassion for one another.

(also: i've heard there are areas in the UK where police don't carry guns... can anyone tell me what that is like? )

the police in the UK have only carried guns since the paris attacks

Silas Mercury wrote: the police in the UK have only carried guns since the paris attacks

Not true... I've seen police officers with guns for a long time.. way before Paris... Usually in London in train stations.
More likely they've been carrying them since the 7/7 bombings.

i think our police force would do better if less of them carried guns

No, I think it's good that they carry guns. Better if they carry guns that fire blanks. Rule by fear of force, not by force itself, after all.

I would like to see something like an amplified, more active neighborhood watch type structure where neighborhoods, parts of a community in a way police themselves. By getting to know each other, who the trouble makers are, who is in what situation (of course it's hard because a lot of people don't want everyone to know their business, and also some people get off on getting into other people's business), just generally looking out and being situationally aware as a community can really put the pressure off police and allow them to focus on more important and serious issues.

Various shops, businesses, recreational places and attractions need more security. Here in Russia they have security everywhere, metal detectors at the bigger malls and at least simple plain clothed 'bouncer' style people in stores and walking around. Where I'm at the police ride 3-4 officers in car, all carrying fully automatic AKs and submachine guns, there are also foot patrols and they setup on different roads stopping random people to check them out. Police here aren't shooting everyone. But can't really compare Russia to the USA.

Because of our bill of rights and constitution, I'm glad police don't have this level of power and authority to just stop everyoe to ask for papers. The weigh stations throughout and between each republic here are checkpoints where they can flag you down, make you walk through a building with detectors, input your passport into their system, search your car. With the way things are going though in the US, this will become possible if the citizens themselves don't start taking an active role in the safety and wellbeing of their own communities, let alone themselves. Right now metaphorically it's like if you live in an area with torandos, you build a house with a basement but today people don't even have them they just die and wonder why.

This is for me the primary, modern function of the militia today but using this term scares people because of the clowns out there on both sides. I think it's time for there to be a medium between individuals of the community and the police. A lot of small problems can be dealt with 'in house' before becoming the bigger problems we experience. This organization I wish to see cannot come from the government it has to be started by people in their communities. Something like this is the last option before we go into a fully blown, martial law style police state kissing our bill of rights and constitution goodbye.

Talking about guns is a strawman agrument so insiders and grown children can immediately wash themselves of any responsibility it would take to actually engage the larger issues at play like our monetary/foreign policies for example.