Your first post in this thread of conversation was pretty much, “Yeah, he committed assault and battery, but he’s a cop, so it’s ok.” Here’s a thought: it’s not okay for the police to break the laws they are charged with enforcing. At all. Ever. We don’t need a fucking study.
Cite? Quote? Thanks for sharing your feelings, but I prefer to address facts.
Actions have consequences. It’s better to take a guess at those consequences before spouting off your confessed uninformed opinion. For example, I was not aware that the police made a habit of enforcing 4th amendment search and seizure laws on others.
Ok, sure. I thought it was posted recently enough not to warrant citing, but at your request:
You do know it’s illegal to go around slapping people, right?
First, I’m a little confused: what opinion did I confess was uninformed? Second, if you want to change the law to allow law enforcement personnel to strike non-resisting subjects, go for it. But do that first, before you excuse them for it. Until then, I’ll stick to my first point: the police are just as subject to the law as the rest of us.
Thank you for providing an accurate quote of an accurate statement. You are indeed correct that slapping people is illegal: it’s called assault and battery.
I did not claim otherwise.
So tell me Kyrie, where did I say, “…but he’s a cop, so it’s ok.”? I corrected that misimpression upthread.
Your claim about my post was uninformed. Your statement about no need for studies implies to me that you have no familiarity or interest in them. Am I wrong?
I have no idea. If you are a member (and there are many), congratulations I guess.
You still haven’t addressed the substance of my argument, which advocates anticipating that which can be anticipated. Frylock and others seemed to want me to elaborate on what sorts of things could be researched. I provided an answer upthread.
I might be alone in this, but I’m not sure that you really did. My current impression is that you are arguing that the police ought to be allowed to continue historical practices that you acknowledge are illegal until the result of changing those practices can be studied. Is this an accurate summary of your position? If not, we might be fussing over nothing.
Hm, ok that’s a reasonable interpretation, but actually no.
In practice this is something that will grind its way through the courts. The police will be hauled up for crimes committed while on videotape, and plead not guilty on the basis of imagined furtive movements or other aspects not showing up clearly on tape. Juries will try to work out whether the prosecutor’s case clears the reasonable doubt bar. The underlying and longstanding pattern of police practice will be muddied.
I say a research program will help clarify matters. Perhaps it would point a way towards procedures that prevent the streets from becoming a cop shooting gallery (or rather show that such fears are overblown). Perhaps it would monetize the sort of delays inherent with getting a warrant for searches during routine traffic stops.
Or maybe it would just provide me with some basis for mouthing off on the internet. I’m simply reluctant to comment on fourth amendment automotive issues without a better grasp on the topic. Sure a lot of this stuff is blatantly unconstitutional. But I’ve followed human rights abuses for long enough to be a little jaded about police bullying and slaps to the face. This kid lost his teeth. I once witnessed a police beating in the Czech Republic train station: the cops appeared bored.
TLDR: In practice research would occur simultaneously with a drawn out process encompassing many court cases. Heck, this isn’t rocket science: it might involve merely digging into existing statistics or arranging a few candid and anonymous interviews with former cops. The NYT does a number of investigations of this scope each month. One might even look into this for the sake of history.
Post 10,000. Not my greatest thread.
So just to be clear, you’re saying we need to do research before we make any conclusions about cops slapping people in the face?
A rather graphic beating was captured, of an NYPD officer who hit a young guy so hard he dropped his nightstick. Hard to watch – the guy was stumbling with blood streaming down his face. According to the article, the young guy jumped a turnstile at the subway.
It looks like he was seriously resisting arrest, even after a hard hit to the head, he is fighting the cop. Why no taser?
I grew up with cops beating people, shoving them to the ground, hitting them with sticks, it was such a common occurrence nobody much reacted. During protests against the War (Nam) cops would beat people so bad they crippled them. The courts wouldn’t do shit about it either.
And we liked it that way, dagnabit!
And I keep scratching my head.
If these 5 Detectives were lazy/incompetent, so much so that they could couldn’t be arsed to do the most basic of investigatory tasks, why the FUCK WOULD YOU PUT THEM UNIFORM AND HAVE THEM PATROL THE STREETS???
I’m outraged, both by the behavior and by the use of the word ‘allegedly’. If there is video of him slapping the kid, then he is not allegedly slapping the kid. If you can see the slap, then there is proof that slap occurred. Grow some balls.
Well, here’s a New York City cop who accidentally killed someone:
Can you believe it: they took his gun away even though it was an acccident!
If I’m not mistaken, when you’re put on paid admin leave after a shooting … any shooting … you need to turn in your service weapon.
My understanding is that firearm confiscation in NYC is automatic (if temporary) after a discharge outside of a shooting range. I do know that all discharges are investigated by a team and are followed up by procedures including eg immediate alcohol tests of all officers involved. Most NYC cops never discharge their weapon during their career: the annual rate is something like 1/4 of one percent. Assessing the New York City Police Department Firearm Training and Firearm-Discharge Review Process | RAND
Evaluation of the New York City Police Department Firearm Training and Firearm-Discharge Review Process | RAND
Salt Lake Tribune: "In the past five years, more Utahns have been killed by police than by gang members. Or drug dealers. Or from child abuse..
Killed by Utah cops since 2010: 45 people, which is 15% of all homicides. How does this compare with other states? It’s hard to say because of spotty statistics. One source puts the number of police-involved homicides at 400 but that’s almost certainly an underestimate. I say better data is needed. But that Utah number seems… high.
Ian Adams, spokesman for the Utah Fraternal Order of Police, disagrees: “The onus is on the person being arrested to stop trying to assault and kill police officers and the innocent public. … Why do some in society continue to insist the problem lies with police officers?”
Ok, so there’s no need to reassess police training and procedures in Utah: they are already perfect. Good to know! I have my citation and I believe everything I read.
In Cleveland a cop shot and killed a 12 year old boy at a playground who had a toy gun:
Having read the last few posts in this thread, I’m left wondering if a person can be driven to violence by having gone through Junior High with the name “Glans”.
Police in Utahkill more people than gang members do
Utah police officers have killed more civilians than gang members, drug dealers, or child abusers have over the past five years, according to a new report from the Salt Lake Tribune.
And in 2014 they have exceeded intimate partner killings as well.
And one of the comments:
Sorry - that was a duplicate post caused by a failure of the search function within this thread. I searched on Utah and the post above was not highlighted. Got past the 30 second edit timeframe before I noticed.