4 ms·
> Maybe not all of them, but enough of them that "police are corrupt" is true. Usually I would never generalize the actions of a subset to the entire group, bu
by pdkl95 11y ago
> Maybe not all of them, but enough of them that "police are corrupt" is true.
Usually I would never generalize the actions of a subset to the entire group, but in this case there is a key difference that justifies "(all/most) police are corrupt": the failure to clean their own house of the "bad apples". When a supposedly "good" policeman gives cover and protection to a criminal in their department instead of reporting the crime, they become an accomplice. in many cases, protecting the guilty may even be a crime in itself (misprision of felony[1]).
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misprision_of_felony#United_States_federal_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misprision_of_felony#United_St...
- iamsohungry 11y agoIt's worth noting that it's not enough for police to passively not cover for each other's crimes. It's the job of police to actively investigate crimes. When corruption is so rampant, any police department which doesn't have a well-funded internal affairs bureau with extensive prosecutorial support is not doing its job.
- jack9 11y ago> It's the job of police to actively investigate crimes. In the US, this is not true. The police, at large, are there to control a situation and assign blame. Investigation is to those ends.