5 ms·

Lots of countries manage to have all sorts of regulations and very few killings by police. I don't think the premise of this essay is valid.

by ahoy 10y ago

mseebach 10y ago
That's not the premise of this essay.
dleslie 10y ago
In many such countries the police are not nearly as militarized.
- dragonwriter 10y ago
  So, instead of "don't support laws you aren't willing to kill to have enforced", perhaps, "don't support militarized police" would be the better recommendation. Since, after all, that's the root of the problem.
  - jessaustin 10y ago
    Which problem do you expect to be fixed first? Every new crime can be fought right in the legislature here and now. Who can demilitarize the police? [EDIT:] Are police unions, bar associations, and armaments manufacturers just going to sit out the session in which you get your miraculous "just do the right thing ok cops?" law passed? I can't believe that someone as knowledgeable as yourself really thinks that way...
    - dragonwriter 10y ago
      > Which problem do you expect to be fixed first? Demilitarizing the police takes building a coalition for a single, focused, legislative action. Preventing all new, and eliminating all existing, legislation that you aren't willing to have the state kill to enforce requires a lot more. So, I'd say that demilitarizing the police is a lot easier. > Every new crime can be fought right in the legislature here and now. Who can demilitarize the police? Demilitarizing the police can be fought right in the legislature, here and now, too. EDIT (to respond to yours): > [EDIT:] Are police unions, bar associations, and armaments manufacturers just going to sit out the session in which you get your miraculous "just do the right thing ok cops?" law passed? I don't see bar associations particularly likely to oppose demilitarizing police; OTOH, police unions are often opponents of efforts to decriminalize minor offenses that are useful as pretexts (and often are sponsors of new criminalization of this type.) So, is it easier to build a coalition to beat them on one point, or thousands?
      - jessaustin 10y ago
        Actually lawyers like to work, so as a whole they like lots of complicated awful laws to keep the courts crowded all the time. Think a little more deeply about how special interests function, however. The NRA really cares about gun control, and few others do, so they get their way. The teachers' unions really care about public education policy, and few others do, so they get their way. Likewise, those who profit from our awful "justice" system really like that profit, so any giant attempt to destroy their entire world will get demolished. We may never know who invented this "one wonderful law will save us" meme, but one doubts he worked on the side of good. We've got to start by eating around the margins of the problem.
        dragonwriter 10y ago
        > Actually lawyers like to work, so as a whole they like lots of complicated awful laws to keep the courts crowded all the time. That's a popular stereotype, but -- especially in any way relevant to the kind of criminal offenses at issue in this discussion -- its not borne out at all, AFAICT, by the actual history of bar association lobbying.
- smt88 10y ago
  Nor is the populace.
- hugh4 10y ago
  More to the point, in those countries it's very very unlikely for anyone to pull a gun on a cop.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
pixl97 10y ago
Lots of countries don't have a literal war on drugs. Lots of countries don't have racials issues stemming from slavery. But what is amazing is those countries that do have higher levels of violence.
pixl97 10y ago
Lots of countries don't have a literal war on drugs. Lots of countries don't have racials issues stemming from slavery. But what is amazing is those countries that do have higher levels of violence.

Lots of countries manage to have all sorts of regulations and very few killings by police. I don't think the premise of this essay is valid.

by ahoy 10y ago

Lots of countries manage to have all sorts of regulations and very few killings by police. I don't think the premise of this essay is valid.

mseebach 10y ago

That's not the premise of this essay.

dleslie 10y ago

In many such countries the police are not nearly as militarized.

dragonwriter 10y ago
So, instead of "don't support laws you aren't willing to kill to have enforced", perhaps, "don't support militarized police" would be the better recommendation. Since, after all, that's the root of the problem.
- jessaustin 10y ago
  Which problem do you expect to be fixed first? Every new crime can be fought right in the legislature here and now. Who can demilitarize the police? [EDIT:] Are police unions, bar associations, and armaments manufacturers just going to sit out the session in which you get your miraculous "just do the right thing ok cops?" law passed? I can't believe that someone as knowledgeable as yourself really thinks that way...
  - dragonwriter 10y ago
    > Which problem do you expect to be fixed first? Demilitarizing the police takes building a coalition for a single, focused, legislative action. Preventing all new, and eliminating all existing, legislation that you aren't willing to have the state kill to enforce requires a lot more. So, I'd say that demilitarizing the police is a lot easier. > Every new crime can be fought right in the legislature here and now. Who can demilitarize the police? Demilitarizing the police can be fought right in the legislature, here and now, too. EDIT (to respond to yours): > [EDIT:] Are police unions, bar associations, and armaments manufacturers just going to sit out the session in which you get your miraculous "just do the right thing ok cops?" law passed? I don't see bar associations particularly likely to oppose demilitarizing police; OTOH, police unions are often opponents of efforts to decriminalize minor offenses that are useful as pretexts (and often are sponsors of new criminalization of this type.) So, is it easier to build a coalition to beat them on one point, or thousands?
    - jessaustin 10y ago
      Actually lawyers like to work, so as a whole they like lots of complicated awful laws to keep the courts crowded all the time. Think a little more deeply about how special interests function, however. The NRA really cares about gun control, and few others do, so they get their way. The teachers' unions really care about public education policy, and few others do, so they get their way. Likewise, those who profit from our awful "justice" system really like that profit, so any giant attempt to destroy their entire world will get demolished. We may never know who invented this "one wonderful law will save us" meme, but one doubts he worked on the side of good. We've got to start by eating around the margins of the problem.
      - dragonwriter 10y ago
        > Actually lawyers like to work, so as a whole they like lots of complicated awful laws to keep the courts crowded all the time. That's a popular stereotype, but -- especially in any way relevant to the kind of criminal offenses at issue in this discussion -- its not borne out at all, AFAICT, by the actual history of bar association lobbying.
smt88 10y ago
Nor is the populace.
hugh4 10y ago
More to the point, in those countries it's very very unlikely for anyone to pull a gun on a cop.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

pixl97 10y ago

Lots of countries don't have a literal war on drugs. Lots of countries don't have racials issues stemming from slavery. But what is amazing is those countries that do have higher levels of violence.

pixl97 10y ago

Lots of countries don't have a literal war on drugs. Lots of countries don't have racials issues stemming from slavery. But what is amazing is those countries that do have higher levels of violence.