7 ms·

Prosecutors have a tough job. Prosecuting people who've hurt other people is the easy part of their job. Prosecuting people who haven't hurt anyone but themselv

Prosecutors have a tough job. Prosecuting people who've hurt other people is the easy part of their job. Prosecuting people who haven't hurt anyone but themselves (self-medication w/ the street pharmacy), or who've become dependent on alcohol just to feel 'normal' [1]... Maybe prosecutors have to have a cruel streak to stick with the job after the novelty wears off. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14085230 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14085230 Sometimes people call the police for help. Years before I met her, a friend of mine got out of control, and her family called the police (maybe her 'craziness' was because she was starting to go through menopause). The police couldn't do anything but take this woman downtown. Her daughter protested, "THIS IS NOT WHY WE CALLED YOU", but the officers were like, "whatevers". If all you've got is a hammer, everything is a nail. Prosecutors' job is frequently to compound the wounds inflicted by the public servants. They do this with the gusto of a true-believer.

Pyxl101 9y ago
> The police couldn't do anything but take this woman downtown. Her daughter protested, "THIS IS NOT WHY WE CALLED YOU", but the officers were like, "whatevers". If all you've got is a hammer, everything is a nail. Sounds like her daughter might have had incorrect expectations for what it entails to call the police, though, unfortunately. The purpose and function of calling the police is generally to bring lawful force to bear against someone who has committed a crime. Any time you call the cops on somebody, it should be done with the expectation that they may be arrested and taken to jail, regardless of your intentions when making the call. Police are not therapists and their job is not to resolve domestic disputes like a guidance counselor. While we might wish that this is what police would be, and while this is how excellent police might behave, in small-town settings, when you scale the system up to cities of millions, the function of police tends toward that of enforcing the law through use of force. When you scale the police system up, it means the officers don't have a personal relationship with the people who call them, and they're going into a situation with no context. We can't fairly expect them to pass judgment on the spot about how a domestic dispute should be resolved when there's ambiguity and no law has obviously been broken - the courts are for handling nuanced, contextual situations like that where facts need to be determined, and fairness weighed. Anything less deprives one party of their rights. Police also need to prioritize their time, because big cities are filled with constant real crime like theft, most of which is already never investigated due to lack of resources. In my mind, actual thefts (that deprive people of property and rights) are a substantially higher priority than resolving social disputes. Any time a police spends on social disputes is time taken away from fighting meaningful crimes that have obvious victims. So from my perspective one should generally not expect the police to intervene for anything less than a law obviously being broken. With this perspective in mind, police are a pretty "binary function". You call them because someone has broken the law and you need to bring society's force to bear against them, typically by giving them e.g. a lawful order to leave the premises of property you own, or by arresting them and taking them to jail. They are not "for" any other purpose. This is of course is not a defense of police taking people to jail for no reason in situations where they are called inappropriately, but I'm saying this to share my life experience in the hopes that it will set useful expectations for others: generally don't call police on someone unless you're willing to send them to jail.
- keithpeter 9y ago
  UK: policing is a bit different here but police officers do often refer people to what is left of Social Services and the local hospital when needed. In your location, if urgent intervention was required to help a relative in a situation like the one outlined in the grandparent post, what agency would be the best one to contact?
  - peteretep 9y ago
    > UK: policing is a bit different here That's an example of typical British understatement, too.
  - Nexxxeh 9y ago
    Our policing is done by consent. Also the police are arguing (I would wager correctly) that they're taking the brunt of the effective cuts to mental health provisioning in the NHS. Over here (England and Wales) if someone was an immediate danger to themselves or others, I'd call 999 and be put through to the Police operator and explain. If the person I was calling regarding wasn't an immediate danger, in theory I'd ring 111, but in practice I'd ring Mind because I've had extremely negative experiences with NHS Direct.
  - Broken_Hippo 9y ago
    I'm from the states: Mental health situations are difficult. The only real options are calling an ambulance and/or the police (the police will often come with the ambulance). I was able to contact the hospital directly with my ex (he was schizo-affective), but that did depend on him being calm enough to willingly come with me. Folks are often jailed on public disturbance and other charges instead of being taken to a facility - many facilities don't have enough space either.
  - _jal 9y ago
    To be frank, my response would depend on resources. If the person in crisis were insured, white, and living in a nicer part of town, I'd get them to one of the local hospitals. If they didn't have the resources required to ensure someone would care and I thought it was something the person could get through, I'd recommend sedatives and try to find an appropriate charity. The only time I'd ever call the police where I live now is if the situation were already life-or-death. There are places with departments where the cops aren't such wildcards, but I don't live in one of those, and every time I've been involved in a situation where cops were introduced into it, at best they were useless.
JustSomeNobody 9y ago
Cruel seems right: https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/may/01/prosecuted-law-new-orleans https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/us-news/201...
bspn 9y ago
>Sometimes people call the police for help. Years before I met her, a friend of mine got out of control, and her family called the police (maybe her 'craziness' was because she was starting to go through menopause). The police couldn't do anything but take this woman downtown. Her daughter protested, "THIS IS NOT WHY WE CALLED YOU", but the officers were like, "whatevers". If all you've got is a hammer, everything is a nail It sounds like she was having some sort of mental health episode - I wonder if it would have helped had the daughter requested an ambulance rather than the police? Where I live, whenever you call 911 for an in-home emergency the police are tasked to arrive first to make sure the residence is safe and then the paramedics and fire crews come in after. You're right about the hammer and nail, but by framing it as a medical emergency you can hopefully ensure the hammer is holstered when they arrive as they approach the incident as secondary support who will only intervene if there is real danger.
- tcj_phx 9y ago
  > It sounds like she was having some sort of mental health episode - I wonder if it would have helped had the daughter requested an ambulance rather than the police? The mental health system does a good job of making people's situations worse too. I think it's infinitely preferable to be locked up in jail than in a mental hospital. > but by framing it as a medical emergency you can hopefully ensure the hammer is holstered when they arrive as they approach the incident as secondary support who will only intervene if there is real danger. good point... When I called for the firefighters to come revive my girlfriend (benzodiazepines amplify opiates, fyi), the police were also dispatched. After the firefighters left, the police officers decided they didn't need to make things worse, and their crew disappeared into the night too. This did not happen the second time I called 911. This could also have been the difference between big-city police and small-town police...
  - bspn 9y ago
    Yes, it sounds like the approaches may be slightly different. My wife has needed ambulance care on several occasions due to an ongoing medical issue, so I've got to know the teams pretty well and one of the cops told me that whenever a male calls an ambulance for a female in my county the 911 dispatcher is instructed to assume domestic violence is involved and send the police as the advance party. I think our house has been flagged as "safe" now, as even though the cops still turn up it feels like more of a tick-the-box exercise these days and they no longer come to the door with their hands on their holsters.
klenwell 9y ago
A cruel streak perhaps, but even more problematic: a perverse incentive. Came across an interesting somewhat contrarian argument recently in a New Yorker article reviewing a new book about mass incarceration in America: So what makes for the madness of American incarceration? If it isn’t crazy drug laws or outrageous sentences or profit-seeking prison keepers, what is it? Pfaff has a simple explanation: it’s prosecutors. They are political creatures, who get political rewards for locking people up and almost unlimited power to do it. http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/04/10/how-we-misunderstand-mass-incarceration http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/04/10/how-we-misunder...
coldtea 9y ago
>Prosecutors have a tough job. Prosecuting people who've hurt other people is the easy part of their job. Prosecuting people who haven't hurt anyone but themselves (self-medication w/ the street pharmacy), or who've become dependent on alcohol just to feel 'normal' [1]... Maybe prosecutors have to have a cruel streak to stick with the job after the novelty wears off. And yet, they manage to not be such bastards in other parts of the Western World (EU, Nordic countries, etc).
- logfromblammo 9y ago
  I know someone in the US who had to stop being a prosecutor because she "got sick of putting poor people in jail for no good reason". In the US, those who aren't total bastards quit. Those that remain create a culture toxic to anyone with a conscience, and thereby perpetuate the vicious cycle. This is what makes it so hard to claw back from a corrupted government. Very few people have sufficient fortitude to endure corruption long enough to effect change from within.

Pyxl101 9y ago

> The police couldn't do anything but take this woman downtown. Her daughter protested, "THIS IS NOT WHY WE CALLED YOU", but the officers were like, "whatevers". If all you've got is a hammer, everything is a nail. Sounds like her daughter might have had incorrect expectations for what it entails to call the police, though, unfortunately. The purpose and function of calling the police is generally to bring lawful force to bear against someone who has committed a crime. Any time you call the cops on somebody, it should be done with the expectation that they may be arrested and taken to jail, regardless of your intentions when making the call. Police are not therapists and their job is not to resolve domestic disputes like a guidance counselor. While we might wish that this is what police would be, and while this is how excellent police might behave, in small-town settings, when you scale the system up to cities of millions, the function of police tends toward that of enforcing the law through use of force. When you scale the police system up, it means the officers don't have a personal relationship with the people who call them, and they're going into a situation with no context. We can't fairly expect them to pass judgment on the spot about how a domestic dispute should be resolved when there's ambiguity and no law has obviously been broken - the courts are for handling nuanced, contextual situations like that where facts need to be determined, and fairness weighed. Anything less deprives one party of their rights. Police also need to prioritize their time, because big cities are filled with constant real crime like theft, most of which is already never investigated due to lack of resources. In my mind, actual thefts (that deprive people of property and rights) are a substantially higher priority than resolving social disputes. Any time a police spends on social disputes is time taken away from fighting meaningful crimes that have obvious victims. So from my perspective one should generally not expect the police to intervene for anything less than a law obviously being broken. With this perspective in mind, police are a pretty "binary function". You call them because someone has broken the law and you need to bring society's force to bear against them, typically by giving them e.g. a lawful order to leave the premises of property you own, or by arresting them and taking them to jail. They are not "for" any other purpose. This is of course is not a defense of police taking people to jail for no reason in situations where they are called inappropriately, but I'm saying this to share my life experience in the hopes that it will set useful expectations for others: generally don't call police on someone unless you're willing to send them to jail.

keithpeter 9y ago
UK: policing is a bit different here but police officers do often refer people to what is left of Social Services and the local hospital when needed. In your location, if urgent intervention was required to help a relative in a situation like the one outlined in the grandparent post, what agency would be the best one to contact?
- peteretep 9y ago
  > UK: policing is a bit different here That's an example of typical British understatement, too.
- Nexxxeh 9y ago
  Our policing is done by consent. Also the police are arguing (I would wager correctly) that they're taking the brunt of the effective cuts to mental health provisioning in the NHS. Over here (England and Wales) if someone was an immediate danger to themselves or others, I'd call 999 and be put through to the Police operator and explain. If the person I was calling regarding wasn't an immediate danger, in theory I'd ring 111, but in practice I'd ring Mind because I've had extremely negative experiences with NHS Direct.
- Broken_Hippo 9y ago
  I'm from the states: Mental health situations are difficult. The only real options are calling an ambulance and/or the police (the police will often come with the ambulance). I was able to contact the hospital directly with my ex (he was schizo-affective), but that did depend on him being calm enough to willingly come with me. Folks are often jailed on public disturbance and other charges instead of being taken to a facility - many facilities don't have enough space either.
- _jal 9y ago
  To be frank, my response would depend on resources. If the person in crisis were insured, white, and living in a nicer part of town, I'd get them to one of the local hospitals. If they didn't have the resources required to ensure someone would care and I thought it was something the person could get through, I'd recommend sedatives and try to find an appropriate charity. The only time I'd ever call the police where I live now is if the situation were already life-or-death. There are places with departments where the cops aren't such wildcards, but I don't live in one of those, and every time I've been involved in a situation where cops were introduced into it, at best they were useless.

JustSomeNobody 9y ago

Cruel seems right: https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/may/01/prosecuted-law-new-orleans https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/us-news/201...

bspn 9y ago

>Sometimes people call the police for help. Years before I met her, a friend of mine got out of control, and her family called the police (maybe her 'craziness' was because she was starting to go through menopause). The police couldn't do anything but take this woman downtown. Her daughter protested, "THIS IS NOT WHY WE CALLED YOU", but the officers were like, "whatevers". If all you've got is a hammer, everything is a nail It sounds like she was having some sort of mental health episode - I wonder if it would have helped had the daughter requested an ambulance rather than the police? Where I live, whenever you call 911 for an in-home emergency the police are tasked to arrive first to make sure the residence is safe and then the paramedics and fire crews come in after. You're right about the hammer and nail, but by framing it as a medical emergency you can hopefully ensure the hammer is holstered when they arrive as they approach the incident as secondary support who will only intervene if there is real danger.

tcj_phx 9y ago
> It sounds like she was having some sort of mental health episode - I wonder if it would have helped had the daughter requested an ambulance rather than the police? The mental health system does a good job of making people's situations worse too. I think it's infinitely preferable to be locked up in jail than in a mental hospital. > but by framing it as a medical emergency you can hopefully ensure the hammer is holstered when they arrive as they approach the incident as secondary support who will only intervene if there is real danger. good point... When I called for the firefighters to come revive my girlfriend (benzodiazepines amplify opiates, fyi), the police were also dispatched. After the firefighters left, the police officers decided they didn't need to make things worse, and their crew disappeared into the night too. This did not happen the second time I called 911. This could also have been the difference between big-city police and small-town police...
- bspn 9y ago
  Yes, it sounds like the approaches may be slightly different. My wife has needed ambulance care on several occasions due to an ongoing medical issue, so I've got to know the teams pretty well and one of the cops told me that whenever a male calls an ambulance for a female in my county the 911 dispatcher is instructed to assume domestic violence is involved and send the police as the advance party. I think our house has been flagged as "safe" now, as even though the cops still turn up it feels like more of a tick-the-box exercise these days and they no longer come to the door with their hands on their holsters.

klenwell 9y ago

A cruel streak perhaps, but even more problematic: a perverse incentive. Came across an interesting somewhat contrarian argument recently in a New Yorker article reviewing a new book about mass incarceration in America: So what makes for the madness of American incarceration? If it isn’t crazy drug laws or outrageous sentences or profit-seeking prison keepers, what is it? Pfaff has a simple explanation: it’s prosecutors. They are political creatures, who get political rewards for locking people up and almost unlimited power to do it. http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/04/10/how-we-misunderstand-mass-incarceration http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/04/10/how-we-misunder...

coldtea 9y ago

>Prosecutors have a tough job. Prosecuting people who've hurt other people is the easy part of their job. Prosecuting people who haven't hurt anyone but themselves (self-medication w/ the street pharmacy), or who've become dependent on alcohol just to feel 'normal' [1]... Maybe prosecutors have to have a cruel streak to stick with the job after the novelty wears off. And yet, they manage to not be such bastards in other parts of the Western World (EU, Nordic countries, etc).

logfromblammo 9y ago
I know someone in the US who had to stop being a prosecutor because she "got sick of putting poor people in jail for no good reason". In the US, those who aren't total bastards quit. Those that remain create a culture toxic to anyone with a conscience, and thereby perpetuate the vicious cycle. This is what makes it so hard to claw back from a corrupted government. Very few people have sufficient fortitude to endure corruption long enough to effect change from within.