8 ms·

Only as I get older do I realize how incredibly bad elements of law enforcement in the US can be, and legally so. Few cops and agents are bad, but it is a syste

Only as I get older do I realize how incredibly bad elements of law enforcement in the US can be, and legally so. Few cops and agents are bad, but it is a system with little filtering, personally or institutionally, of the bad elements. Civil asset forfeiture is overwhelmingly unpopular, but when states try to reform it the law enforcement groups rally around it mightily. Essentially they want the right to steal money because they need money; nobody really makes a sincere argument the situation is any different than that. In Alabama they recently tried to reform it. In an op ed by the leaders of district attorneys and sheriffs, the authors wrote “What incentive would local police and sheriffs have to invest manpower, resources and time in these operations if they don't receive proceeds to cover their costs?” I dunno: it seems like if they are professional cops they should just solve crimes and such that seem important; by “investing manpower” they are not investing like a firm does but pulling resources from elsewhere to spend trying to take things from oblivious people. Also in alabama, sheriffs are allowed to take extra money from the food programs at the county jail, and they buy themselves vacation homes this way. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/alabama-sheriff-legally-pocketed-750k-from-inmate-food-funds-bought-beach-house/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/alabama-sheriff-legally-pockete...

cf498 8y ago
As an outside perspective, how do you quantify, that only "Few cops and agents are bad". If your job contains robbing people, I would rationally word it the other way around. Hopefully there are quite a few cops who dont follow the rules and subvert the system of organized theft. But if you take policies like civil forfeiture or for example police union cards for family members this sounds like organized crime to quite a few people not living in the US.
- maxxxxx 8y ago
  "Hopefully there are quite a few cops who dont follow the rules and subvert the system of organized theft" There is no rule that says they have to do asset forfeiture. It's a choice. One of the biggest problems in the US is that laws are not very clear and clarification is left up to the courts.
- mirimir 8y ago
  Well, it's criminal, and it's organized. Classic quote from Upton Sinclair: "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!"
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- ridgeguy 8y ago
  I don't think it matters whether few or many cops or agents are bad. The source of harm is the forfeiture law. With such laws in place, even a single bad actor can do enormous damage. We need to repeal the civil forfeiture laws.
  - acou_nPlusOne_t 8y ago
    Civil forfeiture laws are not all bad - they got africas law enforcement where it is today.
otalp 8y ago
> it is a system with little filtering, personally or institutionally, of the bad elements Wrong. It is a system that explicitly filters out the good elements. "US Court Ruling: You Can Be “Too Smart” to Be a Cop. Police department disqualifies anyone whose IQ is “too high" (https://www.globalresearch.ca/us-court-ruled-you-can-be-too-smart-to-be-a-cop/5420630 https://www.globalresearch.ca/us-court-ruled-you-can-be-too-...) "Court OKs Barring High IQs for Cops"(https://abcnews.go.com/US/court-oks-barring-high-iqs-cops/story?id=95836 https://abcnews.go.com/US/court-oks-barring-high-iqs-cops/st...)
- threatofrain 8y ago
  That's the same thing as barring someone for being overqualified, isn't it?
  - vageli 8y ago
    I can't think of many jobs you'd be turned away from for being too smart.
    - kardos 8y ago
      One rationalisation is that hiring someone "too smart" for the work required means that they'll soon become bored and move on, so your effort invested in training them is wasted.
      - zwily 8y ago
        This is exactly what I’ve heard the justification is.
      - DrScump 8y ago
        For a modern American police force in the Bay Area, for example, taking a candidate from academy entrant to fully qualified officer is a six-figure cost. That's why many Bay Area LEOs focus their recruiting on recent graduates from other Bay Area forces.
DoofusOfDeath 8y ago
I partially disagree with your statement that this is legal behavior by law enforcement. It's one of those situations where IIRC the Supreme Court's relevant ruling from long ago was just plain wrong. I think just about every sane adult agrees that this violates the Bill of Rights, regardless of any SCOTUS opinions to the contrary.
- microcolonel 8y ago
  Yeah, it seems to be pretty clear. They justify it on the technicality that they are not charging you, but an inanimate object with no rights; but honestly they could do this with almost anything you own, including your own body, through reasoning which is only slightly more ludicrous.
- DrScump 8y ago
  Even "wrong" decisions have the force of law. I haven't read any specific cases, but I wonder if 5th (and 4th) Amendment issues were raised at trial in the first place; perhaps those protections weren't even put in play properly. [Update] an example of this concern is raised elsewhere in this thread[0]. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17211885 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17211885
dssu 8y ago
I found this interesting article from Pew Research on how the perspective of the public sharply differs from how the police perceive the current state of affairs. http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2017/01/11/police-views-public-views/ http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2017/01/11/police-views-publi...
originalsimba 8y ago
Police are a cancer in a free society. We should be raising all of our citizens to be capable of handling their own self defense and defense of their families. If that was a required part of becoming an adult in our culture, we wouldn't need uniformed father figures to protect us.
mgkimsal 8y ago
"What incentive would local police and sheriffs have to invest manpower, resources and time in these operations if they don't receive proceeds to cover their costs?” This feels to me like the end result of "govt should be run like a business!" thinking. Every election cycle we hear about govt should be run like a family budget, and getting out of debt, etc. And govt should run like a business, because that's efficient, etc.

cf498 8y ago

As an outside perspective, how do you quantify, that only "Few cops and agents are bad". If your job contains robbing people, I would rationally word it the other way around. Hopefully there are quite a few cops who dont follow the rules and subvert the system of organized theft. But if you take policies like civil forfeiture or for example police union cards for family members this sounds like organized crime to quite a few people not living in the US.

maxxxxx 8y ago
"Hopefully there are quite a few cops who dont follow the rules and subvert the system of organized theft" There is no rule that says they have to do asset forfeiture. It's a choice. One of the biggest problems in the US is that laws are not very clear and clarification is left up to the courts.
mirimir 8y ago
Well, it's criminal, and it's organized. Classic quote from Upton Sinclair: "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!"
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
ridgeguy 8y ago
I don't think it matters whether few or many cops or agents are bad. The source of harm is the forfeiture law. With such laws in place, even a single bad actor can do enormous damage. We need to repeal the civil forfeiture laws.
- acou_nPlusOne_t 8y ago
  Civil forfeiture laws are not all bad - they got africas law enforcement where it is today.

otalp 8y ago

> it is a system with little filtering, personally or institutionally, of the bad elements Wrong. It is a system that explicitly filters out the good elements. "US Court Ruling: You Can Be “Too Smart” to Be a Cop. Police department disqualifies anyone whose IQ is “too high" (https://www.globalresearch.ca/us-court-ruled-you-can-be-too-smart-to-be-a-cop/5420630 https://www.globalresearch.ca/us-court-ruled-you-can-be-too-...) "Court OKs Barring High IQs for Cops"(https://abcnews.go.com/US/court-oks-barring-high-iqs-cops/story?id=95836 https://abcnews.go.com/US/court-oks-barring-high-iqs-cops/st...)

threatofrain 8y ago
That's the same thing as barring someone for being overqualified, isn't it?
- vageli 8y ago
  I can't think of many jobs you'd be turned away from for being too smart.
  - kardos 8y ago
    One rationalisation is that hiring someone "too smart" for the work required means that they'll soon become bored and move on, so your effort invested in training them is wasted.
    - zwily 8y ago
      This is exactly what I’ve heard the justification is.
    - DrScump 8y ago
      For a modern American police force in the Bay Area, for example, taking a candidate from academy entrant to fully qualified officer is a six-figure cost. That's why many Bay Area LEOs focus their recruiting on recent graduates from other Bay Area forces.

DoofusOfDeath 8y ago

I partially disagree with your statement that this is legal behavior by law enforcement. It's one of those situations where IIRC the Supreme Court's relevant ruling from long ago was just plain wrong. I think just about every sane adult agrees that this violates the Bill of Rights, regardless of any SCOTUS opinions to the contrary.

microcolonel 8y ago
Yeah, it seems to be pretty clear. They justify it on the technicality that they are not charging you, but an inanimate object with no rights; but honestly they could do this with almost anything you own, including your own body, through reasoning which is only slightly more ludicrous.
DrScump 8y ago
Even "wrong" decisions have the force of law. I haven't read any specific cases, but I wonder if 5th (and 4th) Amendment issues were raised at trial in the first place; perhaps those protections weren't even put in play properly. [Update] an example of this concern is raised elsewhere in this thread[0]. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17211885 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17211885

dssu 8y ago

I found this interesting article from Pew Research on how the perspective of the public sharply differs from how the police perceive the current state of affairs. http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2017/01/11/police-views-public-views/ http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2017/01/11/police-views-publi...

originalsimba 8y ago

Police are a cancer in a free society. We should be raising all of our citizens to be capable of handling their own self defense and defense of their families. If that was a required part of becoming an adult in our culture, we wouldn't need uniformed father figures to protect us.

mgkimsal 8y ago

"What incentive would local police and sheriffs have to invest manpower, resources and time in these operations if they don't receive proceeds to cover their costs?” This feels to me like the end result of "govt should be run like a business!" thinking. Every election cycle we hear about govt should be run like a family budget, and getting out of debt, etc. And govt should run like a business, because that's efficient, etc.