11 ms·

Crimes should be charged more seriously, not less, when they're committed by police. This is only reasonable - any crime committed by an on-duty officer is inhe

Crimes should be charged more seriously, not less, when they're committed by police. This is only reasonable - any crime committed by an on-duty officer is inherently more harmful that the same crime committed by a civilian, because in addition to the damage of the actual crime, the officer's commission of it also does harm to the public trust in the police and our society. Beyond that, the police should be held to a higher standard because we as a society acknowledge that they are trained well enough to walk around with guns and the ability to deprive people of their freedom (even those who are innocent - if you're locked in a cell and later not charged, you don't get that time you spent in a cell back). We should be able to charge Chauvin with first degree murder despite a lack of premeditation, because he was trained to know not to do precisely what he did. If I kneel on a guy's neck and kill him unintentionally it's manslaughter, but if a cop does it, it should be worse because that cop should be expected to know that doing so is not an acceptable form of restraint.

thephyber 6y ago
> you don't get that time you spent in a cell back You also got fingerprinted (and probably DNA tested) and your mugshot was publicly distributed and those actions aren't undone.
- smnrchrds 6y ago
  I agree. An arrest on its own, even without a conviction or even any charges being laid, can have an enormous negative effect on one's life. Another example is that having been ever arrested, even if not charged or convicted, can bar you from entering the US without going through an expensive, difficult, discretionary process to get a waiver, that then needs to be periodically redone. And it follows you for the rest of your life, it does not expire for example 30 or 50 years after the arrest.
  - ryandrake 6y ago
    I’ve applied to companies who ask on their application whether you have ever been arrested, regardless of conviction—presumably as a way to disqualify you.
    - defnotashton2 6y ago
      Some countries thats illegal, should be in US.
  - yummypaint 6y ago
    There are landlords in my area who put in the lease that you can be evicted for just being arrested
- awillen 6y ago
  100%. It's crazy to act as though a fair trial (even if you can get one of those, which you probably can't if you're black) somehow provides recourse against arrest. Beyond the time in jail, you might have to spend thousands and thousands on lawyers in order to avoid being punished for a crime you're not guilty of.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
FireBeyond 6y ago
So many double standards. A police officer is allowed to "panic and fear for their life" and shoot me as a result. I, as a private citizen, am expected to remain cool, calm and composed in the face of multiple guns in my face. Even more mundane things: if I break a law, "ignorance is no excuse". When cops arrest photographers for shooting in public spaces, I have literally heard government officials explain it away as "We cannot expect our police officers to be constitutional lawyers".
- HarryHirsch 6y ago
  I as a private citizen, am expected to remain cool, calm and composed in the face of multiple guns in my face. Have you seen that scene from the demonstration in Salt Lake City, where MAGA-man pointed a hunting bow at demonstrators? He was taken down and handed over to law enforcement unharmed. The bystanders displayed extraordinary restraint, no doubt because everything was filmed, and anyone who used deadly force would be harassed for the rest of their lives. We'd like to see that same standard applied to cops.
  - stevespang 6y ago
    Liar. I saw all the videos, his face was bloodied, he was kicked in the ribs.
  - homieg33 6y ago
    This is what I read about that event. “In response, people at the protest tackled the man and attacked him. At least 15 people pinned the man against his vehicle to punch, kick and throw things at him. His face was left bloody and his vehicle was looted and flipped, according to 2News reporter Kelly Vaughen“ https://www.google.com/amp/s/kutv.com/amp/news/local/slc-protesters-ignite-the-vehicle-of-a-man-who-pointed-bow-and-arrow-at-them https://www.google.com/amp/s/kutv.com/amp/news/local/slc-pro...
    - HarryHirsch 6y ago
      There need to be consequences for threatening people with a deadly weapon. An overturned truck is mild in such a situation. I'd have expected at least a broken bone, but, no, only a bloody face. Try that with the cops.
tromp 6y ago
[1] argues that a second degree murder charge would be more appropriate [1] https://www.bostonglobe.com/2020/05/31/opinion/minnesota-prosecutors-charges-might-lead-an-unjustly-easy-sentence-george-floyds-killer/ https://www.bostonglobe.com/2020/05/31/opinion/minnesota-pro...
- awillen 6y ago
  And we certainly could still end up with that charge, but my point is that the police committing a crime should act as an enhancement to force prosecutors to charge it more seriously. If a random person commits a crime that would be third-degree, the same crime committed by an on-duty police officer should be charged as second-degree or higher.
jariel 6y ago
It's not a matter of proportionality, it's a matter of context. You cannot say: "Here's a gun, go into that house, physically get that guy to come out, dead or alive, but - if you do it just a little bit wrong, and you kill him the wrong way, you're going to jail forever" The laws absolutely have to be different for police because we (and that includes you) are compelling them into situations of possible extreme violence, and in some case, constant low level aggression and toxicity. Officers have to be held to account, but that account is definitely a different. The argument however, completely misses the point - what matters more is a) the extreme high level of baseline violence in communities which necessitates all sorts of precautions otherwise unnecessary b) guns everywhere and c) just a general attitude towards over-policing and obvious unfamiliarity with the exact nature of how people should be apprehended or not. For example, the fact that 3 officers were on camera while 1 of them was kneeling on someone's neck AND they were knowingly being filmed, means that 'de-facto' it was allowed, ie they felt there would be no repercussions, in which case, the police chief should be out to dry first. The problem is mass violence, pervasive weaponry and over-aggressive policing - most other things are secondary, if you solve the core problems, much if it goes away. Surely in most other jurisdictions, like Canada, UK, Germany, Japan etc. the police are treated differently under the law and somehow it works out.
TheBobinator 6y ago
Holding them "to a higher standard" is verbal masterbation; feels good, conclusion is a climax of moral splooge, you even get to nap after, but it sets no defined goals and says nothing anyone hasn't already heard. Police have immunity because many cops come from military backgrounds, have operated in chaotic urban and rural environments and know how fragile life is, so they formed a union to protect their interests and skins from the legislative, judicial, executive branches and the public, all of whom from time to time looks for the easiest party to scapegoat; the police. The public, and you especially, need to understand cops are not gun-wielding process-following soldier robots, they are human beings. If the milwaukee cop saved 100 lives in his career and takes one by accident and there are riots, that's one hell of a double standard to set. The first step to a root cause analysis is taking the officer to a padded room for a thorough psych evaluation. When you end up with a SWAT Raid of someone's house that goes wrong and their chihwuawua gets shot, that's half the story. A lot of the time the reason you only hear half of the story is to protect someone. A lot of the story is, the population is not as intelligent or well-to-do as the hackernews demographic; to a military strategist, shows of force are an essential mechanism for gaining compliance, and they are probably right about that to an extent. You have a demographic that is not doing themselves any favors; rioting, assaulting people, looting businesses, burning buildings. This is not a civil way to handle the situation. What I find very interesting this time around is the willingness of the public, especially young kids, to take up arms and defend their neighbors businesses and back up the police. That there is the start of something.
- lukev 6y ago
  It is precisely because cops are human beings that we cannot allow them to operate in an effectively consequences-free environment. Also; the idea that any cop would have "saved 100 lives in his career" is ludicrous. But even if it were true, it would not justify allowing them to murder without consequence. In actuality, the pattern we see with Derek Chauvin is more common; 18 complaints on his official record, involvement with 3 police shootings, and never any consequences beyond a reprimand. Until he just casually crushes a dude to death, and people like you are _still_ arguing there shouldn't be consequences.

thephyber 6y ago

> you don't get that time you spent in a cell back You also got fingerprinted (and probably DNA tested) and your mugshot was publicly distributed and those actions aren't undone.

smnrchrds 6y ago
I agree. An arrest on its own, even without a conviction or even any charges being laid, can have an enormous negative effect on one's life. Another example is that having been ever arrested, even if not charged or convicted, can bar you from entering the US without going through an expensive, difficult, discretionary process to get a waiver, that then needs to be periodically redone. And it follows you for the rest of your life, it does not expire for example 30 or 50 years after the arrest.
- ryandrake 6y ago
  I’ve applied to companies who ask on their application whether you have ever been arrested, regardless of conviction—presumably as a way to disqualify you.
  - defnotashton2 6y ago
    Some countries thats illegal, should be in US.
- yummypaint 6y ago
  There are landlords in my area who put in the lease that you can be evicted for just being arrested
awillen 6y ago
100%. It's crazy to act as though a fair trial (even if you can get one of those, which you probably can't if you're black) somehow provides recourse against arrest. Beyond the time in jail, you might have to spend thousands and thousands on lawyers in order to avoid being punished for a crime you're not guilty of.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

FireBeyond 6y ago

So many double standards. A police officer is allowed to "panic and fear for their life" and shoot me as a result. I, as a private citizen, am expected to remain cool, calm and composed in the face of multiple guns in my face. Even more mundane things: if I break a law, "ignorance is no excuse". When cops arrest photographers for shooting in public spaces, I have literally heard government officials explain it away as "We cannot expect our police officers to be constitutional lawyers".

HarryHirsch 6y ago
I as a private citizen, am expected to remain cool, calm and composed in the face of multiple guns in my face. Have you seen that scene from the demonstration in Salt Lake City, where MAGA-man pointed a hunting bow at demonstrators? He was taken down and handed over to law enforcement unharmed. The bystanders displayed extraordinary restraint, no doubt because everything was filmed, and anyone who used deadly force would be harassed for the rest of their lives. We'd like to see that same standard applied to cops.
- stevespang 6y ago
  Liar. I saw all the videos, his face was bloodied, he was kicked in the ribs.
- homieg33 6y ago
  This is what I read about that event. “In response, people at the protest tackled the man and attacked him. At least 15 people pinned the man against his vehicle to punch, kick and throw things at him. His face was left bloody and his vehicle was looted and flipped, according to 2News reporter Kelly Vaughen“ https://www.google.com/amp/s/kutv.com/amp/news/local/slc-protesters-ignite-the-vehicle-of-a-man-who-pointed-bow-and-arrow-at-them https://www.google.com/amp/s/kutv.com/amp/news/local/slc-pro...
  - HarryHirsch 6y ago
    There need to be consequences for threatening people with a deadly weapon. An overturned truck is mild in such a situation. I'd have expected at least a broken bone, but, no, only a bloody face. Try that with the cops.

tromp 6y ago

[1] argues that a second degree murder charge would be more appropriate [1] https://www.bostonglobe.com/2020/05/31/opinion/minnesota-prosecutors-charges-might-lead-an-unjustly-easy-sentence-george-floyds-killer/ https://www.bostonglobe.com/2020/05/31/opinion/minnesota-pro...

awillen 6y ago
And we certainly could still end up with that charge, but my point is that the police committing a crime should act as an enhancement to force prosecutors to charge it more seriously. If a random person commits a crime that would be third-degree, the same crime committed by an on-duty police officer should be charged as second-degree or higher.

jariel 6y ago

It's not a matter of proportionality, it's a matter of context. You cannot say: "Here's a gun, go into that house, physically get that guy to come out, dead or alive, but - if you do it just a little bit wrong, and you kill him the wrong way, you're going to jail forever" The laws absolutely have to be different for police because we (and that includes you) are compelling them into situations of possible extreme violence, and in some case, constant low level aggression and toxicity. Officers have to be held to account, but that account is definitely a different. The argument however, completely misses the point - what matters more is a) the extreme high level of baseline violence in communities which necessitates all sorts of precautions otherwise unnecessary b) guns everywhere and c) just a general attitude towards over-policing and obvious unfamiliarity with the exact nature of how people should be apprehended or not. For example, the fact that 3 officers were on camera while 1 of them was kneeling on someone's neck AND they were knowingly being filmed, means that 'de-facto' it was allowed, ie they felt there would be no repercussions, in which case, the police chief should be out to dry first. The problem is mass violence, pervasive weaponry and over-aggressive policing - most other things are secondary, if you solve the core problems, much if it goes away. Surely in most other jurisdictions, like Canada, UK, Germany, Japan etc. the police are treated differently under the law and somehow it works out.

TheBobinator 6y ago

Holding them "to a higher standard" is verbal masterbation; feels good, conclusion is a climax of moral splooge, you even get to nap after, but it sets no defined goals and says nothing anyone hasn't already heard. Police have immunity because many cops come from military backgrounds, have operated in chaotic urban and rural environments and know how fragile life is, so they formed a union to protect their interests and skins from the legislative, judicial, executive branches and the public, all of whom from time to time looks for the easiest party to scapegoat; the police. The public, and you especially, need to understand cops are not gun-wielding process-following soldier robots, they are human beings. If the milwaukee cop saved 100 lives in his career and takes one by accident and there are riots, that's one hell of a double standard to set. The first step to a root cause analysis is taking the officer to a padded room for a thorough psych evaluation. When you end up with a SWAT Raid of someone's house that goes wrong and their chihwuawua gets shot, that's half the story. A lot of the time the reason you only hear half of the story is to protect someone. A lot of the story is, the population is not as intelligent or well-to-do as the hackernews demographic; to a military strategist, shows of force are an essential mechanism for gaining compliance, and they are probably right about that to an extent. You have a demographic that is not doing themselves any favors; rioting, assaulting people, looting businesses, burning buildings. This is not a civil way to handle the situation. What I find very interesting this time around is the willingness of the public, especially young kids, to take up arms and defend their neighbors businesses and back up the police. That there is the start of something.

lukev 6y ago
It is precisely because cops are human beings that we cannot allow them to operate in an effectively consequences-free environment. Also; the idea that any cop would have "saved 100 lives in his career" is ludicrous. But even if it were true, it would not justify allowing them to murder without consequence. In actuality, the pattern we see with Derek Chauvin is more common; 18 complaints on his official record, involvement with 3 police shootings, and never any consequences beyond a reprimand. Until he just casually crushes a dude to death, and people like you are _still_ arguing there shouldn't be consequences.