3 ms·
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 defin
by 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 agoIt 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.