5 ms·

Clean or not, people need to be held accountable for their actions. I mean if they have nothing to hide then they have nothing to fear, right? These are suppo

Clean or not, people need to be held accountable for their actions. I mean if they have nothing to hide then they have nothing to fear, right? These are supposed to be public servants (although that's obviously not the case). So no, I still don't feel bad about it, even if that cop needs the job to feed his family. Maybe they should fight the system that doesn't support their citizens in need (people with health problems, people who don't have money for food, people who don't have homes) instead of being willing participants against those fighting for a better government that actually serves the needs of its people?

zepto 6y ago
If you can be sure that the protestors are all trying to make a better government for everyone, then I’d agree. But that’s never the case. There is always a mixture of people with good motivations, people who just want to get into a fight. This is just as true for the protestors as it is for the police. If it was so clear what was right, then it would be simple to overthrow the government since the vast majority of people would be in agreement.
- Judgmentality 6y ago
  This is about accountability, not right vs wrong. The courts can decide that (in theory, anyway).
  - zepto 6y ago
    Does accountability mean retaliation to you?
    - Judgmentality 6y ago
      I already made it clear it's about greater transparency so people can be held accountable by the courts. Whether or not the court system is about retaliation is a completely separate debate. I'm exiting this thread as you've shown no interest in listening to anyone that has disagreed with you.
      - zepto 6y ago
        Exit whenever you like. This is not about ‘disagreement’, it’s about understanding distinctions. Doxxing doesn’t equate to transparency or holding people accountable in court, and it certainly can mean retaliation. That brings us back to my original point - if you believe in accountability you don’t necessarily believe in doxxing cops. It’s not that clean.
        MegaButts 6y ago
        So you believe the police should police themselves? Honestly I'd prefer vigilante justice over that. Dox the cops, 100%. I'd rather a cop be hurt unfairly in the line of duty than a protester fighting for what he believes in. This country was founded on overthrowing tyrrany. If the cops don't accept the risks of the job then they can quit. Cops need to be held to a higher standard, not lower or even equal. The government (and police) should fear the people, not the other way around. So no. It is that clean.
        zepto 6y ago
        https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24862215 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24862215 Nobody said anything about the police policing themselves. That doesn’t mean the only alternative is doxxing. That is a false dichotomy. It’s only ‘clean’ if you can only see two options, and think there are no alternatives.
        MegaButts 6y ago
        The police need to be held accountable, full stop. The police need to be held to a higher standard than the people, full stop. Even if that means an angry mob it's still preferable to no accountability. It's clean because the police should be held to higher standards than the public, and they can quit if they don't want that responsibility.
        zepto 6y ago
        Again, a false dichotomy. Now it’s “angry mob” vs “no police accountability”. Nobody else is talking about either of these.
josephcsible 6y ago
> I mean if they have nothing to hide then they have nothing to fear, right? You can't use that line on groups of people you don't like while also wanting privacy for groups of people you do like.
- Judgmentality 6y ago
  I agree with your premise of equality - that you can't have it both ways. My point was if the government uses that power against its people, the people should be able to use that power against their government. However in this case it's actually different, as police officers are meant to be public servants.
- fsflover 6y ago
  I disagree. People paid by the public must be accountable to the public and all their (paid) actions should not be private. (Exceptions may apply to this general rule, though they are debatable)
  - zepto 6y ago
    Yes, but you haven’t said whether you think this means that the names, photos and home addresses of all police should be made public. Just because someone does public work doesn’t mean they should be denied a private life.
    - fsflover 6y ago
      What do you suggest to do here? Either you allow the oppressors to beat people and stay anonymous, not get punished or you create a community trying to deanonymize them with all the consequences.
      - zepto 6y ago
        “not get punished” Are you saying the goal of de-anonymizing is to punish the police? Earlier it seemed like you were interested in trials: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24862054 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24862054

zepto 6y ago

If you can be sure that the protestors are all trying to make a better government for everyone, then I’d agree. But that’s never the case. There is always a mixture of people with good motivations, people who just want to get into a fight. This is just as true for the protestors as it is for the police. If it was so clear what was right, then it would be simple to overthrow the government since the vast majority of people would be in agreement.

Judgmentality 6y ago
This is about accountability, not right vs wrong. The courts can decide that (in theory, anyway).
- zepto 6y ago
  Does accountability mean retaliation to you?
  - Judgmentality 6y ago
    I already made it clear it's about greater transparency so people can be held accountable by the courts. Whether or not the court system is about retaliation is a completely separate debate. I'm exiting this thread as you've shown no interest in listening to anyone that has disagreed with you.
    - zepto 6y ago
      Exit whenever you like. This is not about ‘disagreement’, it’s about understanding distinctions. Doxxing doesn’t equate to transparency or holding people accountable in court, and it certainly can mean retaliation. That brings us back to my original point - if you believe in accountability you don’t necessarily believe in doxxing cops. It’s not that clean.
      - MegaButts 6y ago
        So you believe the police should police themselves? Honestly I'd prefer vigilante justice over that. Dox the cops, 100%. I'd rather a cop be hurt unfairly in the line of duty than a protester fighting for what he believes in. This country was founded on overthrowing tyrrany. If the cops don't accept the risks of the job then they can quit. Cops need to be held to a higher standard, not lower or even equal. The government (and police) should fear the people, not the other way around. So no. It is that clean.
        zepto 6y ago
        https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24862215 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24862215 Nobody said anything about the police policing themselves. That doesn’t mean the only alternative is doxxing. That is a false dichotomy. It’s only ‘clean’ if you can only see two options, and think there are no alternatives.
        MegaButts 6y ago
        The police need to be held accountable, full stop. The police need to be held to a higher standard than the people, full stop. Even if that means an angry mob it's still preferable to no accountability. It's clean because the police should be held to higher standards than the public, and they can quit if they don't want that responsibility.
        zepto 6y ago
        Again, a false dichotomy. Now it’s “angry mob” vs “no police accountability”. Nobody else is talking about either of these.

josephcsible 6y ago

> I mean if they have nothing to hide then they have nothing to fear, right? You can't use that line on groups of people you don't like while also wanting privacy for groups of people you do like.

Judgmentality 6y ago
I agree with your premise of equality - that you can't have it both ways. My point was if the government uses that power against its people, the people should be able to use that power against their government. However in this case it's actually different, as police officers are meant to be public servants.
fsflover 6y ago
I disagree. People paid by the public must be accountable to the public and all their (paid) actions should not be private. (Exceptions may apply to this general rule, though they are debatable)
- zepto 6y ago
  Yes, but you haven’t said whether you think this means that the names, photos and home addresses of all police should be made public. Just because someone does public work doesn’t mean they should be denied a private life.
  - fsflover 6y ago
    What do you suggest to do here? Either you allow the oppressors to beat people and stay anonymous, not get punished or you create a community trying to deanonymize them with all the consequences.
    - zepto 6y ago
      “not get punished” Are you saying the goal of de-anonymizing is to punish the police? Earlier it seemed like you were interested in trials: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24862054 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24862054