7 ms·

The perfect event (the capitol) to normalise the practice even further. And those who should be opposing it most passionately will be applauding it’s use, beca

The perfect event (the capitol) to normalise the practice even further. And those who should be opposing it most passionately will be applauding it’s use, because they started with ‘the bad guys’.

mnd999 6y ago
We saw the same in London after the 2012 riots. Instead of stopping the rioting and looting the police let it go on and then took all the cctv and arrested the perpetrators after the event. It’s lazy policing, hundreds of shops got damaged and looted simply because for whatever reason the police wouldn’t do what people want them to do. Stop people committing crime at the time.
- pdkl95 6y ago
  > lazy policing From Susan Landau's 2016 testimony[1] before the House Judiciary Committee regarding Apple's encryption on the San Bernardino shooter's iphone: >> "Instead of embracing the communications and device security we so badly need for securing US public and private data, law enforcement continues to press hard to undermine security in the misguided desire to preserve simple, but outdated, investigative techniques." >> "We need 21st century techniques to secure the data that 21st century enemies—organized crime and nation-state attackers—seek to steal and exploit. Twentieth century approaches that provide law enforcement with the ability to investigate but also simplify exploitations and attacks are not in our national security interest. Instead of laws and regulation that weaken our protections, we should enable law enforcement to develop 21st century capabilities for conducting investigations." >> "Developing such capabilities will involve deep changed for the Bureau, which remains agent-based, not technology-based." Whenever law enforcement complains that they need tools that give them access to more data they never mention that they have access to far more data than any point in history. Yes, some types of data they have used in the past may be going dark, but they have gained an incredible breadth of new tools. Unfortunately, learning new investigation techniques requires money, training, and effort. Shoveling as much data as possible onto the problem makes the actual investigation more difficult, but they do it anyway when it also acts de facto as another source of power. ~sigh~ This crap needs to be reigned in. Fast. [1] (pdf) https://docs.house.gov/meetings/JU/JU00/20160301/104573/HHRG-114-JU00-Wstate-LandauS-20160301.pdf https://docs.house.gov/meetings/JU/JU00/20160301/104573/HHRG...
- prussian 6y ago
  So instead we should increase the risk of death and injury instead of safely picking people up once things deescalate? I don't think that's lazy by any measure.
  - ausbah 6y ago
    is it literally not the job of the police to stop events like this? of course their safety needs to be considered to a degree, but any perceived threat isn't a reason for them to just act as a glorified clean up crew
    - roenxi 6y ago
      Police are here to deal with a few deviants here and there who act up. They aren't really meant to be a tool to break up mass political action.
      - throwaway0a5e 6y ago
        Sure, in an ideal world. But every big city police department is at decently trained and equipped for dealing with riots at our expense. So if we're gonna pay for that stupidity we may as well get the benefit of it.
    - tacocataco 6y ago
      "...the police do not owe a specific duty to provide police services to citizens..." (1) (1) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_v._District_of_Columbia https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_v._District_of_Columb...
      - kwhitefoot 6y ago
        Doesn't apply in the circumstances of this event since it happened in London, England.
    - UI_at_80x24 6y ago
      Policing in North America as we know it today arose in the south from Overseer's and slavery. [0][1] Their job has always been to protect the rich, keep minorities and the lower classes oppressed. [0] https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2020/07/20/the-invention-of-the-police https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2020/07/20/the-invention-... [1] https://plsonline.eku.edu/insidelook/brief-history-slavery-and-origins-american-policing https://plsonline.eku.edu/insidelook/brief-history-slavery-a...
- ngold 6y ago
  This. Lazy policing is everything that is wrong. Fire everyone and have a drone fly overhead that takes a picture a minute if you don't care about human privacy.
  - bluntfang 6y ago
    i pick lazy over dishonest any day of the week.
- simonh 6y ago
  Riots are dangerous situations, I think they need to do both. Put in place a physical security presence to contain and limit the damage, and address he worst cases involving violence, but also consider that escalation may not be appropriate. In a riot it unlikely you're going to be able to quash it and clear it up completely, so you also need to make sure perpetrators don't get away without consequences. In the 2012 riots did the police really have no street presence at all? That's not what I remember.
hef19898 6y ago
Funny enough, the capitol insurgents brought their own surveillance. Courtesy of FB and Twitter. Pretty sure all the video material streamed and posted by themselves would be more than enough in that case.
- breakfastduck 6y ago
  Yes but there's a difference between reviewing evidence and using mass facial recognition software to scour literally everything.
  - hef19898 6y ago
    Oh, it definitely is. Going through public material or videos provided as evidence, even using facial recognition, after a crime is IMHO ok. Preemptively recording everything, and using facial recognition right from the bat, is very different. The latter shouldn't be acceptable in a free and democratic society.
    - breakfastduck 6y ago
      Absolutely agree with your second point, but still not sure I'm comfortable using it 'post crime' so to speak.
      - hef19898 6y ago
        Me neither. We now have surveillance capabilities like never before, stuff the Gestapo, Stasi or the NKVD couldn't even dream about. Funny enough we are mostly using it to sell adds. Until you look at China and their surveillance activities. I do not want any of that. Especially if all that can be replaced by proper police work. Like unbiased investigation, arresting people (just imagine if authorities had arrested all the insurectionists right on the spot). I am afraid so, that we will have more surveillance and not less.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]

mnd999 6y ago

We saw the same in London after the 2012 riots. Instead of stopping the rioting and looting the police let it go on and then took all the cctv and arrested the perpetrators after the event. It’s lazy policing, hundreds of shops got damaged and looted simply because for whatever reason the police wouldn’t do what people want them to do. Stop people committing crime at the time.

pdkl95 6y ago
> lazy policing From Susan Landau's 2016 testimony[1] before the House Judiciary Committee regarding Apple's encryption on the San Bernardino shooter's iphone: >> "Instead of embracing the communications and device security we so badly need for securing US public and private data, law enforcement continues to press hard to undermine security in the misguided desire to preserve simple, but outdated, investigative techniques." >> "We need 21st century techniques to secure the data that 21st century enemies—organized crime and nation-state attackers—seek to steal and exploit. Twentieth century approaches that provide law enforcement with the ability to investigate but also simplify exploitations and attacks are not in our national security interest. Instead of laws and regulation that weaken our protections, we should enable law enforcement to develop 21st century capabilities for conducting investigations." >> "Developing such capabilities will involve deep changed for the Bureau, which remains agent-based, not technology-based." Whenever law enforcement complains that they need tools that give them access to more data they never mention that they have access to far more data than any point in history. Yes, some types of data they have used in the past may be going dark, but they have gained an incredible breadth of new tools. Unfortunately, learning new investigation techniques requires money, training, and effort. Shoveling as much data as possible onto the problem makes the actual investigation more difficult, but they do it anyway when it also acts de facto as another source of power. ~sigh~ This crap needs to be reigned in. Fast. [1] (pdf) https://docs.house.gov/meetings/JU/JU00/20160301/104573/HHRG-114-JU00-Wstate-LandauS-20160301.pdf https://docs.house.gov/meetings/JU/JU00/20160301/104573/HHRG...
prussian 6y ago
So instead we should increase the risk of death and injury instead of safely picking people up once things deescalate? I don't think that's lazy by any measure.
- ausbah 6y ago
  is it literally not the job of the police to stop events like this? of course their safety needs to be considered to a degree, but any perceived threat isn't a reason for them to just act as a glorified clean up crew
  - roenxi 6y ago
    Police are here to deal with a few deviants here and there who act up. They aren't really meant to be a tool to break up mass political action.
    - throwaway0a5e 6y ago
      Sure, in an ideal world. But every big city police department is at decently trained and equipped for dealing with riots at our expense. So if we're gonna pay for that stupidity we may as well get the benefit of it.
  - tacocataco 6y ago
    "...the police do not owe a specific duty to provide police services to citizens..." (1) (1) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_v._District_of_Columbia https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_v._District_of_Columb...
    - kwhitefoot 6y ago
      Doesn't apply in the circumstances of this event since it happened in London, England.
  - UI_at_80x24 6y ago
    Policing in North America as we know it today arose in the south from Overseer's and slavery. [0][1] Their job has always been to protect the rich, keep minorities and the lower classes oppressed. [0] https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2020/07/20/the-invention-of-the-police https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2020/07/20/the-invention-... [1] https://plsonline.eku.edu/insidelook/brief-history-slavery-and-origins-american-policing https://plsonline.eku.edu/insidelook/brief-history-slavery-a...
ngold 6y ago
This. Lazy policing is everything that is wrong. Fire everyone and have a drone fly overhead that takes a picture a minute if you don't care about human privacy.
- bluntfang 6y ago
  i pick lazy over dishonest any day of the week.
simonh 6y ago
Riots are dangerous situations, I think they need to do both. Put in place a physical security presence to contain and limit the damage, and address he worst cases involving violence, but also consider that escalation may not be appropriate. In a riot it unlikely you're going to be able to quash it and clear it up completely, so you also need to make sure perpetrators don't get away without consequences. In the 2012 riots did the police really have no street presence at all? That's not what I remember.

hef19898 6y ago

Funny enough, the capitol insurgents brought their own surveillance. Courtesy of FB and Twitter. Pretty sure all the video material streamed and posted by themselves would be more than enough in that case.

breakfastduck 6y ago
Yes but there's a difference between reviewing evidence and using mass facial recognition software to scour literally everything.
- hef19898 6y ago
  Oh, it definitely is. Going through public material or videos provided as evidence, even using facial recognition, after a crime is IMHO ok. Preemptively recording everything, and using facial recognition right from the bat, is very different. The latter shouldn't be acceptable in a free and democratic society.
  - breakfastduck 6y ago
    Absolutely agree with your second point, but still not sure I'm comfortable using it 'post crime' so to speak.
    - hef19898 6y ago
      Me neither. We now have surveillance capabilities like never before, stuff the Gestapo, Stasi or the NKVD couldn't even dream about. Funny enough we are mostly using it to sell adds. Until you look at China and their surveillance activities. I do not want any of that. Especially if all that can be replaced by proper police work. Like unbiased investigation, arresting people (just imagine if authorities had arrested all the insurectionists right on the spot). I am afraid so, that we will have more surveillance and not less.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]