4 ms·

> Invest in educational resources to teach communities how to deal with law enforcement. You have this exactly backwards. It's telling that instead of mention

> Invest in educational resources to teach communities how to deal with law enforcement. You have this exactly backwards. It's telling that instead of mentioning doing away with warrior training, for instance, you list things we, the people, need to do to deal with poorly trained cops with licenses to kill, which, in the case of the police, is exactly what this immunity grants. The police need better training to handle the people they serve and protect, period. The police need to perform better psychological evaluations of prospective cops. The police need to develop better community relations with the communities they serve. I agree with reforming the unions and installing more independent civilian oversight. I also agree that the U.S. needs major reform of metal health and drug rehab, but that particular issue is more of a left outer join with the issue being discussed; they overlap unfortunately, but the all-too-often grim outcomes of that overlap are due to the state of policing. The police and their unions acting in bad faith, and abusing their immunity, is why we're here. WE don't need to clean up our interactions with police. It's the other way around. Edited: typo, wording, and removed unnecessary emphasis

throwawaydeitz1 6y ago
I agree with all of your points, except for your idea of "the people they serve and protect." If you read about the historical origins of the US police force, their (verifiably documented) lineage goes back to the days of English colonialism. Those original patrol groups were created to "protect" the damage/loss of property- namely to prevent runaway slaves from escaping their owner's control. The US police force has, quite literally, always been first and foremost a way for the richest upper class to protect their wealth, power, and assets. They are a way to keep the status quo. The fact that they (sometimes) help poor and working class citizens is merely a by-product of their primary goal.
- zepto 6y ago
  > their (verifiably documented) lineage Where are these documents, and what do they verify? Saying that an institution today goes back to an institution from the past doesn’t mean that it shares the same traits. Institutions change over time. What you need to show is that the same purpose can be documented today as was there when the police were established.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
- drc37 6y ago
  Way to go turning the whole of the police force into a bunch of racist bigots. With many family members serving in both law enforcement and the military, this is one of the most offensive things I have heard in a long time. 99% of the police are some of the best people you will ever meet, and they will even serve and protect people like you who don't appreciate them and would spit on them if had the chance.
  - macintux 6y ago
    > 99% of the police are some of the best people you will ever meet The best people I would ever meet would not protect bad cops at every opportunity. The fact that police who stand up to bad policing are consistently removed from the ranks does not lend credence to your assertion. https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/07/what-police-departments-do-whistle-blowers/613687/ https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/07/what-polic...
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - Der_Einzige 6y ago
    Well they got a court decision for them that says they have no duty to protect it serve except in the most nebulous sense of some duty "at large" that doesn't actually mean anything. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_v._District_of_Columbia#:~:text=DISTRICT%20OF%20COLUMBIA%20METROPOLITAN%20POLICE%20DEPARTMENT%2C%20et%20al.%2C%20Appellees.&text=1981)%20is%20a%20District%20of,on%20the%20public%20duty%20doctrine https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_v._District_of_Columb....
  - zokula 6y ago
    > Way to go turning the whole of the police force into a bunch of racist bigots. If the shoe fits.
- m-p-3 6y ago
  > The US police force has, quite literally, always been first and foremost a way for the richest upper class to protect their wealth, power, and assets. Law and "order" can also mean keeping the order of classes as is.
- nerdponx 6y ago
  I've heard this argument before and I think it's a cherry-picked factoid meant to sound scarier than it is. From what I've read (e.g. https://plsonline.eku.edu/insidelook/history-policing-united-states-part-1 https://plsonline.eku.edu/insidelook/history-policing-united...), the "slave patrol" thing is only part of the story. If anything, policing was developed first in the 17th century in England and the 13 colonies, and the slave patrols evolved to match the modernizing template of a police force. If you want to lean a bit farther left, the obvious implication here is that police exist to benefit those who have power and property, projecting the former and protecting the latter; if necessary, abusing those who lack power/property in the process. That policing ends up being "racist" then is then a natural consequence, and not at all an axiom.

throwawaydeitz1 6y ago

I agree with all of your points, except for your idea of "the people they serve and protect." If you read about the historical origins of the US police force, their (verifiably documented) lineage goes back to the days of English colonialism. Those original patrol groups were created to "protect" the damage/loss of property- namely to prevent runaway slaves from escaping their owner's control. The US police force has, quite literally, always been first and foremost a way for the richest upper class to protect their wealth, power, and assets. They are a way to keep the status quo. The fact that they (sometimes) help poor and working class citizens is merely a by-product of their primary goal.

zepto 6y ago
> their (verifiably documented) lineage Where are these documents, and what do they verify? Saying that an institution today goes back to an institution from the past doesn’t mean that it shares the same traits. Institutions change over time. What you need to show is that the same purpose can be documented today as was there when the police were established.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
drc37 6y ago
Way to go turning the whole of the police force into a bunch of racist bigots. With many family members serving in both law enforcement and the military, this is one of the most offensive things I have heard in a long time. 99% of the police are some of the best people you will ever meet, and they will even serve and protect people like you who don't appreciate them and would spit on them if had the chance.
- macintux 6y ago
  > 99% of the police are some of the best people you will ever meet The best people I would ever meet would not protect bad cops at every opportunity. The fact that police who stand up to bad policing are consistently removed from the ranks does not lend credence to your assertion. https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/07/what-police-departments-do-whistle-blowers/613687/ https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/07/what-polic...
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- Der_Einzige 6y ago
  Well they got a court decision for them that says they have no duty to protect it serve except in the most nebulous sense of some duty "at large" that doesn't actually mean anything. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_v._District_of_Columbia#:~:text=DISTRICT%20OF%20COLUMBIA%20METROPOLITAN%20POLICE%20DEPARTMENT%2C%20et%20al.%2C%20Appellees.&text=1981)%20is%20a%20District%20of,on%20the%20public%20duty%20doctrine https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_v._District_of_Columb....
- zokula 6y ago
  > Way to go turning the whole of the police force into a bunch of racist bigots. If the shoe fits.
m-p-3 6y ago
> The US police force has, quite literally, always been first and foremost a way for the richest upper class to protect their wealth, power, and assets. Law and "order" can also mean keeping the order of classes as is.
nerdponx 6y ago
I've heard this argument before and I think it's a cherry-picked factoid meant to sound scarier than it is. From what I've read (e.g. https://plsonline.eku.edu/insidelook/history-policing-united-states-part-1 https://plsonline.eku.edu/insidelook/history-policing-united...), the "slave patrol" thing is only part of the story. If anything, policing was developed first in the 17th century in England and the 13 colonies, and the slave patrols evolved to match the modernizing template of a police force. If you want to lean a bit farther left, the obvious implication here is that police exist to benefit those who have power and property, projecting the former and protecting the latter; if necessary, abusing those who lack power/property in the process. That policing ends up being "racist" then is then a natural consequence, and not at all an axiom.