4 ms·

>I expect the police to not violate my rights. Sure, we all do but if they violate your rights anyway, it does not give you the right to resist, ignore orders

by noxer 6y ago

>I expect the police to not violate my rights. Sure, we all do but if they violate your rights anyway, it does not give you the right to resist, ignore orders or even defend yourself... yes that a hard one to swallow for many people egos but that's how it is. If there would be a way around this problem I'm sure we would have found out. But you just can't fight someone with a state given authority/power who most likely has the monopoly on force in the given situation. You have to take the legal way and to get a chance to do this you better comply with orders. Whether or not your rights where violated is decided by a judge not by arguing with a cop. >and just because they routinely abuse those powers without consequence doesn't mean that we should be okay with it. I doubt this is as routinely as people think it is and that there are no consequences but either way, whats your proposed solution? Do you think defunding the police would help? Or should people just open fire if a cop is abusing his power? I'm sure you can see that this would go nowhere. Complying isn't an option its the only option and the law clearly states that you have to comply. Then fight back the legal way if you can and impose the desired consequences on bad cops. Which BTW you cant do if you resisted even if you rights were violated, the moment you violate your duty the legal way will not favor you. Everyone should act like they would want their loved ones to act if they have a police encounter.

jakelazaroff 6y ago
I think there are actually a lot of palliative measures: stop giving police surplus military equipment, end qualified immunity, pay misconduct settlements from police pensions, ban police unions, decriminalize drugs and prostitution. But frankly, I don’t think anything short of defunding is likely to work. Like you said, the root of the problem is that police have a monopoly on force, so the only solution is to drastically reduce the cases in which that imbalance exists. The US spends more money on policing than literally every country other than China spends on their military [1], so it’s prima facie ridiculous to me that we can’t significantly cut back our police force. [1] https://twitter.com/pplscitycouncil/status/1383071847479078913?s=21 https://twitter.com/pplscitycouncil/status/13830718474790789...
- noxer 6y ago
  I definitely did not say the root of the problem is that police has a monopoly on force. I said that it is the reason why people should comply regardless of potential rights being violated. Because you have to defend your rights with legal means not with force. Its exactly the same as if your neighbor violates your rights. The use of force as a means to enforce your rights is illegal. There are some extreme cases where you can use force namely self-defense and defending others who are in imminent danger. This is not an act of enforcing you rights this an act of defense. The right to use force voids as soon as the "danger" is gone not when your "right is restored". Self defense is almost always not applicable if the "danger" comes from a police officer. Being arrested even if not lawful does not make it a kidnapping and you resisting isn't self-defense. I have no clue how you think police should do its job if they do not have a monopoly on force. It quite obviously who would have the monopoly then, the criminals. Also how about teaching people that although bad cops exist most cops wont kill you if you comply (this is the statistical reality). And that no matter what you did or being accused of doing your best option is to comply (even for mass murders, rapists and terrorists, statistics show that this behavior significantly prolongs their life). The other political measurement you suggested are up for debate and whether or not they work needs to be evaluated while the simply act of complying can be done by anyone right now. And there is zero negative side effect.
  - jakelazaroff 6y ago
    Who are the criminals you’re afraid of giving the upper hand here? Speeders? Homeless people sleeping where others don’t want them to? Kids caught with a dime bag? If there’s a statistical reality here, it’s that hardly any of the situations in which we call on police would be likely to result in violence at all. But if you send police, that is inevitably what will happen — because violence is literally the only tool in their toolbox, the sole reason they even exist in the first place. And predictably, if you imbue people with the power to commit violence free from consequence, that is what they do. In almost every police encounter, they are the ones escalating the risk of violence. So it’s perfectly reasonable to fear for your life during a police encounter, because we see over and over and over again that there are plenty of cops who relish that power, and plenty more who will close ranks to protect them. Compliance may be the best self-preservation strategy for individuals in the moment. But it does nothing to address the systemic issue.

by noxer 6y ago

jakelazaroff 6y ago

I think there are actually a lot of palliative measures: stop giving police surplus military equipment, end qualified immunity, pay misconduct settlements from police pensions, ban police unions, decriminalize drugs and prostitution. But frankly, I don’t think anything short of defunding is likely to work. Like you said, the root of the problem is that police have a monopoly on force, so the only solution is to drastically reduce the cases in which that imbalance exists. The US spends more money on policing than literally every country other than China spends on their military [1], so it’s prima facie ridiculous to me that we can’t significantly cut back our police force. [1] https://twitter.com/pplscitycouncil/status/1383071847479078913?s=21 https://twitter.com/pplscitycouncil/status/13830718474790789...

noxer 6y ago
I definitely did not say the root of the problem is that police has a monopoly on force. I said that it is the reason why people should comply regardless of potential rights being violated. Because you have to defend your rights with legal means not with force. Its exactly the same as if your neighbor violates your rights. The use of force as a means to enforce your rights is illegal. There are some extreme cases where you can use force namely self-defense and defending others who are in imminent danger. This is not an act of enforcing you rights this an act of defense. The right to use force voids as soon as the "danger" is gone not when your "right is restored". Self defense is almost always not applicable if the "danger" comes from a police officer. Being arrested even if not lawful does not make it a kidnapping and you resisting isn't self-defense. I have no clue how you think police should do its job if they do not have a monopoly on force. It quite obviously who would have the monopoly then, the criminals. Also how about teaching people that although bad cops exist most cops wont kill you if you comply (this is the statistical reality). And that no matter what you did or being accused of doing your best option is to comply (even for mass murders, rapists and terrorists, statistics show that this behavior significantly prolongs their life). The other political measurement you suggested are up for debate and whether or not they work needs to be evaluated while the simply act of complying can be done by anyone right now. And there is zero negative side effect.
- jakelazaroff 6y ago
  Who are the criminals you’re afraid of giving the upper hand here? Speeders? Homeless people sleeping where others don’t want them to? Kids caught with a dime bag? If there’s a statistical reality here, it’s that hardly any of the situations in which we call on police would be likely to result in violence at all. But if you send police, that is inevitably what will happen — because violence is literally the only tool in their toolbox, the sole reason they even exist in the first place. And predictably, if you imbue people with the power to commit violence free from consequence, that is what they do. In almost every police encounter, they are the ones escalating the risk of violence. So it’s perfectly reasonable to fear for your life during a police encounter, because we see over and over and over again that there are plenty of cops who relish that power, and plenty more who will close ranks to protect them. Compliance may be the best self-preservation strategy for individuals in the moment. But it does nothing to address the systemic issue.