3 ms·

Far more people die from medical malpractice mistakes every year. I don't see anyone calling for dismantling the medical profession. Police are a necessary par

Far more people die from medical malpractice mistakes every year. I don't see anyone calling for dismantling the medical profession. Police are a necessary part of modern civilization. Full stop. If they have no repercussions for bad actions, then implement them. It really isn't that complicated.

Clubber 5y ago
>Police are a necessary part of modern civilization. Full stop. Sure, but how many? How much is the right amount. I hear the same said about our military, but it's degrees. Should we double the amount of money we spend on police? Triple? What's enough? Do we have too much now? There are lots of indications to me that it's turned into a make-work program. >Police are a necessary part of modern civilization. Full stop. If they have no repercussions for bad actions, then implement them. The unions are too powerful, the profession is too corrupt. Police "self regulate," and insiders who try to bring light to corruption typically get punished. It's too hard for the political process. All the while, the citizenry continues to get robbed, beaten and killed. Honestly the best thing to happen to the citizenry is phone cameras. >It really isn't that complicated. Maybe you should give it some more thought.
- ashneo76 5y ago
  Why is this down voted?
  - throwaway0a5e 5y ago
    Look at the demographics of HN. What kind of calls do you think these demographics generate? Questioning staffing levels is not popular among the white collar crowd because "can you please come tell my neighbor to party more quietly" and "can someone write up a police report for my stolen property so I can get reimbursement from insurance" are the first type of calls to get a "haha we'll get to it when we get to it" from the dispatcher when you start reducing the department size. Harassing shitbox drivers for tail light out, telling loitering teenagers to knock it off, bothering the guy drinking while he walks his dog, all sorts of low priority things (the bulk of which can probably be described as "reducing the visibility of lower class behavior") that make up the bulk of the services HN demographics demand from the police are the first things police stop doing when they're spread thin. Killing people over bootleg cigs is the second thing they stop doing.
- throwaway0a5e 5y ago
  >Sure, but how many? Less per capita than pretty much any wealthy city or suburb has. More per capita than Detroit. We all see the kind of trouble people with no real pressing crap to do can cause with an HOA at their disposal. So I figure we should make sure the people with a badge and a gun are substantially more busy than that. Nobody wants to work in an overworked department but I don't see a way to keep police from harassing people unnecessarily other than making sure the department is small enough there's enough "real crime" to go around.
- ceilingcorner 5y ago
  From my point of view, the problem with the police is that the standards are not high enough. It's too easy to become an officer, it doesn't require much education, and so on. It needs to become a prestige position, something that is respectable and attracts applicants that genuinely want to do good. Right now, this doesn't happen, so you mostly get the corrupt tribalism stuff. But demonizing the police profession will guarantee that thousands of reasonable, well-meaning people will never become police officers. > Maybe you should give it some more thought. I have given it plenty of thought. I, along with pretty much anyone that actually has lived in crime-ridden areas, thinks that the idea of abolishing the police and demonizing officers is completely absurd. The worst part is that the people with the loudest voices won't face any of the repercussions. Instead, it'll be the poor, because they aren't rich and social media savvy. Actual working class people are too busy working to be tweeting all day long about politics.
  - Clubber 5y ago
    >it doesn't require much education, and so on It depends on the jurisdiction. When I was in college, being a cop required a college degree. A couple of my colleagues became police. I don't know if that's still standard in major cities. >But demonizing the police profession will guarantee that thousands of reasonable, well-meaning people will never become police officers. Maybe. I think abusing citizens guarantees that the police will be demonized. We're currently in a downward spiral and it's only fixable by changing the status of the police. >thinks that the idea of abolishing the police and demonizing officers is completely absurd. That's a red herring. I never said that and in fact I explicitly said it's a matter of degree. That's not a good faith argument. You're arguing with an imaginary person in your head, not me.
    - ceilingcorner 5y ago
      > Maybe. I think abusing citizens guarantees that the police will be demonized. We're currently in a downward spiral and it's only fixable by changing the status of the police. And where is the bottom of the spiral? When police are completely hated by everyone, everywhere? You'll only get the absolute worst people to be police officers, as I said in my initial comment. > You're arguing with an imaginary person in your head, not me. I'm arguing against the idea that demonizing the police is an effective tactic.
saurik 5y ago
But medical malpractice is a thing, with personal consequences to the doctor. They might have insurance, and maybe it can be hard to prove wrongdoing, but there absolutely is "repercussions for bad actors" with respect to medicine. With police the problem is that they might not even get fired, and any judgements against them tend to at best get paid by taxpayers: there is no incentive to not be horrible.
- ceilingcorner 5y ago
  > With police the problem is that they might not even get fired, and any judgements against them tend to at best get paid by taxpayers: there is no incentive to not be horrible. That's the problem. I don't think demonizing the other 99.9% of officers is the solution.
  - pjc50 5y ago
    There was sufficient evidence for any police officer in Minneapolis to arrest Derek Chauvin, and yet they protected him instead. They all chose to be complicit in his crime. Various forces have little internal secret rituals in which they all collude in murder. Above we have https://openvallejo.org/2020/07/28/vallejo-police-bend-badge-tips-to-mark-fatal-shootings/ https://openvallejo.org/2020/07/28/vallejo-police-bend-badge... ; there's another example from NYPD: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23525224 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23525224 Doctors very rarely turn out politically to defend the malpractice of other doctors.
    - ceilingcorner 5y ago
      Yes and all three of the other officers are facing various charges. That's how the legal system works. It's still unclear to me how a small town officer, hundreds of miles away, is guilty for the crimes of people he has nothing to do with.
      - pjc50 5y ago
        > all three of the other officers are facing various charges None of them would have faced charges without months of national protests! That's why there's a problem! And I don't just mean the others that were there, all eight hundred Minneapolis PD officers are to some extent complicit.
raisedbyninjas 5y ago
Is it common for "good" doctors cover-up or just remain silent for "bad" doctors? Is there an incentive for this behavior where "bad" doctors may endanger the lives of those that cross the doctor wall of silence?
thosakwe 5y ago
> Police are a necessary part of modern civilization. Full stop. Are you sure? Lots of causes for crime (i.e. poverty) can't be solved by arresting or shooting people. I am convinced that part of the reason police reform is so difficult in the United States is that most people have never questioned neither the history of American policing (which started as slave patrols in many states), nor the necessity for heavily-armed police at all. > If they have no repercussions for bad actions, then implement them. This is not so easy, when both of the parties with political control in the U.S. receive donations from the prison industry... EDIT: Lastly, in reference to your original point, the argument that police officers are being simply "demonized" is missing the bigger picture. Police aren't individual actors - they protect each other, even when they have crossed a line. And it's all by choice.
- ceilingcorner 5y ago
  What modern country doesn't have a police force? If you actually look at the responses from people who live in high-crime areas, the data is clear. Virtually no one wants less police. Most want more. I trust that more than activists with explicit political messages written in their manifestos. > Police aren't individual actors - they protect each other, even when they have crossed a line. And it's all by choice. This is largely due to systemic problems with unions, etc. Still unclear to me how calling a beat cop obscene words or having an ACAB attitude is going to solve that issue.
  - thosakwe 5y ago
    I am not an activist, and this is not a manifesto. I don't understand why you brought that up. Anyways: The fact that most modern countries have police is not evidence that police departments are necessary. In addition, the article is about the American police, which are notorious for their history of racial profiling, cover-ups, and numbers of civilian shooting deaths every year. Does most modern countries having police mean this is justified behavior? If you could, please provide a link to a survey or study indicating that people who live in "high-crime" areas want more police. And even if they did, that doesn't change the reason for the widespread backlash against police in the United States. It's not simply people "demonizing" a profession (which again, people choose to work in).
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

Clubber 5y ago

>Police are a necessary part of modern civilization. Full stop. Sure, but how many? How much is the right amount. I hear the same said about our military, but it's degrees. Should we double the amount of money we spend on police? Triple? What's enough? Do we have too much now? There are lots of indications to me that it's turned into a make-work program. >Police are a necessary part of modern civilization. Full stop. If they have no repercussions for bad actions, then implement them. The unions are too powerful, the profession is too corrupt. Police "self regulate," and insiders who try to bring light to corruption typically get punished. It's too hard for the political process. All the while, the citizenry continues to get robbed, beaten and killed. Honestly the best thing to happen to the citizenry is phone cameras. >It really isn't that complicated. Maybe you should give it some more thought.

ashneo76 5y ago
Why is this down voted?
- throwaway0a5e 5y ago
  Look at the demographics of HN. What kind of calls do you think these demographics generate? Questioning staffing levels is not popular among the white collar crowd because "can you please come tell my neighbor to party more quietly" and "can someone write up a police report for my stolen property so I can get reimbursement from insurance" are the first type of calls to get a "haha we'll get to it when we get to it" from the dispatcher when you start reducing the department size. Harassing shitbox drivers for tail light out, telling loitering teenagers to knock it off, bothering the guy drinking while he walks his dog, all sorts of low priority things (the bulk of which can probably be described as "reducing the visibility of lower class behavior") that make up the bulk of the services HN demographics demand from the police are the first things police stop doing when they're spread thin. Killing people over bootleg cigs is the second thing they stop doing.
throwaway0a5e 5y ago
>Sure, but how many? Less per capita than pretty much any wealthy city or suburb has. More per capita than Detroit. We all see the kind of trouble people with no real pressing crap to do can cause with an HOA at their disposal. So I figure we should make sure the people with a badge and a gun are substantially more busy than that. Nobody wants to work in an overworked department but I don't see a way to keep police from harassing people unnecessarily other than making sure the department is small enough there's enough "real crime" to go around.
ceilingcorner 5y ago
From my point of view, the problem with the police is that the standards are not high enough. It's too easy to become an officer, it doesn't require much education, and so on. It needs to become a prestige position, something that is respectable and attracts applicants that genuinely want to do good. Right now, this doesn't happen, so you mostly get the corrupt tribalism stuff. But demonizing the police profession will guarantee that thousands of reasonable, well-meaning people will never become police officers. > Maybe you should give it some more thought. I have given it plenty of thought. I, along with pretty much anyone that actually has lived in crime-ridden areas, thinks that the idea of abolishing the police and demonizing officers is completely absurd. The worst part is that the people with the loudest voices won't face any of the repercussions. Instead, it'll be the poor, because they aren't rich and social media savvy. Actual working class people are too busy working to be tweeting all day long about politics.
- Clubber 5y ago
  >it doesn't require much education, and so on It depends on the jurisdiction. When I was in college, being a cop required a college degree. A couple of my colleagues became police. I don't know if that's still standard in major cities. >But demonizing the police profession will guarantee that thousands of reasonable, well-meaning people will never become police officers. Maybe. I think abusing citizens guarantees that the police will be demonized. We're currently in a downward spiral and it's only fixable by changing the status of the police. >thinks that the idea of abolishing the police and demonizing officers is completely absurd. That's a red herring. I never said that and in fact I explicitly said it's a matter of degree. That's not a good faith argument. You're arguing with an imaginary person in your head, not me.
  - ceilingcorner 5y ago
    > Maybe. I think abusing citizens guarantees that the police will be demonized. We're currently in a downward spiral and it's only fixable by changing the status of the police. And where is the bottom of the spiral? When police are completely hated by everyone, everywhere? You'll only get the absolute worst people to be police officers, as I said in my initial comment. > You're arguing with an imaginary person in your head, not me. I'm arguing against the idea that demonizing the police is an effective tactic.

saurik 5y ago

But medical malpractice is a thing, with personal consequences to the doctor. They might have insurance, and maybe it can be hard to prove wrongdoing, but there absolutely is "repercussions for bad actors" with respect to medicine. With police the problem is that they might not even get fired, and any judgements against them tend to at best get paid by taxpayers: there is no incentive to not be horrible.

ceilingcorner 5y ago
> With police the problem is that they might not even get fired, and any judgements against them tend to at best get paid by taxpayers: there is no incentive to not be horrible. That's the problem. I don't think demonizing the other 99.9% of officers is the solution.
- pjc50 5y ago
  There was sufficient evidence for any police officer in Minneapolis to arrest Derek Chauvin, and yet they protected him instead. They all chose to be complicit in his crime. Various forces have little internal secret rituals in which they all collude in murder. Above we have https://openvallejo.org/2020/07/28/vallejo-police-bend-badge-tips-to-mark-fatal-shootings/ https://openvallejo.org/2020/07/28/vallejo-police-bend-badge... ; there's another example from NYPD: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23525224 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23525224 Doctors very rarely turn out politically to defend the malpractice of other doctors.
  - ceilingcorner 5y ago
    Yes and all three of the other officers are facing various charges. That's how the legal system works. It's still unclear to me how a small town officer, hundreds of miles away, is guilty for the crimes of people he has nothing to do with.
    - pjc50 5y ago
      > all three of the other officers are facing various charges None of them would have faced charges without months of national protests! That's why there's a problem! And I don't just mean the others that were there, all eight hundred Minneapolis PD officers are to some extent complicit.

raisedbyninjas 5y ago

Is it common for "good" doctors cover-up or just remain silent for "bad" doctors? Is there an incentive for this behavior where "bad" doctors may endanger the lives of those that cross the doctor wall of silence?

thosakwe 5y ago

> Police are a necessary part of modern civilization. Full stop. Are you sure? Lots of causes for crime (i.e. poverty) can't be solved by arresting or shooting people. I am convinced that part of the reason police reform is so difficult in the United States is that most people have never questioned neither the history of American policing (which started as slave patrols in many states), nor the necessity for heavily-armed police at all. > If they have no repercussions for bad actions, then implement them. This is not so easy, when both of the parties with political control in the U.S. receive donations from the prison industry... EDIT: Lastly, in reference to your original point, the argument that police officers are being simply "demonized" is missing the bigger picture. Police aren't individual actors - they protect each other, even when they have crossed a line. And it's all by choice.

ceilingcorner 5y ago
What modern country doesn't have a police force? If you actually look at the responses from people who live in high-crime areas, the data is clear. Virtually no one wants less police. Most want more. I trust that more than activists with explicit political messages written in their manifestos. > Police aren't individual actors - they protect each other, even when they have crossed a line. And it's all by choice. This is largely due to systemic problems with unions, etc. Still unclear to me how calling a beat cop obscene words or having an ACAB attitude is going to solve that issue.
- thosakwe 5y ago
  I am not an activist, and this is not a manifesto. I don't understand why you brought that up. Anyways: The fact that most modern countries have police is not evidence that police departments are necessary. In addition, the article is about the American police, which are notorious for their history of racial profiling, cover-ups, and numbers of civilian shooting deaths every year. Does most modern countries having police mean this is justified behavior? If you could, please provide a link to a survey or study indicating that people who live in "high-crime" areas want more police. And even if they did, that doesn't change the reason for the widespread backlash against police in the United States. It's not simply people "demonizing" a profession (which again, people choose to work in).

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]