3 ms·

This may be controversial but: Policing for profit is in theory a good thing. Every time they enforced a good law the society profits. Every time they enforce

This may be controversial but: Policing for profit is in theory a good thing. Every time they enforced a good law the society profits. Every time they enforce a bad law the society should change the law. The alternative is having bad laws that are enforced just sometimes, at the discretion and personal biases of the not-for profit police.

rdedev 5y ago
The problem is when you do things for profit, it just becomes a race to extract as much profit as you can. Goodharts law comes to mind
- dandare 5y ago
  Why exactly is this problem? I personally see a problem with having laws that we enforce only if the offender is black, or a similar discretion or bias of the policeman.
FireBeyond 5y ago
> Every time they enforced a good law the society profits. Some of these departments have used these "profits" for BBQs for the police, or flat screen TVs, or for personal vehicles for officers. And in some of the cases where such "misuse" of funds has been taken to court, oftentimes the court has ruled that the PD has the perfect right to do so. Not sure how this is a societal profit.
- dandare 5y ago
  That is problem of the laws governing the use of the funds, not a problem of policing per se.
tdeck 5y ago
> The alternative is having bad laws that are enforced just sometimes, at the discretion and personal biases of the not-for profit police. This happens whether policing is "for profit" or not. Do you think they'll give the mayor or the police chief's spouse a speeding ticket if it means $100 extra in the department budget? These powers are always used selectively. The police just have to avoid using the "bad laws" against a core group of people with political power, and maybe share some of the spoils of enforcement with that group.
- dandare 5y ago
  The difference is this: if police misuses bad laws selectively - like predominantly only against the black community - then the majority won't give a fcuk. But once "honest citizens" are targeted by excessive policing, the laws will sooner or later change.
Gollapalli 5y ago
And this is why libertarianism is stupid. There is zero notion of duty or honor in your worldview. The only decision loop that exists in your worldview is "(if (profitable? action) (action) (not action)". It's disgusting. Police have a duty to justice. These police, if the reporting is correct, have ignored duty and used their office for pecuniary gain.
- dandare 5y ago
  Why do you think this has anything to do with libertarianism? > Police have a duty to justice How did duty to justice and honour worked for the black communities deliberately. targeted by law enforcement over the last 100 years (in the US)?

rdedev 5y ago

The problem is when you do things for profit, it just becomes a race to extract as much profit as you can. Goodharts law comes to mind

dandare 5y ago
Why exactly is this problem? I personally see a problem with having laws that we enforce only if the offender is black, or a similar discretion or bias of the policeman.

FireBeyond 5y ago

> Every time they enforced a good law the society profits. Some of these departments have used these "profits" for BBQs for the police, or flat screen TVs, or for personal vehicles for officers. And in some of the cases where such "misuse" of funds has been taken to court, oftentimes the court has ruled that the PD has the perfect right to do so. Not sure how this is a societal profit.

dandare 5y ago
That is problem of the laws governing the use of the funds, not a problem of policing per se.

tdeck 5y ago

> The alternative is having bad laws that are enforced just sometimes, at the discretion and personal biases of the not-for profit police. This happens whether policing is "for profit" or not. Do you think they'll give the mayor or the police chief's spouse a speeding ticket if it means $100 extra in the department budget? These powers are always used selectively. The police just have to avoid using the "bad laws" against a core group of people with political power, and maybe share some of the spoils of enforcement with that group.

dandare 5y ago
The difference is this: if police misuses bad laws selectively - like predominantly only against the black community - then the majority won't give a fcuk. But once "honest citizens" are targeted by excessive policing, the laws will sooner or later change.

Gollapalli 5y ago

And this is why libertarianism is stupid. There is zero notion of duty or honor in your worldview. The only decision loop that exists in your worldview is "(if (profitable? action) (action) (not action)". It's disgusting. Police have a duty to justice. These police, if the reporting is correct, have ignored duty and used their office for pecuniary gain.

dandare 5y ago
Why do you think this has anything to do with libertarianism? > Police have a duty to justice How did duty to justice and honour worked for the black communities deliberately. targeted by law enforcement over the last 100 years (in the US)?