4 ms·

>who is not subject to police authority How would you police these people? They would be like diplomats, only without a home country to keep them in line.

zwkrt 5y ago
I assume this meant only that their org chart didn’t eventually merge with the police’s. Kind of like SREs at google.
- stonemetal12 5y ago
  That makes more sense. I get that it is mostly a states rights issue, but I have always thought that Police crime should be handled by FBI + Federal courts.
  - rootusrootus 5y ago
    I think that at least in theory that is how it is intended to work. But it doesn't really solve the issue, because it's still a strict hierarchy. So the top enforcement organization is hard to force accountability on. And like you said, states rights and all that, it might be outside the Constitutional powers of the federal government to actually do this. On the bright side, I suppose, getting at least one state to build a model of a working checks & balance system on police is a lot easier than making it happen federally.
liara_k 5y ago
There are several of different options. The most obvious is an independent line of authority delegated from the state's legislature or governor. This is where the police get THEIR authority. Other options include close supervision by the courts, private rights of action (i.e., citizen lawsuits), strong FOIA-like transparency rules, etc...
rootusrootus 5y ago
I don't know how I'd make it work exactly, just in principle. I envision a group of people who have enforcement powers over the police, but nobody else. But in order to have enforcement power, they need to be immunized against retaliation from the police. Part of why I think they should have no power at all over anyone other than the police is to reduce the damage potential. Clearly there are details that a policy expert would have to work out, I'm just a rando on the 'net philosophizing about how we as a society can stop the slide into a police state and preserve a healthy democracy. Maintaining a liberal democracy seems hard, like it's an unstable creation that can only be sustained through deliberate effort.
tremon 5y ago
In NL, the authority watching the police (Marechaussee, [1]) is organizationally a branch of the military, next to the army, navy and air force subdivisions. I guess it would be similar to having the National Guard be the police watchdog in the US. The Marechaussee are also involved with other police duties such as fighting organized crime and riot control. NL police doesn't have SWAT teams like in the US, they would be part of the military hierarchy, not the police hierarchy. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Marechaussee https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Marechaussee
- Doxin 5y ago
  NL Does have DSI which is pretty close to what SWAT does as far as I understand it. DSI is a police branch that specializes in things like terrorism and armed standoffs.

zwkrt 5y ago

I assume this meant only that their org chart didn’t eventually merge with the police’s. Kind of like SREs at google.

stonemetal12 5y ago
That makes more sense. I get that it is mostly a states rights issue, but I have always thought that Police crime should be handled by FBI + Federal courts.
- rootusrootus 5y ago
  I think that at least in theory that is how it is intended to work. But it doesn't really solve the issue, because it's still a strict hierarchy. So the top enforcement organization is hard to force accountability on. And like you said, states rights and all that, it might be outside the Constitutional powers of the federal government to actually do this. On the bright side, I suppose, getting at least one state to build a model of a working checks & balance system on police is a lot easier than making it happen federally.

liara_k 5y ago

There are several of different options. The most obvious is an independent line of authority delegated from the state's legislature or governor. This is where the police get THEIR authority. Other options include close supervision by the courts, private rights of action (i.e., citizen lawsuits), strong FOIA-like transparency rules, etc...

rootusrootus 5y ago

I don't know how I'd make it work exactly, just in principle. I envision a group of people who have enforcement powers over the police, but nobody else. But in order to have enforcement power, they need to be immunized against retaliation from the police. Part of why I think they should have no power at all over anyone other than the police is to reduce the damage potential. Clearly there are details that a policy expert would have to work out, I'm just a rando on the 'net philosophizing about how we as a society can stop the slide into a police state and preserve a healthy democracy. Maintaining a liberal democracy seems hard, like it's an unstable creation that can only be sustained through deliberate effort.

tremon 5y ago

In NL, the authority watching the police (Marechaussee, [1]) is organizationally a branch of the military, next to the army, navy and air force subdivisions. I guess it would be similar to having the National Guard be the police watchdog in the US. The Marechaussee are also involved with other police duties such as fighting organized crime and riot control. NL police doesn't have SWAT teams like in the US, they would be part of the military hierarchy, not the police hierarchy. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Marechaussee https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Marechaussee

Doxin 5y ago
NL Does have DSI which is pretty close to what SWAT does as far as I understand it. DSI is a police branch that specializes in things like terrorism and armed standoffs.