4 ms·

Personally, I think discretion, as long as it’s not abused, should be available to decision makers. Strict unbending rules are not ideal. In other words a lit

by mc32 4y ago

Personally, I think discretion, as long as it’s not abused, should be available to decision makers. Strict unbending rules are not ideal. In other words a little abuse is acceptable, a lot of abuse should not. I’m sure some people are uncomfortable with that. However I feel that lack of latitude leans tyrannical and fascistic. Most counties I’ve been to permit police latitude (and in some cases way more than a little latitude) and there are places where a victim can decide on civil consequence (receive $$) or proceed with criminal case (potential jail time).

giraffe_lady 4y ago
This view really only works if you consider the police as a whole a respectable & valuable workforce, and capricious enforcement to be a deviation from that norm. The problem is if you view the police as they actually act over time, the uncertainty and cruelty is basically designed in. They are part of a long term and slow motion terror campaign against the most vulnerable members of our society. Whatever they should be, that is consistently how they act, and any power we give them should be considered within that reality. There is no power they have ever been granted that they have not chosen to use for tremendous harm and personal gain.
- mc32 4y ago
  On the whole, I would consider the police a valuable workforce with some reservations. The vast majority are not performing egregious violations of civil rights. What we see in the news are the exceptions. That said, I don't see a usable alternative --even considering the abuse. It's a human system--and maybe a remote robotic AI assisted system would be worse-- so it suffers from human fallibility. A system without police is worse. You will have gangs and vigilantes take over who will be worse than police forces (yes, I know police in Venezuela are indistinguishable from violent gangs --but I'm talking about most police forces in advanced economies). Without a police force you get what we saw in the Wild West and what they got in Somalia --gangs and warlords and outlaws and whatnot. I'm not saying don't strive for improvement -what I am saying is we must allow discretion (an example of what happens with lack of discretion is what happens with mandatory sentencing) Even in China, you want a police force over no police and the police in China are even less concerned with civil rights and offer more discretion to the "right" people. In Russia, I would say it's closer to a draw as they are pretty corrupt, but your gangs are still worse. Thinking in idealistic fashion is an okay exercise but we also need to face reality and the reality is that people cannot "police themselves" adequately.
  - giraffe_lady 4y ago
    > The vast majority are not performing egregious violations of civil rights. What we see in the news are the exceptions. I can not see it this way, and I have earned that honestly. I have lived much of my life in poverty and addiction and across decades and dozens of interactions, not a single cop treated me with dignity and respect while I was homeless. Now I can code, can afford a dentist and $300 boots, and we get along fine! The violations are not the exception, they are build in to the system. The violations against people like you, against who I am now, those are exceptions. But in general? No. I'm not arguing for lawlessness here. I am saying we should not be funding a hostile paramilitary force to harass the citizens we have already failed in other ways.
    - mc32 4y ago
      When I was young I too had encounters with them and it was less than ideal. But I also feel that without them there society would be worse off. Yes, there can be improvement and they definitely need to better weed out bad apples (they need to better detect criminals within their ranks --just like the clergy needs to and schools need to). But also realize they are doing what society is asking them to do. Allowing some discretion is what allows them to ignore homeless in the park or in a ditch or wherever the locality finds unofficially permissible. If they followed the letter of the law in many places, they'd have to call in the paddy wagon way more often.
    - s1artibartfast 4y ago
      Do you have any concrete suggestions for improvement besides defunding the police?
      - giraffe_lady 4y ago
        Do you have any suggestions for dinner besides food? The answer is the answer, sorry you don't like it.
        mc32 4y ago
joshstrange 4y ago
> Personally, I think discretion, as long as it’s not abused, should be available to decision makers. > as long as it’s not abused That ship has long since sailed. The police have proven more times than I can count that they absolutely cannot be trusted not to abuse this.
- mc32 4y ago
  Right, so you give some leeway but have oversight. It very well could be that the PBA cards are given out too freely. Maybe officers let too many people with broken lights off the hook or tear up too many parking tickets. I definitely would like to see better parking enforcement and more official cars get towed. I'd be all for that, no question.
  - joshstrange 4y ago
    > It very well could be that the PBA cards are given out too freely. I can't see a legitimate reason for PBA cards to be given out at all. If leeway is going to be given it should be given based on the situation (not the person). Friends/family of the police should not be given more leeway.
    - mc32 4y ago
      I have no problem with that. However, I guess in theory, someone is vouching for the cardholder --so it provides more information than just giving someone a lookover. Kind of like a "precheck".
      - runnerup 4y ago
        That makes no fucking sense.
  - ender341341 4y ago
    For things related to car maintenance I think there should be a special class of tickets available, a "Provide proof you fixed the problem by {date} or pay {fine}$", they already informally exist (I've known a few people who got a ticket along with the officer's email and told if they provide proof the officer will cancel the ticket). This would take needing discretion out of the question, and also provide better incentive to the driver than "I hope the same cop doesn't pull me over again and remember they already gave me a warning".
s1artibartfast 4y ago
Of course, the ideal state is reasonable and good laws enforced uniformly. The current policing system is non-functional without discretion because nearly everything is criminalized with overly harsh punishments. Police are pretty terrible arbiters of discretion, but I would rather have that than the current laws enforced. I am much more concerned about over enforcement than under enforcement.

by mc32 4y ago

giraffe_lady 4y ago

This view really only works if you consider the police as a whole a respectable & valuable workforce, and capricious enforcement to be a deviation from that norm. The problem is if you view the police as they actually act over time, the uncertainty and cruelty is basically designed in. They are part of a long term and slow motion terror campaign against the most vulnerable members of our society. Whatever they should be, that is consistently how they act, and any power we give them should be considered within that reality. There is no power they have ever been granted that they have not chosen to use for tremendous harm and personal gain.

mc32 4y ago
On the whole, I would consider the police a valuable workforce with some reservations. The vast majority are not performing egregious violations of civil rights. What we see in the news are the exceptions. That said, I don't see a usable alternative --even considering the abuse. It's a human system--and maybe a remote robotic AI assisted system would be worse-- so it suffers from human fallibility. A system without police is worse. You will have gangs and vigilantes take over who will be worse than police forces (yes, I know police in Venezuela are indistinguishable from violent gangs --but I'm talking about most police forces in advanced economies). Without a police force you get what we saw in the Wild West and what they got in Somalia --gangs and warlords and outlaws and whatnot. I'm not saying don't strive for improvement -what I am saying is we must allow discretion (an example of what happens with lack of discretion is what happens with mandatory sentencing) Even in China, you want a police force over no police and the police in China are even less concerned with civil rights and offer more discretion to the "right" people. In Russia, I would say it's closer to a draw as they are pretty corrupt, but your gangs are still worse. Thinking in idealistic fashion is an okay exercise but we also need to face reality and the reality is that people cannot "police themselves" adequately.
- giraffe_lady 4y ago
  > The vast majority are not performing egregious violations of civil rights. What we see in the news are the exceptions. I can not see it this way, and I have earned that honestly. I have lived much of my life in poverty and addiction and across decades and dozens of interactions, not a single cop treated me with dignity and respect while I was homeless. Now I can code, can afford a dentist and $300 boots, and we get along fine! The violations are not the exception, they are build in to the system. The violations against people like you, against who I am now, those are exceptions. But in general? No. I'm not arguing for lawlessness here. I am saying we should not be funding a hostile paramilitary force to harass the citizens we have already failed in other ways.
  - mc32 4y ago
    When I was young I too had encounters with them and it was less than ideal. But I also feel that without them there society would be worse off. Yes, there can be improvement and they definitely need to better weed out bad apples (they need to better detect criminals within their ranks --just like the clergy needs to and schools need to). But also realize they are doing what society is asking them to do. Allowing some discretion is what allows them to ignore homeless in the park or in a ditch or wherever the locality finds unofficially permissible. If they followed the letter of the law in many places, they'd have to call in the paddy wagon way more often.
  - s1artibartfast 4y ago
    Do you have any concrete suggestions for improvement besides defunding the police?
    - giraffe_lady 4y ago
      Do you have any suggestions for dinner besides food? The answer is the answer, sorry you don't like it.
      - mc32 4y ago

joshstrange 4y ago

> Personally, I think discretion, as long as it’s not abused, should be available to decision makers. > as long as it’s not abused That ship has long since sailed. The police have proven more times than I can count that they absolutely cannot be trusted not to abuse this.

mc32 4y ago
Right, so you give some leeway but have oversight. It very well could be that the PBA cards are given out too freely. Maybe officers let too many people with broken lights off the hook or tear up too many parking tickets. I definitely would like to see better parking enforcement and more official cars get towed. I'd be all for that, no question.
- joshstrange 4y ago
  > It very well could be that the PBA cards are given out too freely. I can't see a legitimate reason for PBA cards to be given out at all. If leeway is going to be given it should be given based on the situation (not the person). Friends/family of the police should not be given more leeway.
  - mc32 4y ago
    I have no problem with that. However, I guess in theory, someone is vouching for the cardholder --so it provides more information than just giving someone a lookover. Kind of like a "precheck".
    - runnerup 4y ago
      That makes no fucking sense.
- ender341341 4y ago
  For things related to car maintenance I think there should be a special class of tickets available, a "Provide proof you fixed the problem by {date} or pay {fine}$", they already informally exist (I've known a few people who got a ticket along with the officer's email and told if they provide proof the officer will cancel the ticket). This would take needing discretion out of the question, and also provide better incentive to the driver than "I hope the same cop doesn't pull me over again and remember they already gave me a warning".

s1artibartfast 4y ago

Of course, the ideal state is reasonable and good laws enforced uniformly. The current policing system is non-functional without discretion because nearly everything is criminalized with overly harsh punishments. Police are pretty terrible arbiters of discretion, but I would rather have that than the current laws enforced. I am much more concerned about over enforcement than under enforcement.