7 ms·

While I definitely sympathize with your sentiment, TFA is mostly about how confusing and inconsistent the laws are. According to the article, Ron Wyden and sev

While I definitely sympathize with your sentiment, TFA is mostly about how confusing and inconsistent the laws are. According to the article, Ron Wyden and several others tried to pass a bill to clarify the guidelines, but it didn't make it out of committee. Perhaps we should write good, clear laws and guidelines before we break out the pitchforks. I may be naive, but I still believe that most law enforcement officers want to do the right thing, and dedicate their lives to helping others. Of course egregious violations should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
tsimionescu 4y ago
> I may be naive, but I still believe that most law enforcement officers want to do the right thing, and dedicate their lives to helping others. That is extremely naive, especially when talking about these sorts of federal entities.
- l33t233372 4y ago
  Can you elaborate? What do you think most law enforcement officers want to do, and what do you think being federal changes about it?
  - zmgsabst 4y ago
    “A few rotten apples spoil the bunch” as the saying goes. Due to never facing consequences for illegal actions, a culture of flouting the law and abusing rights has been normalized — for both federal and other agencies. The few “bad apples” rotted their organizations.
  - miguelazo 4y ago
    >What do you think most law enforcement officers want to do Get paid large salaries and good benefits without having to go to college, in a country that doesn't respect the trades enough. And plenty of them like the power, especially the "bad apples."
- supportlocal4h 4y ago
  It can be true and still be problematic. If a small city has 100 LEO, and 15 are bad apples, the overwhelming majority still want to do the right thing. Unfortunately 15 is still a very big problem. If they can break the law with impunity it can rightly be said that the police force is doing more harm than good. Even outnumbered 6:1 the bad apples have a larger effect on the community. Unless the 85 good apples focus their attention specifically on the 15 above all other crime. If they enforce the law against the 15 until the problem goes away, or until the ratio is 30:1 and it is really hard for the 3 bad apples to collude... well then maybe. No organization is perfect. But the rule enforcers have to be held to a higher standard.
  - Enginerrrd 4y ago
    I actually think you're missing the mark on bad apples by an order of magnitude. I think 1-5% bad apples is not only more likely, but I think you perhaps underestimate the effect that this smaller percentage can have if allowed to operate in a permissive environment.
    - supportlocal4h 4y ago
      I would guess that 95% of the people I know exceed the speed limit 80+% of the time they drive. In fact, just suggesting that it is ok to drive the speed limit in the left lane of a U.S. freeway would draw near universal condemnation. Imagine an individual who actually obeys the speed limit 99% of the time, exceeding it only by mistake. Imagine they are late to a once in a lifetime event. I think it almost impossible for the average do-gooder to contemplate the mental struggle of whether it is ok to--just this once--go 3 or 4 mph over the speed limit. Normal people wouldn't even hesitate. Now imagine you are a concientious LEO driving a marked vehicle. There is practically no speed at which you will be punished. Every normal person is doing 5-10 over the limit. Some tap their brakes when they see you. But you can do 20 over the limit and never tap your brakes even when you see another police car. In fact, you rationalize, you all by yourself will impede traffic if you don't drive at least 10 over. How do you not develop a sense of exceptionalism? Even if you are a good person? And, of course, how do you presume to pull another cop over and give them a ticket? Now extend that beyond speed limits into every aspect of law enforcement. Is it reasonable to expect 80% compliance of the very best officers? No? So why should it surprise anybody to get <50% compliance from 15% of officers? Especially when you get <50% compliance from 80+% of non-officers. The by-the-book officer is great for a comic movie. We all cheer for them in the theater. But on the street in real life they are intolerable to 99.9% of the public. Happily we all cut each other some slack. I think 1-5% percent is naive, or doesn't include the 10-20% grace we automatcally ignore by necessity in life.
mxkopy 4y ago
> I still believe that most law enforcement officers want to do the right thing It's been legally determined that "the right thing" is 1. protection of property 2. protection of the status quo (i.e. the rule of law regardless of what the law is) 3. does not include the safeguarding of the welfare of people (see DeShaney v Winnebago and its impacts). You say "some bad apples" - the tree was selectively bred to make anemic, putrid fruit.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

tsimionescu 4y ago

> I may be naive, but I still believe that most law enforcement officers want to do the right thing, and dedicate their lives to helping others. That is extremely naive, especially when talking about these sorts of federal entities.

l33t233372 4y ago
Can you elaborate? What do you think most law enforcement officers want to do, and what do you think being federal changes about it?
- zmgsabst 4y ago
  “A few rotten apples spoil the bunch” as the saying goes. Due to never facing consequences for illegal actions, a culture of flouting the law and abusing rights has been normalized — for both federal and other agencies. The few “bad apples” rotted their organizations.
- miguelazo 4y ago
  >What do you think most law enforcement officers want to do Get paid large salaries and good benefits without having to go to college, in a country that doesn't respect the trades enough. And plenty of them like the power, especially the "bad apples."
supportlocal4h 4y ago
It can be true and still be problematic. If a small city has 100 LEO, and 15 are bad apples, the overwhelming majority still want to do the right thing. Unfortunately 15 is still a very big problem. If they can break the law with impunity it can rightly be said that the police force is doing more harm than good. Even outnumbered 6:1 the bad apples have a larger effect on the community. Unless the 85 good apples focus their attention specifically on the 15 above all other crime. If they enforce the law against the 15 until the problem goes away, or until the ratio is 30:1 and it is really hard for the 3 bad apples to collude... well then maybe. No organization is perfect. But the rule enforcers have to be held to a higher standard.
- Enginerrrd 4y ago
  I actually think you're missing the mark on bad apples by an order of magnitude. I think 1-5% bad apples is not only more likely, but I think you perhaps underestimate the effect that this smaller percentage can have if allowed to operate in a permissive environment.
  - supportlocal4h 4y ago
    I would guess that 95% of the people I know exceed the speed limit 80+% of the time they drive. In fact, just suggesting that it is ok to drive the speed limit in the left lane of a U.S. freeway would draw near universal condemnation. Imagine an individual who actually obeys the speed limit 99% of the time, exceeding it only by mistake. Imagine they are late to a once in a lifetime event. I think it almost impossible for the average do-gooder to contemplate the mental struggle of whether it is ok to--just this once--go 3 or 4 mph over the speed limit. Normal people wouldn't even hesitate. Now imagine you are a concientious LEO driving a marked vehicle. There is practically no speed at which you will be punished. Every normal person is doing 5-10 over the limit. Some tap their brakes when they see you. But you can do 20 over the limit and never tap your brakes even when you see another police car. In fact, you rationalize, you all by yourself will impede traffic if you don't drive at least 10 over. How do you not develop a sense of exceptionalism? Even if you are a good person? And, of course, how do you presume to pull another cop over and give them a ticket? Now extend that beyond speed limits into every aspect of law enforcement. Is it reasonable to expect 80% compliance of the very best officers? No? So why should it surprise anybody to get <50% compliance from 15% of officers? Especially when you get <50% compliance from 80+% of non-officers. The by-the-book officer is great for a comic movie. We all cheer for them in the theater. But on the street in real life they are intolerable to 99.9% of the public. Happily we all cut each other some slack. I think 1-5% percent is naive, or doesn't include the 10-20% grace we automatcally ignore by necessity in life.

mxkopy 4y ago

> I still believe that most law enforcement officers want to do the right thing It's been legally determined that "the right thing" is 1. protection of property 2. protection of the status quo (i.e. the rule of law regardless of what the law is) 3. does not include the safeguarding of the welfare of people (see DeShaney v Winnebago and its impacts). You say "some bad apples" - the tree was selectively bred to make anemic, putrid fruit.