4 ms·

> if a raid is performed and the warrant doesn’t pan out the cops behind the warrant should be immediately investigated by another agency (which, they’re cops

> if a raid is performed and the warrant doesn’t pan out the cops behind the warrant should be immediately investigated by another agency (which, they’re cops too so who knows if this would help). As long as we're talking about shoulds, we should have an independent body reviewing police misconduct and major screw ups. There should be very little "police policing themselves". Police can police themselves when it comes to the kinds of things any other workplace handles themselves, like people showing up late for their shifts, or stealing office supplies. When police end up violate the rights of Americans though, let police handle that however they want internally, but that should always be in addition to what an outside body decides. Honestly, the police should welcome the idea too. I'm sure there are plenty of officers who would rather be doing their job than spending time busting down the doors of innocent people and searching for fake kidnapping victims they'll never find.

numpad0 4y ago
Independent body(s) correctly incentivized to review misconduct and major screw ups. The court and prosecutor’s office currently exists and are working as ill-incentivized, clueless, codependent body that mostly post-hoc justify actions. I believe this is an unsolved problem, not inherent to US or any country.
- lrem 4y ago
  Quite a few European countries seem to have much less issues with their police forces. But you can’t just copy-paste solutions. “Weapon discharged - automatic suspension until proven innocent” just wouldn’t fit the way the US is.
  - dragonwriter 4y ago
    You aren’t going to change the problems with the way the US is with “solutions” that fit the way the US is.
  - numpad0 4y ago
    The United States is basically the single largest country on Earth, surely the US representation of a problem must be among the most expressed.
    - lrem 4y ago
      It is fourth largest and third most populated. It has the second largest prison population, but is almost tied for the first place here.
      - monocasa 4y ago
        Who has a larger prison population? All stats I'm seeing both in raw numbers and per capita have the US as number one there.
        lrem 4y ago
        The top search result claimed China has about 20k more inmates. Meaning it has about a quarter of USA’s per capita.
  - pjc50 4y ago
    The absolute bare minimum should be "weapon discharge resulting in death or serious injury gets external investigation". We can go after the misses and the warning shots later.
  - mrguyorama 4y ago
    Cops aren't even given enough bullets to properly train their ability to shoot straight, we should absolutely have them justify every single round fired.
theteapot 4y ago
> .. but that should always be in addition to what an outside body decides. I.e. civil society.
altacc 4y ago
The UK has the IOPC (Independent Office for Police Conduct) which is the latest version of oversight that has only existed for about 20 years, once it became increasingly clear how bias, corrupt and insular policing was. No system is perfect but it is having a good effect. They are independent and can investigate whatever they want and take referrals from the public and within the police. Any police interaction that results in a death or serious injury of anyone immediately triggers an investigation.
- lostlogin 4y ago
  I’m not sure that they are that highly regarded - especially given that one goal is to protect public confidence in the police. The criticism is pretty strong. https://novaramedia.com/2022/11/21/why-are-we-still-pretending-this-police-watchdog-is-independent/ https://novaramedia.com/2022/11/21/why-are-we-still-pretendi...
- pjc50 4y ago
  Not sure that's really helped with the recent reports about the Met.
  - mrguyorama 4y ago
    I would take a smaller amount of the same problems over what we have right now in the states. Baby steps.
- goldenkey 4y ago
  How did the IOPC handle the disappearance of all of the documents implicating high level officials in pedophilia, kidnapping, and murder? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westminster_paedophile_dossier https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westminster_paedophile_dossier
  - autoexec 4y ago
    I don't understand that scandal. It sounds like in 1981 this Dickens guy claimed to have discovered a ring of pedos, and using some special free speech power he publicly named one of the members, then assembled a 40 page document that listed 8 super powerful people who were supposedly involved in the ring because he wanted them all exposed. So a few years later in 1984 he hands his dossier over to another guy in Parliament, and it was supposed to go to the police, but then a bunch of it went "missing" so now everyone wants to know who the 8 people were and who covered it up, but why is there even a mystery about the people named in that dossier? For like 11 years after Dickens handed over the dossier he could have just said who they were. He still had that same immunity he used to name the first one and could have told the world, but he apparently just decided not to even after seeing nothing came from his "explosive" report that was supposed to change everything, and even after having previously threatened to do exactly that and use his immunity to name the others. So, why didn't he just do it? Why is the question all about where this guys one pedo report went. He knew what it said. Why didn't he just type up another one? Why not a bunch of them? How did he end up being the only person to get this information in the first place? He said that he'd been threatened after naming that first guy, but that didn't stop him from compiling and turning over his dossier. I guess maybe the 8 powerful mystery people threatened him harder until he shut up, but if we can't blame him for not just saying who they were because of those threats, how can the IOPC or anyone else who tried to investigate it later be blamed. Couldn't they have been threatened into silence the same way? It's really messed up if its all true, but the whole thing seems full of holes and uncertainty. Then again, that's just what I managed to get out of Wikipedia so what am I missing?

numpad0 4y ago

Independent body(s) correctly incentivized to review misconduct and major screw ups. The court and prosecutor’s office currently exists and are working as ill-incentivized, clueless, codependent body that mostly post-hoc justify actions. I believe this is an unsolved problem, not inherent to US or any country.

lrem 4y ago
Quite a few European countries seem to have much less issues with their police forces. But you can’t just copy-paste solutions. “Weapon discharged - automatic suspension until proven innocent” just wouldn’t fit the way the US is.
- dragonwriter 4y ago
  You aren’t going to change the problems with the way the US is with “solutions” that fit the way the US is.
- numpad0 4y ago
  The United States is basically the single largest country on Earth, surely the US representation of a problem must be among the most expressed.
  - lrem 4y ago
    It is fourth largest and third most populated. It has the second largest prison population, but is almost tied for the first place here.
    - monocasa 4y ago
      Who has a larger prison population? All stats I'm seeing both in raw numbers and per capita have the US as number one there.
      - lrem 4y ago
        The top search result claimed China has about 20k more inmates. Meaning it has about a quarter of USA’s per capita.
- pjc50 4y ago
  The absolute bare minimum should be "weapon discharge resulting in death or serious injury gets external investigation". We can go after the misses and the warning shots later.
- mrguyorama 4y ago
  Cops aren't even given enough bullets to properly train their ability to shoot straight, we should absolutely have them justify every single round fired.

theteapot 4y ago

> .. but that should always be in addition to what an outside body decides. I.e. civil society.

altacc 4y ago

The UK has the IOPC (Independent Office for Police Conduct) which is the latest version of oversight that has only existed for about 20 years, once it became increasingly clear how bias, corrupt and insular policing was. No system is perfect but it is having a good effect. They are independent and can investigate whatever they want and take referrals from the public and within the police. Any police interaction that results in a death or serious injury of anyone immediately triggers an investigation.

lostlogin 4y ago
I’m not sure that they are that highly regarded - especially given that one goal is to protect public confidence in the police. The criticism is pretty strong. https://novaramedia.com/2022/11/21/why-are-we-still-pretending-this-police-watchdog-is-independent/ https://novaramedia.com/2022/11/21/why-are-we-still-pretendi...
pjc50 4y ago
Not sure that's really helped with the recent reports about the Met.
- mrguyorama 4y ago
  I would take a smaller amount of the same problems over what we have right now in the states. Baby steps.
goldenkey 4y ago
How did the IOPC handle the disappearance of all of the documents implicating high level officials in pedophilia, kidnapping, and murder? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westminster_paedophile_dossier https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westminster_paedophile_dossier
- autoexec 4y ago
  I don't understand that scandal. It sounds like in 1981 this Dickens guy claimed to have discovered a ring of pedos, and using some special free speech power he publicly named one of the members, then assembled a 40 page document that listed 8 super powerful people who were supposedly involved in the ring because he wanted them all exposed. So a few years later in 1984 he hands his dossier over to another guy in Parliament, and it was supposed to go to the police, but then a bunch of it went "missing" so now everyone wants to know who the 8 people were and who covered it up, but why is there even a mystery about the people named in that dossier? For like 11 years after Dickens handed over the dossier he could have just said who they were. He still had that same immunity he used to name the first one and could have told the world, but he apparently just decided not to even after seeing nothing came from his "explosive" report that was supposed to change everything, and even after having previously threatened to do exactly that and use his immunity to name the others. So, why didn't he just do it? Why is the question all about where this guys one pedo report went. He knew what it said. Why didn't he just type up another one? Why not a bunch of them? How did he end up being the only person to get this information in the first place? He said that he'd been threatened after naming that first guy, but that didn't stop him from compiling and turning over his dossier. I guess maybe the 8 powerful mystery people threatened him harder until he shut up, but if we can't blame him for not just saying who they were because of those threats, how can the IOPC or anyone else who tried to investigate it later be blamed. Couldn't they have been threatened into silence the same way? It's really messed up if its all true, but the whole thing seems full of holes and uncertainty. Then again, that's just what I managed to get out of Wikipedia so what am I missing?