4 ms·

> It's rhetoric like this that makes cops feel obligated to protect each other from other citizens. Wait, what? If citizen's lied for each other in investigati

> It's rhetoric like this that makes cops feel obligated to protect each other from other citizens. Wait, what? If citizen's lied for each other in investigations, they'd be prosecuted.

saraid216 13y ago
> Wait, what? If citizen's lied for each other in investigations, they'd be prosecuted. What, the Internal Affairs division just doesn't exist? Does it not have enough power? Is that what's really being argued here? Or is this just feel-good we're-the-good-guys they're-the-bad-guys rhetoric intended to undermine what capabilities they have, cause them to feel threatened and insecure in the midst of the citizenry they're supposed to be protecting, and motivating them to develop a similar and responsive antagonistic attitude that is precisely the seed of a police state? Is the argument "they started it"? Is that the level of discourse that a mature, educated citizenry ought to engage in? Fuck people like sneak. All they're good for is exacerbating problems that exist, making it that much harder to fix, fulfilling their own prophecies of doom and gloom, to no useful end other than making themselves feel self-important. It's like discovering database corruption and going, "Hell, let's run DELETE in with random WHERE clauses and see what happens. Because my job title says VP of Marketing."
- jlgreco 13y ago
  > What, the Internal Affairs division just doesn't exist? In fact yes. Many police departments do not have "Internal Affairs". Where they nominally exist, they are rarely staffed by a separate group of people, rather "internal affairs" work is handled by the same people as everything else. The same people behind the same silent blue wall... Hollywood depictions of "Internal Affairs" are largely a "Hollywood thing".
  - saraid216 13y ago
    I can support a campaign to increase staffing for more of such divisions so that they're independent and capable of successfully prosecuting cops who lie to protect cops.
    - jlgreco 13y ago
      One does not simply throw money at corruption. Even if you could, that would be a hell of a lot of money. In many cases you would be damn near doubling the size of police departments.
- adventured 13y ago
  Maybe you should avoid letting your temper get the best of you with such emotional outbursts as: "fuck people like sneak," on Hacker News. If you can't control your temper, why are you even participating in the discussion here? Personal attacks like that aren't acceptable here, and I'd think you would know that by now after three plus years. It's disgusting to see that level of discourse here.
  - saraid216 13y ago
    Using a personal attack to rebuke an alleged personal attack is not what I'd call a convincing argument. > If you can't control your temper, why are you even participating in the discussion here? Because http://xkcd.com/386/ http://xkcd.com/386/ Stop being wrong and I'll go away. Seriously, if you want to whine about the level of discourse, then you're welcome to start with the person I originally responded to. But you won't, will you? Because you agree with him, so his emotional outburst is okay.
    - sneak 13y ago
      "Fuck the police", in addition to being a famous quote[1], is a well-reasoned and long considered personal policy. It's about as far from an emotional outburst as one can get. [1] http://youtu.be/1M8vei3L0L8 http://youtu.be/1M8vei3L0L8
  - sneak 13y ago
    "Fuck sneak" has been a common refrain on the internet for well over a dozen years. :D Don't sweat it. I don't.
- darkarmani 13y ago
  > cause them to feel threatened and insecure in the midst of the citizenry they're supposed to be protecting, and motivating them to develop a similar and responsive antagonistic attitude Are we still railing against rhetoric? The argument isn't they started it, it's "they have been granted tremendous power, so they need to accept accountability."
  - saraid216 13y ago
    > The argument isn't they started it, it's "they have been granted tremendous power, so they need to accept accountability." Yes. "Fuck the police" really captures that argument well.
    - jlgreco 13y ago
      Argument that was actually made: "It's shit like this that flies in the face of all those "but most cops are not bad guys" arguments. If an organization fights to protect bad guys, I don't care how much good they do: they are complicit in furthering criminal behavior. And they're in a position of trust, at that! It's an open secret that cops lie to protect other cops. Why do we allow this? Any other person in a special position of trust and responsibility that contravenes their duty gets _extra_ punishment. Lon Horiuchi was an FBI sniper that shot Vicki Weaver in the back while holding her infant daughter in her arms: case dismissed. That cop that pepper sprayed those protesting kids at UC Davis, John Pike, was never even charged for "lack of evidence" (nevermind that video of him doing so was on every news show in the country that week). The FBI and BATFE set the Branch Davidians' home on fire, burning up the children inside. Instead of meaningful outrage, we simply let cops get away with murder, literally. Fuck the police." What you read: "Fuck the police." Is it really any wonder that you are having problems with this conversation? There is a lot of content in that comment; you appear to have ingested none of it.
- beedogs 13y ago
  ::sniff sniff:: I smell bacon!

> It's rhetoric like this that makes cops feel obligated to protect each other from other citizens. Wait, what? If citizen's lied for each other in investigations, they'd be prosecuted.

saraid216 13y ago

> Wait, what? If citizen's lied for each other in investigations, they'd be prosecuted. What, the Internal Affairs division just doesn't exist? Does it not have enough power? Is that what's really being argued here? Or is this just feel-good we're-the-good-guys they're-the-bad-guys rhetoric intended to undermine what capabilities they have, cause them to feel threatened and insecure in the midst of the citizenry they're supposed to be protecting, and motivating them to develop a similar and responsive antagonistic attitude that is precisely the seed of a police state? Is the argument "they started it"? Is that the level of discourse that a mature, educated citizenry ought to engage in? Fuck people like sneak. All they're good for is exacerbating problems that exist, making it that much harder to fix, fulfilling their own prophecies of doom and gloom, to no useful end other than making themselves feel self-important. It's like discovering database corruption and going, "Hell, let's run DELETE in with random WHERE clauses and see what happens. Because my job title says VP of Marketing."

jlgreco 13y ago
> What, the Internal Affairs division just doesn't exist? In fact yes. Many police departments do not have "Internal Affairs". Where they nominally exist, they are rarely staffed by a separate group of people, rather "internal affairs" work is handled by the same people as everything else. The same people behind the same silent blue wall... Hollywood depictions of "Internal Affairs" are largely a "Hollywood thing".
- saraid216 13y ago
  I can support a campaign to increase staffing for more of such divisions so that they're independent and capable of successfully prosecuting cops who lie to protect cops.
  - jlgreco 13y ago
    One does not simply throw money at corruption. Even if you could, that would be a hell of a lot of money. In many cases you would be damn near doubling the size of police departments.
adventured 13y ago
Maybe you should avoid letting your temper get the best of you with such emotional outbursts as: "fuck people like sneak," on Hacker News. If you can't control your temper, why are you even participating in the discussion here? Personal attacks like that aren't acceptable here, and I'd think you would know that by now after three plus years. It's disgusting to see that level of discourse here.
- saraid216 13y ago
  Using a personal attack to rebuke an alleged personal attack is not what I'd call a convincing argument. > If you can't control your temper, why are you even participating in the discussion here? Because http://xkcd.com/386/ http://xkcd.com/386/ Stop being wrong and I'll go away. Seriously, if you want to whine about the level of discourse, then you're welcome to start with the person I originally responded to. But you won't, will you? Because you agree with him, so his emotional outburst is okay.
  - sneak 13y ago
    "Fuck the police", in addition to being a famous quote[1], is a well-reasoned and long considered personal policy. It's about as far from an emotional outburst as one can get. [1] http://youtu.be/1M8vei3L0L8 http://youtu.be/1M8vei3L0L8
- sneak 13y ago
  "Fuck sneak" has been a common refrain on the internet for well over a dozen years. :D Don't sweat it. I don't.
darkarmani 13y ago
> cause them to feel threatened and insecure in the midst of the citizenry they're supposed to be protecting, and motivating them to develop a similar and responsive antagonistic attitude Are we still railing against rhetoric? The argument isn't they started it, it's "they have been granted tremendous power, so they need to accept accountability."
- saraid216 13y ago
  > The argument isn't they started it, it's "they have been granted tremendous power, so they need to accept accountability." Yes. "Fuck the police" really captures that argument well.
  - jlgreco 13y ago
    Argument that was actually made: "It's shit like this that flies in the face of all those "but most cops are not bad guys" arguments. If an organization fights to protect bad guys, I don't care how much good they do: they are complicit in furthering criminal behavior. And they're in a position of trust, at that! It's an open secret that cops lie to protect other cops. Why do we allow this? Any other person in a special position of trust and responsibility that contravenes their duty gets _extra_ punishment. Lon Horiuchi was an FBI sniper that shot Vicki Weaver in the back while holding her infant daughter in her arms: case dismissed. That cop that pepper sprayed those protesting kids at UC Davis, John Pike, was never even charged for "lack of evidence" (nevermind that video of him doing so was on every news show in the country that week). The FBI and BATFE set the Branch Davidians' home on fire, burning up the children inside. Instead of meaningful outrage, we simply let cops get away with murder, literally. Fuck the police." What you read: "Fuck the police." Is it really any wonder that you are having problems with this conversation? There is a lot of content in that comment; you appear to have ingested none of it.
beedogs 13y ago
::sniff sniff:: I smell bacon!