6 ms·

I don't think reality is as clear cut as that. There is genuine complexity. Being a cop is legitimately dangerous, gun or no gun. A gun isn't an off switch. Peo

by netcan 12y ago

I don't think reality is as clear cut as that. There is genuine complexity. Being a cop is legitimately dangerous, gun or no gun. A gun isn't an off switch. People can confront an armed cop and shooting doesn't always stop them. There are also all sorts of rules that are learned on the job and aren't not in any manual. Ways for maintaining control and authority mostly. Many of these practices are unsanctioned and unofficial, but still essential for being able to do the job. Some things are both crucial and illegal. Cops usually feel like when they get busted for being arrogant, bullying or outright violence that they are are victims of these situations. They do what everyone does, what has to be done for policing to be viable. Those pencil pushers with their removed perspective are making judgments about their irrelevant rules being broken. They are under stress. Violence is a part of their days. Most of the people they deal with are lowlifes, lyres, cheaters. There is real stress. Real danger That said, a lot of these practices aren't benign and they aren't inevitable. The police does genuinely attract many problematic people and it makes other. They get used to defending their authority and meet challenges to it with extreme responses. They develop a cops & robbers, us & them worldview that becomes their reality. More specifically cops, criminals and naive spectators, citizens & bureaucrats. They develop a bullying mannerism. Police manage to do their jobs without guns at all in many places. They deal with violent crime just like cops in the states. I'm not saying this should be adopted by US department, but is proof that there are other ways of doing things. I think lights good for the paradigm. But, whatever that light reveals needs to be dealt with. Maybe police modus operandi needs to changed. But, maybe the rulebook needs to change too. It can be dangerous trying to enforce the official rulebook after long periods where it has only been enforced selectively. Maybe the official way of doing things doesn't work. That said, this following cops around only plays to the problem paradigm. It's harassment, like what paparazzi do. It's belligerent. Maybe it's valuable as a protest, but it isn't as solution. What I think should happen in law enforcement is that everything should be recorded. Every interrogation. Every arrest. Every time a cop pulls you over. This is all evidence and it should be part of every booking. Hopefully that will make the need for this sort of thing go away.

coder23 12y ago
What I think should happen in law enforcement is that everything should be recorded. We can expect that pretty soon with storage and chips becoming ever smaller. 10-15 years perhaps?
- maxerickson 12y ago
  There are existing commercial products. Taser makes several: http://www.taser.com/products/on-officer-video/axon-flex-on-officer-video http://www.taser.com/products/on-officer-video/axon-flex-on-... I guess whether those meet every possible definition of 'everything' is something that can be argued about.
TallGuyShort 12y ago
>> Some things are both crucial and illegal. Well that's where I draw the line though. If it comes down to a choice between accepting that law enforcement is allowed to break the law or making law enforcement less effective by increasing transparency, I choose to decrease law enforcement effectiveness. I'd rather citizens undermine the police by recording them then have citizens get shot without cause with little oversight. >> What I think should happen in law enforcement is that everything should be recorded. I agree. I would hope that in these "discussions" they're having with these groups to reach a compromise, that's the solution.
omgtehblackbloc 12y ago
Being a cop is legitimately dangerous Not really, no. It's just not that dangerous. We imagine it must be dangerous, and so do cops themselves. But you're a lot more likely to be killed as a garbage collector or airline pilot, or a construction worker, or plenty of other jobs. It's like with the "war on terror". The fear of danger is much more powerful than the danger itself. And like with terrorism, the fear is actively promoted for political reasons. They do what everyone does, what has to be done for policing to be viable. That seems like an argument against the department as a whole, not a justification for an individual's abuse. Most of the people they deal with are lowlifes, lyres, cheaters. Most of the people they deal with are ordinary innocent civilians whom they assume are "lowlifes" because they have been trained and conditioned to. That said, this following cops around only plays to the problem paradigm. It's harassment, like what paparazzi do. It's belligerent. Maybe it's valuable as a protest, but it isn't as solution. It is belligerent, and it is harassment, and it is protest. And that's the point. People with power do not voluntarily stop abusing it. They continue until met with resistance - until they are forced to stop. Unfortunately it's effectively suicide to physically force the cops to stop, but we should do everything we can short of that to stand up against them. Standing up against the cops sets an example for others that we don't need to fear them, that they don't deserve respect and deference, and that we can do something directly to stop their abuse.
- JoeAltmaier 12y ago
  Oh for pity's sake, follow a cop around some Saturday night downtown, before lecturing us on what a soft life a cop's job is. Deal with the belligerent drunks, entitled rich boys, teenagers with too much car and no sense. Enter a store that gave off a silent alarm, in the dark, all by yourself and tell me what a walk in the park it is. "Stand up against them"? See how lovely a world it is without them - what comes next is very much worse than what you're complaining about. Cops deserve respect and deference, if only because they stand for public order and that deserves it.
  - keepper 12y ago
    Question a cop who's wrong about the law... Stand in front of your house in any major city as a minority... Walk down the street in any major city as a minority... The bad perceptions of the police have very real reasons behind them. Respect is EARNED, not given. Cops CHOSE to be cops, they are being compensated to be cops, the onus is on them, to take then danger. Not on the citizen. servi publici and all that comes with that...
sremani 12y ago
Over generalizations. That is not the case for many SubUrban and Rural PDs. Arlington is not peaceful but Arlington PD has episodes of dysfunction that all the N.Tex folks are aware of. The Illegal drugs for "juicing" episode and drug peddling with in the PD is latest episode. Most of the Arglington cops interact with ballpark, cowboys stadium and six flags/hurricane harbor folk. Even though its sixth biggest city in Texas - Arlington is more of a crowd management and driver safety-ish zone. So, not everything in Arlington is violent crime, no we are not talking about crompton or East LA - Arlington is way way better than those gang infested areas. Your narrative is inaccurate at best.
ndarilek 12y ago
There's a lot of idealism here. In general, I think it'd be great if the person pulling me over for speeding was different from the person who could violently shut down an armed robbery. It'd be great if the person arresting cyclists for biking unsafely, the person helping old ladies cross the street and the one breaking up family disputes was firewalled from the one with the gun. I live in a low-income apartment complex, and I try not to think much about the fact that my neighbor routinely calls people with guns to resolve non-violent disputes with her teenage daughter (I wish I was kidding or engaging in the slightest bit of hyperbole here.) I also think it'd be great if cops had cameras on them at all times, and if they voluntarily did that themselves. Unfortunately, that reality is a bit, well, unrealistic as well. My understanding is that APD has dash cams, but the footage often isn't released, especially in cases of suspected brutality, and often not even to those with an interest in clearing their names. Also, my understanding is that the Peaceful Streets folks arrested here never got their own cameras back, even though no charges were ultimately filed (I think the stolen camera count was at 4.) I don't know what the solution is, but I don't think it is "let the watchmen wear their own cameras and decide what footage to release."
- netcan 12y ago
  I think it's a long term thing. Having a camera on you at work takes getting used to and habits need to change (thats a big part of the point). "let the watchmen wear their own cameras" isn't all that outrageous. It's a momentum thing. If all cops were wearing cameras any incident without footage would be suspicious. I think it will happen eventually. I agree about internal investigations. They shouldn't be internal. Investigating police and other law enforcers should be a separate unit.
- overdrivetg 12y ago
  I've also been thinking lately that having 2 levels of "police" would actually be a good idea: normal (aka non-violent/immediately dangerous) incidents could be handled by mediators who could try to resolve the situation (and would hopefully develop a culture/reputation for helpfulness/playing the "Good Cop" role). So for things like speeding, jaywalking, etc - you could get pulled over and a talking to by a mediator. Then if there was a problem that couldn't be mediated/otherwise handled, only then would they call in an actual officer who could write tickets, use physical force, etc. Then it's very clear if you're being an ahole, you get to quickly deal with cops just like today. But if you're being reasonable, often disputes could be mediated without the confrontational baggage most police encounters today seem to engender. The key would also be that you prevent the "real" cops from dealing with these lower-level issues until AFTER they've been mediated, so the escalation process is very clear and unambiguous. Or at least require them to have a mediator show up to...mediate...first. Of course this is different from the environment in high-crime urban areas, but just as an example of how this can play out in a realistic way: the Burning Man festival has Rangers (mediators) who are there to help people resolve their own issues and handle minor incidents. In theory, the cops there are for backup in case of major incidents, but in practice they wind up being a pain in the a by literally being the "Fun Police" and shaking people down for minor alcohol and drug infractions. Pretty much the entire event's security needs are handled entirely by the Rangers and simple mediation. The police there could choose to be be a valuable community resource, but instead generally wind up being resented by most of the community due to (at least a perception of) having generally antagonistic and abusive attitudes. This dynamic is the real problem more than anything else IMO - both on and off-Playa. When large numbers of law-abiding citizens have a negative impression of your entire profession, something is definitely wrong.

by netcan 12y ago

coder23 12y ago

What I think should happen in law enforcement is that everything should be recorded. We can expect that pretty soon with storage and chips becoming ever smaller. 10-15 years perhaps?

maxerickson 12y ago
There are existing commercial products. Taser makes several: http://www.taser.com/products/on-officer-video/axon-flex-on-officer-video http://www.taser.com/products/on-officer-video/axon-flex-on-... I guess whether those meet every possible definition of 'everything' is something that can be argued about.

TallGuyShort 12y ago

>> Some things are both crucial and illegal. Well that's where I draw the line though. If it comes down to a choice between accepting that law enforcement is allowed to break the law or making law enforcement less effective by increasing transparency, I choose to decrease law enforcement effectiveness. I'd rather citizens undermine the police by recording them then have citizens get shot without cause with little oversight. >> What I think should happen in law enforcement is that everything should be recorded. I agree. I would hope that in these "discussions" they're having with these groups to reach a compromise, that's the solution.

omgtehblackbloc 12y ago

Being a cop is legitimately dangerous Not really, no. It's just not that dangerous. We imagine it must be dangerous, and so do cops themselves. But you're a lot more likely to be killed as a garbage collector or airline pilot, or a construction worker, or plenty of other jobs. It's like with the "war on terror". The fear of danger is much more powerful than the danger itself. And like with terrorism, the fear is actively promoted for political reasons. They do what everyone does, what has to be done for policing to be viable. That seems like an argument against the department as a whole, not a justification for an individual's abuse. Most of the people they deal with are lowlifes, lyres, cheaters. Most of the people they deal with are ordinary innocent civilians whom they assume are "lowlifes" because they have been trained and conditioned to. That said, this following cops around only plays to the problem paradigm. It's harassment, like what paparazzi do. It's belligerent. Maybe it's valuable as a protest, but it isn't as solution. It is belligerent, and it is harassment, and it is protest. And that's the point. People with power do not voluntarily stop abusing it. They continue until met with resistance - until they are forced to stop. Unfortunately it's effectively suicide to physically force the cops to stop, but we should do everything we can short of that to stand up against them. Standing up against the cops sets an example for others that we don't need to fear them, that they don't deserve respect and deference, and that we can do something directly to stop their abuse.

JoeAltmaier 12y ago
Oh for pity's sake, follow a cop around some Saturday night downtown, before lecturing us on what a soft life a cop's job is. Deal with the belligerent drunks, entitled rich boys, teenagers with too much car and no sense. Enter a store that gave off a silent alarm, in the dark, all by yourself and tell me what a walk in the park it is. "Stand up against them"? See how lovely a world it is without them - what comes next is very much worse than what you're complaining about. Cops deserve respect and deference, if only because they stand for public order and that deserves it.
- keepper 12y ago
  Question a cop who's wrong about the law... Stand in front of your house in any major city as a minority... Walk down the street in any major city as a minority... The bad perceptions of the police have very real reasons behind them. Respect is EARNED, not given. Cops CHOSE to be cops, they are being compensated to be cops, the onus is on them, to take then danger. Not on the citizen. servi publici and all that comes with that...

sremani 12y ago

Over generalizations. That is not the case for many SubUrban and Rural PDs. Arlington is not peaceful but Arlington PD has episodes of dysfunction that all the N.Tex folks are aware of. The Illegal drugs for "juicing" episode and drug peddling with in the PD is latest episode. Most of the Arglington cops interact with ballpark, cowboys stadium and six flags/hurricane harbor folk. Even though its sixth biggest city in Texas - Arlington is more of a crowd management and driver safety-ish zone. So, not everything in Arlington is violent crime, no we are not talking about crompton or East LA - Arlington is way way better than those gang infested areas. Your narrative is inaccurate at best.

ndarilek 12y ago

There's a lot of idealism here. In general, I think it'd be great if the person pulling me over for speeding was different from the person who could violently shut down an armed robbery. It'd be great if the person arresting cyclists for biking unsafely, the person helping old ladies cross the street and the one breaking up family disputes was firewalled from the one with the gun. I live in a low-income apartment complex, and I try not to think much about the fact that my neighbor routinely calls people with guns to resolve non-violent disputes with her teenage daughter (I wish I was kidding or engaging in the slightest bit of hyperbole here.) I also think it'd be great if cops had cameras on them at all times, and if they voluntarily did that themselves. Unfortunately, that reality is a bit, well, unrealistic as well. My understanding is that APD has dash cams, but the footage often isn't released, especially in cases of suspected brutality, and often not even to those with an interest in clearing their names. Also, my understanding is that the Peaceful Streets folks arrested here never got their own cameras back, even though no charges were ultimately filed (I think the stolen camera count was at 4.) I don't know what the solution is, but I don't think it is "let the watchmen wear their own cameras and decide what footage to release."

netcan 12y ago
I think it's a long term thing. Having a camera on you at work takes getting used to and habits need to change (thats a big part of the point). "let the watchmen wear their own cameras" isn't all that outrageous. It's a momentum thing. If all cops were wearing cameras any incident without footage would be suspicious. I think it will happen eventually. I agree about internal investigations. They shouldn't be internal. Investigating police and other law enforcers should be a separate unit.
overdrivetg 12y ago
I've also been thinking lately that having 2 levels of "police" would actually be a good idea: normal (aka non-violent/immediately dangerous) incidents could be handled by mediators who could try to resolve the situation (and would hopefully develop a culture/reputation for helpfulness/playing the "Good Cop" role). So for things like speeding, jaywalking, etc - you could get pulled over and a talking to by a mediator. Then if there was a problem that couldn't be mediated/otherwise handled, only then would they call in an actual officer who could write tickets, use physical force, etc. Then it's very clear if you're being an ahole, you get to quickly deal with cops just like today. But if you're being reasonable, often disputes could be mediated without the confrontational baggage most police encounters today seem to engender. The key would also be that you prevent the "real" cops from dealing with these lower-level issues until AFTER they've been mediated, so the escalation process is very clear and unambiguous. Or at least require them to have a mediator show up to...mediate...first. Of course this is different from the environment in high-crime urban areas, but just as an example of how this can play out in a realistic way: the Burning Man festival has Rangers (mediators) who are there to help people resolve their own issues and handle minor incidents. In theory, the cops there are for backup in case of major incidents, but in practice they wind up being a pain in the a by literally being the "Fun Police" and shaking people down for minor alcohol and drug infractions. Pretty much the entire event's security needs are handled entirely by the Rangers and simple mediation. The police there could choose to be be a valuable community resource, but instead generally wind up being resented by most of the community due to (at least a perception of) having generally antagonistic and abusive attitudes. This dynamic is the real problem more than anything else IMO - both on and off-Playa. When large numbers of law-abiding citizens have a negative impression of your entire profession, something is definitely wrong.