5 ms·

> The entire time, the officers' job is to protect themselves and their fellow officers. >This is unpopular, but I believe it to be true, I think. Your belief

by vdaniuk 12y ago

> The entire time, the officers' job is to protect themselves and their fellow officers. >This is unpopular, but I believe it to be true, I think. Your belief is simply wrong. The risk of dying in a line of duty for cops is quite low, being a LE is not even in the first top 10 dangerous professions. Most deaths are due to the traffic incidents.[0] >Aaron was a great kid, but the majority of people brought into the station aren't. Who defines that? Police? Nice circular logic you've got there. Until the court says otherwise they are citizens whose rights should be upheld as much as possible. Also it's great that US has such upstanding citizens as you, protecting the real opressed minority - policemen. If Aaron would be wearing his shoes, who knows what grave harm could he do to a police station full of armed cops? EDIT I digged a little deeper and found out that number of police deaths in the line of duty during latest years had been around 100/year[1]. At least 1450 were people killed by police since May 2013[2]. I don't wish that on you but there would be a certain ironical justice if police apologists like you would experience non-lethal brutality themeselves. Maybe then you would learn something. [0]http://www.theagitator.com/2007/12/28/how-dangerous-is-police-work/ http://www.theagitator.com/2007/12/28/how-dangerous-is-polic... [1]http://www.nleomf.org/facts/officer-fatalities-data/year.html http://www.nleomf.org/facts/officer-fatalities-data/year.htm... [2]http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/another-much-higher-count-of-police-homicides/ http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/another-much-higher-count...

bane 12y ago
So for police it's a binary outcome? Either they handle a suspect and everthing is peaches and cream or they die? You need to go spend some time in a police station, do some ride-alongs. Here's a number, in 2012 ~53,000 officers were assaulted in the line of duty. Those assaults could have happened from arresting a dangerous gunman to booking a 130 pound 24 year old for B&E. It's important to have perspective about what police do and deal with everyday. They aren't acting irrationally. There really are reasons for why they do what they do, even if we disagree with their actions.
- vdaniuk 12y ago
  >It's important to have perspective about what police do and deal with everyday. They aren't acting irrationally. Sure they aren't. Most of them are psychopaths(yes,"psychopath" term is not a perfect model for describing personality disorders, deal with it) who are using their privileged position and monopoly on violence to satisfy their urge for power and control. It is perfectly rational if you understand that police are NOT there to "serve and protect" you and not legally obliged to protect you and are blue wall of silence covers up "the bad apples".
  - bane 12y ago
    > Most of them are psychopaths That's quite a claim. Demonstrate it.
    - vdaniuk 12y ago
      I certainly can't do it in a rigorous, scientific manner. However, my line of thinking is as follows. Persons with antisocial personality diaorder ( a correct term) fail to exhibit guilt, empathy or admit the responsibility for their actions among other factors. That is consistent with general, averaged cop behavior in US and existence of blue wall of silence that effectively prohibits making those accountable for multiple transgressions accountable. But yeah, I was too irritated by apologists and didn't use enough guarding. I'll admit that I have no proof of "most" police officers being psychopathic. I am sure many of them are, though.
  - shitehawk 12y ago
    We need every cop to wear cams as soon as possible. Then all these "the cop is the perp and the perp is the victim" idiots can watch the videos and shut up.
- NoMoreNicksLeft 12y ago
  > Here's a number, in 2012 ~53,000 officers were assaulted in the line of duty. One of those assaults was a suspect bleeding on their uniforms as he was having his head stomped. They charged him with destruction of government property for his blood stains. Of course, I don't think just one of those 53,000 was like this. It wasn't a fluke.
- discardorama 12y ago
  Whenever police end up using force, they inevitably attach the "assault of police officer" charge, to justify their use of force. If they did not, the defence could ask: well, why did you beat him up?
  - bane 12y ago
    That's not really correct. It does happen, but not as a typical case. I'd be interested in independent and unbiased studies of violence against police officers if you have any.
coldtea 12y ago
>Here's a number, in 2012 ~53,000 officers were assaulted in the line of duty. Those assaults could have happened from arresting a dangerous gunman to booking a 130 pound 24 year old for B&E. Here's another number, most of those numbers are BS incidents reported by the police as "assaults" (much like the black guy shot that was said to "hold a gun"), and a lot of those are provoked by the police too. Ask yourself how Germany (1/5 of the US in population) manages have its police use a total of 85-100 bullets in a whole year (for every city / policeman / incident in aggregate!), whereas a US police team can fire more than 90 in just one incident: http://www.theweek.co.uk/crime/46907/us-police-fire-more-bullets-month-germans-use-year http://www.theweek.co.uk/crime/46907/us-police-fire-more-bul...
- bane 12y ago
  > Here's another number, most of those numbers are BS incidents reported by the police as "assaults" That's a) not a number b) prove it American police are definitely out of control. No disagreement from me on that matter. But their job also has risks, and unlike what vdaniuk and other naive people here seem to think the two options for an officer are not "make it through their day having pleasant exchanges with every person they meet" and "die in the most horrible manner possible". I understand that you don't like the police. Most people, myself included, have trouble with the amount of power the police have assumed and the amount of power the courts have allowed the police to hold on to. But I'm also capable of rational thinking on the matter instead of diving into immediate hyperbole whenever the word "police" are brought up. I understand that it makes you emotional and brings up all kinds of feelings of injustice. But your arguments just become troll fodder when they start the way you've started your argument. And you've only simulated the appearance of rationality by bringing German police shootings into the matter, something almost completely non-sequitur and demonstrating your lack of rational thought on the issue. This is why policy shouldn't be made on emotional input like yours. Because then the system would be optimized for petty theft and people that swear on Sundays and have no capacity to handle higher modes of human failure, or it would be the opposite and be completely punitive regardless of the arrest circumstances.
  - coldtea 12y ago
borski 12y ago
Whoa. Let's be clear: I am not an apologist for anything, and I do not appreciate the ad hominem at all. I am, on the other hand, capable of realizing that police officers do have a dangerous job (by definition, actually), and that it is their right to protect themselves and their fellow officers, as well as our fellow citizens. I am not excusing any sort of unjust death or brutality, but nobody was brutalized here. I watched the video just like you. Yes, they gave him a hard time for not knowing his social security number; that could have been handled better. But that's it. As for who defines whether he is or isn't a good kid: that's just my point, it is /not/ the booking officer. That is, the booking officer has no idea whether Aaron was just brought in for a stolen bicycle as a suspect, or whether he had been seen beating a helpless old man with his own cane. Nobody defines it for the officer, I am simply stating the obvious: Aaron was a good kid, but it is entirely possible that a worse kid could have been brought in, with worse intentions, and the officers who were booking him would have been none the wiser.

by vdaniuk 12y ago

bane 12y ago

So for police it's a binary outcome? Either they handle a suspect and everthing is peaches and cream or they die? You need to go spend some time in a police station, do some ride-alongs. Here's a number, in 2012 ~53,000 officers were assaulted in the line of duty. Those assaults could have happened from arresting a dangerous gunman to booking a 130 pound 24 year old for B&E. It's important to have perspective about what police do and deal with everyday. They aren't acting irrationally. There really are reasons for why they do what they do, even if we disagree with their actions.

vdaniuk 12y ago
>It's important to have perspective about what police do and deal with everyday. They aren't acting irrationally. Sure they aren't. Most of them are psychopaths(yes,"psychopath" term is not a perfect model for describing personality disorders, deal with it) who are using their privileged position and monopoly on violence to satisfy their urge for power and control. It is perfectly rational if you understand that police are NOT there to "serve and protect" you and not legally obliged to protect you and are blue wall of silence covers up "the bad apples".
- bane 12y ago
  > Most of them are psychopaths That's quite a claim. Demonstrate it.
  - vdaniuk 12y ago
    I certainly can't do it in a rigorous, scientific manner. However, my line of thinking is as follows. Persons with antisocial personality diaorder ( a correct term) fail to exhibit guilt, empathy or admit the responsibility for their actions among other factors. That is consistent with general, averaged cop behavior in US and existence of blue wall of silence that effectively prohibits making those accountable for multiple transgressions accountable. But yeah, I was too irritated by apologists and didn't use enough guarding. I'll admit that I have no proof of "most" police officers being psychopathic. I am sure many of them are, though.
- shitehawk 12y ago
  We need every cop to wear cams as soon as possible. Then all these "the cop is the perp and the perp is the victim" idiots can watch the videos and shut up.
NoMoreNicksLeft 12y ago
> Here's a number, in 2012 ~53,000 officers were assaulted in the line of duty. One of those assaults was a suspect bleeding on their uniforms as he was having his head stomped. They charged him with destruction of government property for his blood stains. Of course, I don't think just one of those 53,000 was like this. It wasn't a fluke.
discardorama 12y ago
Whenever police end up using force, they inevitably attach the "assault of police officer" charge, to justify their use of force. If they did not, the defence could ask: well, why did you beat him up?
- bane 12y ago
  That's not really correct. It does happen, but not as a typical case. I'd be interested in independent and unbiased studies of violence against police officers if you have any.

coldtea 12y ago

>Here's a number, in 2012 ~53,000 officers were assaulted in the line of duty. Those assaults could have happened from arresting a dangerous gunman to booking a 130 pound 24 year old for B&E. Here's another number, most of those numbers are BS incidents reported by the police as "assaults" (much like the black guy shot that was said to "hold a gun"), and a lot of those are provoked by the police too. Ask yourself how Germany (1/5 of the US in population) manages have its police use a total of 85-100 bullets in a whole year (for every city / policeman / incident in aggregate!), whereas a US police team can fire more than 90 in just one incident: http://www.theweek.co.uk/crime/46907/us-police-fire-more-bullets-month-germans-use-year http://www.theweek.co.uk/crime/46907/us-police-fire-more-bul...

bane 12y ago
> Here's another number, most of those numbers are BS incidents reported by the police as "assaults" That's a) not a number b) prove it American police are definitely out of control. No disagreement from me on that matter. But their job also has risks, and unlike what vdaniuk and other naive people here seem to think the two options for an officer are not "make it through their day having pleasant exchanges with every person they meet" and "die in the most horrible manner possible". I understand that you don't like the police. Most people, myself included, have trouble with the amount of power the police have assumed and the amount of power the courts have allowed the police to hold on to. But I'm also capable of rational thinking on the matter instead of diving into immediate hyperbole whenever the word "police" are brought up. I understand that it makes you emotional and brings up all kinds of feelings of injustice. But your arguments just become troll fodder when they start the way you've started your argument. And you've only simulated the appearance of rationality by bringing German police shootings into the matter, something almost completely non-sequitur and demonstrating your lack of rational thought on the issue. This is why policy shouldn't be made on emotional input like yours. Because then the system would be optimized for petty theft and people that swear on Sundays and have no capacity to handle higher modes of human failure, or it would be the opposite and be completely punitive regardless of the arrest circumstances.
- coldtea 12y ago

borski 12y ago

Whoa. Let's be clear: I am not an apologist for anything, and I do not appreciate the ad hominem at all. I am, on the other hand, capable of realizing that police officers do have a dangerous job (by definition, actually), and that it is their right to protect themselves and their fellow officers, as well as our fellow citizens. I am not excusing any sort of unjust death or brutality, but nobody was brutalized here. I watched the video just like you. Yes, they gave him a hard time for not knowing his social security number; that could have been handled better. But that's it. As for who defines whether he is or isn't a good kid: that's just my point, it is /not/ the booking officer. That is, the booking officer has no idea whether Aaron was just brought in for a stolen bicycle as a suspect, or whether he had been seen beating a helpless old man with his own cane. Nobody defines it for the officer, I am simply stating the obvious: Aaron was a good kid, but it is entirely possible that a worse kid could have been brought in, with worse intentions, and the officers who were booking him would have been none the wiser.