6 ms·

Do you think your median cop in the US actually deals with "violent offenders" on a daily basis? If so, who defines what a "violent offender" is? (Hint: it's pr

by rmxt 11y ago

Do you think your median cop in the US actually deals with "violent offenders" on a daily basis? If so, who defines what a "violent offender" is? (Hint: it's probably the police officer him/herself, a pretty self-serving situation.) The point in all of this is that we no longer have to rely on such inconsistent and inaccurate first-hand definitions: body-cams, dash-cams and public access records would allow for a re-evaluation of all such interactions. If only police departments actually had the public's best interest in mind...

JoeAltmaier 11y ago
I live in a college town, so maybe I have a biased sample. But yes, I do believe so. A suggestion: could you do what you need to do, if someone were looking over your shoulder at all times? There is a chilling effect on good cops too - if anything at all they say and do results in a personal lawsuit, they stop being effective at all. A ride-along some Friday night has been known to change the opinion of many a critic. See what a cop has to deal with, no room for preconceived notions or idealistic predictions. As for the public interest - we don't want to live in a world without policemen. There is a wide literature on that subject.
- VLM 11y ago
  "we don't want to live in a world without policemen" No need for binary thinking. We already no longer have policemen, we have infantry soldiers trained in urban combat with "shoot first ask questions later" rules of engagement and military weapons, deployed with an us vs them attitude, considerable deeply embedded racism issues, and a strong organizational opposition to respecting the occupied area's resident's civil rights. Or, in summary, it sucks. I agree with you, in part, its not as bad as having no order at all, which is hardly the only alternative to what we have now. I'd like living in an area with a police force. Military occupation force, not so good. But "real cops" would be OK.
- rmxt 11y ago
  I don't do my job with a gun or a mandate to maintain law and order. To reiterate your earlier point: any comparison to any other job is an unfair one. It doesn't matter how I would behave if someone were looking over my shoulder, it only matters how much more insight and oversight the general public would have into those who supposedly serve them. To be cliche: "With great power comes great responsibility." We don't need to go on an in-person ride along on Friday night: we can put cameras on them and let the whole of posterity go on every ride-along. Your point about a chilling effect on good cops due to lawsuits seems flimsy. Potentially frivolous lawsuits won't be resource intensive because they would have hard and fast evidence (video) for a prosecutor or jury to make a decision on. Good cops that know they are good cops could act confidently, reassured that their protocol-following actions are recorded. Citizens that might otherwise be mouthy, physically resistant, or whatever else might behave better knowing that the camera is watching. It really seems like a win-win for all parties involved, except for the "bad apples" and their supporters. Also, I don't suggest that we disband police forces. I do believe that policing in the United States needs to be more "peace officer"-like rather than SWAT-like. I feel that we are trending towards the latter.
  - JoeAltmaier 11y ago
    Agreed. That all sounds good. I'm not sure about the 'good cops don't have anything to fear' argument, because of course every time they restrain any drunk, they have something to fear. Rich people hire lawyers; cops aren't rich. Cops use intimidation to quell a drunk; if you can get them to stand down and get their buddies to take them home, problem solved. The alternative in this brave new world of cop-surveillance may be to arrest them all instead. So it would change things.

by rmxt 11y ago

JoeAltmaier 11y ago

I live in a college town, so maybe I have a biased sample. But yes, I do believe so. A suggestion: could you do what you need to do, if someone were looking over your shoulder at all times? There is a chilling effect on good cops too - if anything at all they say and do results in a personal lawsuit, they stop being effective at all. A ride-along some Friday night has been known to change the opinion of many a critic. See what a cop has to deal with, no room for preconceived notions or idealistic predictions. As for the public interest - we don't want to live in a world without policemen. There is a wide literature on that subject.

VLM 11y ago
"we don't want to live in a world without policemen" No need for binary thinking. We already no longer have policemen, we have infantry soldiers trained in urban combat with "shoot first ask questions later" rules of engagement and military weapons, deployed with an us vs them attitude, considerable deeply embedded racism issues, and a strong organizational opposition to respecting the occupied area's resident's civil rights. Or, in summary, it sucks. I agree with you, in part, its not as bad as having no order at all, which is hardly the only alternative to what we have now. I'd like living in an area with a police force. Military occupation force, not so good. But "real cops" would be OK.
rmxt 11y ago
I don't do my job with a gun or a mandate to maintain law and order. To reiterate your earlier point: any comparison to any other job is an unfair one. It doesn't matter how I would behave if someone were looking over my shoulder, it only matters how much more insight and oversight the general public would have into those who supposedly serve them. To be cliche: "With great power comes great responsibility." We don't need to go on an in-person ride along on Friday night: we can put cameras on them and let the whole of posterity go on every ride-along. Your point about a chilling effect on good cops due to lawsuits seems flimsy. Potentially frivolous lawsuits won't be resource intensive because they would have hard and fast evidence (video) for a prosecutor or jury to make a decision on. Good cops that know they are good cops could act confidently, reassured that their protocol-following actions are recorded. Citizens that might otherwise be mouthy, physically resistant, or whatever else might behave better knowing that the camera is watching. It really seems like a win-win for all parties involved, except for the "bad apples" and their supporters. Also, I don't suggest that we disband police forces. I do believe that policing in the United States needs to be more "peace officer"-like rather than SWAT-like. I feel that we are trending towards the latter.
- JoeAltmaier 11y ago
  Agreed. That all sounds good. I'm not sure about the 'good cops don't have anything to fear' argument, because of course every time they restrain any drunk, they have something to fear. Rich people hire lawyers; cops aren't rich. Cops use intimidation to quell a drunk; if you can get them to stand down and get their buddies to take them home, problem solved. The alternative in this brave new world of cop-surveillance may be to arrest them all instead. So it would change things.