14 ms·

This is a really well written article. This also echo's alot of the sentiment that many people have. I remember reading recently about the differences in poli

by jxm262 11y ago

This is a really well written article. This also echo's alot of the sentiment that many people have. I remember reading recently about the differences in police training from Germany vs the US. One of the things that stuck out at me was the huge amount of hours they spend training to "not" shoot, and learning how to de-escalate situations. It's no wonder we have so many issues here in the US, it makes me sad.

tajen 11y ago
What does it mean for us Europeans, who still have, for the moment, more lenient police? Should we expect that America uprises against their own police? Draw a Fergusson every 3 months? Becomes either less economically stable or more economically agressive? Should we expect that US' political influence requires us to step up our police, the same way France escalated an NSA-style law six months ago? It worries me that a friend country's police goes more totalitarian, but are there actual consequences on us? It's an open question. For the last 6 years I've refused to set foot in US (and even declined free tickets to a very important tech conference in my field) because of your unpredictable trigger-friendly police [1] and your guantanamo-friendly interviews at border control [2]. I wonder it your unstability could reach me in Europe. [1] Being a foreigner, I'm not protected by your constitution and the officers haven't sworn to protect and serve me. [2] I do believe an intent to go to a conference could randomly be recategorized as seeking work, which is illegal, and using a false Facebook name could be recategorized as identity theft. I do believe it's therefore possible to be retained at your border for an undefined amount of time, with no record and no rights to a lawyer. I do believe I'd be upset in this situation and I could end up sentenced for life in your prisons.
- maxerickson 11y ago
  Your reaction is extreme. Working professionals from rich countries that come to the US on short term Visas are not subjected to intense scrutiny. No one is prosecuted for the name on their Facebook account.
  - Elrac 11y ago
    You need to be a bit more careful with sweeping generalizations like "no one." Here are two cases just off the top of my head that almost perfectly contradict what you wrote. http://thetyee.ca/News/2007/04/23/Feldmar/ http://thetyee.ca/News/2007/04/23/Feldmar/ http://www.zdnet.com/article/think-before-you-tweet-why-two-teenagers-were-refused-entry-to-the-u-s/ http://www.zdnet.com/article/think-before-you-tweet-why-two-...
    - rory096 11y ago
      While those incidents are obviously outrageous, refusal at the border isn't the same as prosecution and certainly nobody was sentenced to life imprisonment.
      - Elrac 11y ago
        I grant part of that. But now _you_ have to tell me: How do you claim to know that no one was arrested and suffered life imprisonment? The point you seem to be missing is that you have no way of knowing! This is the "wonderful" thing about the Patriot Act: Even as an American citizen, you could be disappeared and shipped to a foreign country for torturing... and there's a good chance no one would find out, for years, maybe forever. I don't think you have an idea of how significant this is. America does not operate under the rule of law.
        rory096 11y ago
        >The border guard then escorted him to his car and made sure he did a U-turn and went back to Canada. >To their surprise, however, when they arrived at L.A. International, they were not only detained and questioned at length by U.S. authorities, but were swiftly -- after a night in the cells, naturally -- plonked back on a plane back to England, and barred from entering the United States again. I'm not sure what you mean. They were each returned to their respective countries.
        fian 11y ago
- Elrac 11y ago
  For what it's worth, I feel the same way as you do about the US, and I'm a US citizen. I've told friends that I may return to the US "when the US becomes a democracy again." Unchecked police brutality is just one of a complex of problems I see in the news: The private for-profit prison industry that lobbies for more and longer incarcerations, the bail-and-debt system, civil forfeitures, plea bargaining, the unabashed wiretapping and widespread weakening of 4th Amendment rights... if you describe the US system of "justice" to a neutral party, he will guess you're talking about Russia or maybe North Korea. To answer your question, whether that state reaches Europe depends on whether the US' war of the rich on the poor spreads to Europe. The statesmen of the US are cheaply purchased pawns of various rich industries, and law & order are replaced by high-tech feudalism. If Europe finds itself ruled by corrupt evil clowns like the US is, then we'll see similar conditions here. That said, I have no idea how it will go. I have no knack at all for predicting politics. I'm betting on kicking the bucket before shit hits the fan.
- smhg 11y ago
  > For the last 6 years I've refused to set foot in US I have never been to the US, and although a trip to California would be an obvious to-do in my profession, the main reason I don't consider it is the death penalty. It sounds so unattractive to visit countries stuck with such laws. Despite all the nice things they have to offer. It might be easier to understand from a European perspective. [1] [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_in_Europe https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_in_Europe
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
  - wtbob 11y ago
    > I have never been to the US, and although a trip to California would be an obvious to-do in my profession, the main reason I don't consider it is the death penalty. Don't kill anyone and you'll be good. Or perhaps you're actually concerned about false conviction, which is a different problem and no less bad when someone spend the rest of his life in prison
- powertower 11y ago
  > Draw a Fergusson every 3 months? The majority of what you have been told by your media are "narrative" stories that are removed of all actual facts and details (to fit the narrative). Its pure politics. For example, in the Ferguson case, you where told that the police officer (Darren Wilson) saw Michael Brown, and for whatever reason, just murdered him on the spot, by shooting him through the back of his head - all while Michael Brown was doing nothing wrong, and holding his hands up. Except none of that is true. Here is the basic outline of what happened instead - http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/ferguson-shooting-13-facts/2014/11/25/id/609483/ http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/ferguson-shooting-13-facts/... Or here - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Michael_Brown https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Michael_Brown And that's still leaving allot out. In the case of Trayvon Martin, the spin was even worse. This is a racist "white" man - http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2013/02/06/zimmerman-brother-voted-obama/ http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2013/02/06/zimmerman... And a watermelon soda is an ice tea - http://www.examiner.com/article/trayvon-s-skittles-arizona-tea-and-something-called-purple-drank http://www.examiner.com/article/trayvon-s-skittles-arizona-t... I'm assuming the later was "modified" in the produced story by all the left-leaning news outlets because it was too stereotypical / and the narrative must be protected. If you don't believe it, check the crime seen photos and the court records - I did. And that's about 5% of the falsehood story. I could go on and on. > Should we expect that America uprises against their own police? Cops kill a reported 500 or so people every year. Maybe twice that much in real numbers. The majority of those people are violent criminals - some of which are firing at cops, using knifes to stab cops, garbing at cops' guns, using vehicles to run cops over, etc. Why would anyone that is not delusional with the political media spin revolt against cops?
  - evan_ 11y ago
    Sorry but you're going to need to explain why having watermelon soda is a shoot-on-sight offense, and why it matters that it's soda and not ice tea.
    - powertower 11y ago
      > , and why it matters that it's soda and not ice tea. It matters that it was a manufactured lie. The "ice tea and skittles" was also mentioned every time the name Trayvon Martin was mentioned. Every. Single. Time. So it must have also had a great importance to everything and everyone. And the point was to show how these stories are manufactured by removing facts, and replacing them with the narrative... A young 12 year old kid just getting some ice tea and skittles on a bright sunny day - murdered by a white racist who had no injuries, was not arrested, was not handcuffed and taken-in, etc (all points proven false). > Sorry but you're going to need to explain why having watermelon soda is a shoot-on-sight offense Why would I have to explain it? What you just said is completely made up, and you are the one saying it. Trayvon was shot because he was beating Zimmerman's head into the pavement. They both made mistakes, it escalated. And everything that was reported was spun to the narrative.
- adventured 11y ago
  The next US response will be gradual de-escalation of its police aggressiveness. The beginning of the end of the war on drugs, body cameras, attention being cast on asset seizures and minimum mandatory sentencing - it has become obvious to most of the population that over the last 30 years the policing system has gotten out of control. You know it's understood to be bad when the president is openly discussing how much worse imprisonment is in the US than other countries, and becomes the first sitting president to visit a federal prison.
  - mcherm 11y ago
    Except that it is possible this will become politicized. If one party becomes identified as the party supporting prison and law enforcement reform then the other party will then by default have to be the party opposing that. Then when THEY get into office they will oppose reforms. I hope this politicization does not happen but I am worried it may.
- nickff 11y ago
  I am not a US citizen, a supporter of the militarization of the police, or their unchecked use of power, but your third (numbered) point: "[1] Being a foreigner, I'm not protected by your constitution and the officers haven't sworn to protect and serve me." is incorrect. All persons on US soil are protected by the US constitution, whether citizens or not. Your (confusingly) similarly enumerated point earlier "[1] and your guantanamo-friendly interviews at border control" is also flawed, as there is no possible way (of which I am aware) for US Customs and Immigration to send you to Guantanamo Bay without the assent of the country you are leaving. US C&I can turn you back, or temporarily detain you, and have a great deal of latitude with respect to questioning and searches, but you are always protected by the US constitution and possibly the laws of the country you are attempting to leave depending on where you are being questioned. The reason that people were allowed to be transported to Guantanamo Bay is that they were captured as unaffiliated combatants (who are allotted few rights in the Geneva Convention,) within the borders of a country whose sovereign granted the USA custody, and allowed deportation for detention without conditions.
  - taejo 11y ago
    > All persons on US soil are protected by the US constitution, whether citizens or not. That's my reading, too, but it's not clear that it's government's reading.
- ahomescu1 11y ago
  > It's an open question. For the last 6 years I've refused to set foot in US (and even declined free tickets to a very important tech conference in my field) because of your unpredictable trigger-friendly police [1] and your guantanamo-friendly interviews at border control [2]. I wonder it your unstability could reach me in Europe. This seems excessive to me, you're not going to run into the cops going to a tech conference. I've lived in the US for the past 5 years, and never had any issues with police or border control. In fact, I'd go as far as saying that the part of California I live in (Orange County) is safer than my home country in Europe.
- Shivetya 11y ago
  In Europe you are more likely to have lightly if unarmed cops because its more acceptable to have troops with fully automatic weapons deployed. I still remember quite a few pictures of such at airports if not on the streets so six of one, half dozen of another.
mc32 11y ago
For sure our police more often than necessary become very aggro. It may have to do with knowing anyone could own and possess either legal or illegal firearms. We need to reconcile gun ownership with the violence it can allow and our desire for less aggro policing. That said police most definitely need to be trained to deescallate rather than automatically double down. We need to seriously emphasize de-escalation.
- guns 11y ago
  > It may have to do with knowing anyone could own and possess either legal or illegal firearms. While this may have an influence, it's important to remember that police officers are also trained to be wary of knives: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_KJ1R2PCMM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_KJ1R2PCMM You can't totally disarm a population, so there are diminishing returns on this front.
  - RoboSeldon 11y ago
    While this may have an influence, it's important to remember that police officers are also trained to be wary of knives Are you seriously comparing a knife with a firearm ?
    - eric_h 11y ago
      Within about 3-5 feet, a knife is just as dangerous as a firearm.
      - RoboSeldon 11y ago
        Lets try a metal experiment, you have your knife and 3 enemies attack you at the same time. How many can you neutralize from 5 feet with your knife ? Suppose you have special training and you can throw your knife and kill one of them, you still have 2 ... Try the same mental experiment when you have a firearm in your hand ... You can inflict much more damage with a firearm even without special training (not everybody can throw a knife and do some damages).
grecy 11y ago
> differences in police training from Germany vs the US To highlight this even more, Police in Germany used only 85 bullets in all of 2001 [1]. Given their population is about 4x lower than the US, the equivalent would be the Police in all of the US using only ~340 bullets for a year. In reality, The police in the US have KILLED over 400 people this year already. [1] http://www.thewire.com/global/2012/05/german-police-used-only-85-bullets-against-people-2011/52162/ http://www.thewire.com/global/2012/05/german-police-used-onl...
- StavrosK 11y ago
  Making the fact that they did it with only 340 bullets all the more impressive!
- noinsight 11y ago
  In Norway police only fired two shots in 2014. In Finland, 6 shots in 2013. http://www.thelocal.no/20150706/norway-police-shot-guns-twice-in-2014 http://www.thelocal.no/20150706/norway-police-shot-guns-twic... http://yle.fi/uutiset/finnish_police_fired_guns_only_six_times_in_2013/7701005 http://yle.fi/uutiset/finnish_police_fired_guns_only_six_tim...
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
- _yosefk 11y ago
  I don't think the amount of bullets used by the police in different places can be meaningfully compared without knowing the number of bullets fired at the police. Edit: a sister comment cites numbers according to which almost 8 times as many police officers are killed in the US than in Germany per capita. Of course the real question is how many are attacked; if the police is better at gunfights than the criminals it is not a cause for alarm, rather the opposite.
  - colechristensen 11y ago
    Don't overlook the very likely strong coupling between the bullets fired 'at' and 'by' police and how it likely goes both ways. People want to shoot at police because police shoot at people so often is probably just as true as the converse. This is likely both true at the macro and micro level. That is, police behavior escalates individual situations into shootings which otherwise, with better training, could have ended peacefully. _And_ with the culture of police quick to use force, people are more inclined to acquire weapons and use them during criminal activity. Police positions on the usage and scale of force is a self-fulfilling prophecy. A violent, forceful police will create a violent, forceful criminal. Which side you believe has more to do with your internal bias. Do you believe that police are violent because criminals are or do you believe criminals are violent because police are? It's neither, though. It's a systematic problem with a systematic solution. Placing the blame isn't important, finding the solution is. You can do a little by trying to help people out of the situations where they're motivated to crime. You can do a lot by helping police nudge the outcome of interactions towards peaceful solutions. The media whipping everyone into a frenzy over every contentious interaction doesn't help anybody.
vowelless 11y ago
> One of the things that stuck out at me was the huge amount of hours they spend training to "not" shoot, and learning how to de-escalate situations. I think that the likelihood of civilians being armed in the US is a lot higher than in Germany, so I can imagine why American cops are a little more paranoid. I've seen cops put a hand on their gun as they approach suspects, which I think is part of the training here. I wonder how many cops in America get killed in line of duty compared to Germany.
- fixxer 11y ago
  When I was growing up in LA in the 80s, several family friends were cops in rougher areas like Hawaiian Gardens, etc. I recall hearing multiple times that engaging with violent force was discouraged because they never knew what kind hellfire was going to erupt. They proceeded with extreme caution and did not act like warrior cops. If there was any doubt, they backed way up. Now, I'm well aware of the sins of LAPD in that era, but with regard to use of violent force and this damned finger-on-the-trigger mentality, I really feel like this has been a post-2003 evolution in tactics. It wasn't always like this. I don't remember being nervous about getting shot during a traffic stop. Hell, I can even recall two distinct occasions where SWAT was deployed to my house because I had hit the emergency button on my phone (rediculous, I know). In those cases, guns were drawn, but they weren't aimed and extreme caution was taken.
  - hellbanner 11y ago
    You hit the emergency 911 button and SWAT instead of regular police showed up? What kind of button was that?
    - fixxer 11y ago
      Kinda funny. I was about 10 and after the button was hit, it went on speaker and dispatch was listening for ~10 minutes trying to figure out what was going on. Second time was less funny.
- Mithaldu 11y ago
  No direct comparison, but, police officers killed in germany: http://www.corsipo.de/ http://www.corsipo.de/ (probably incomplete, but <5 per year) In the usa: http://www.governing.com/gov-data/safety-justice/US-Law-Enforcement-Officer-Deaths-annual-totals.html http://www.governing.com/gov-data/safety-justice/US-Law-Enfo... Extrapolating that into numbers: DEU: <0.6 police officers killed per 10 mio citizens :::: USA: ~4.6 police officers killed per 10 mio citizens Meanwhile the number of police kills are roughly: DEU: ~1 person killed by police per 10 mio citizens :::: USA: ~12.5 persons killed by police per 10 mio citizens The ratios are not all that far apart: DEU: ~1.7 persons killed per police officer death :::: USA: ~2.7 persons killed per police officer death
maxxxxx 11y ago
When I did my compulsory military duty in Germany I ended up being military police. We had a lot of interactions with American MPs due to the US military being stationed there. We always joked about how they behaved like movie action heroes, always ready to use force. We were trained to avoid confrontation at almost any price. When in doubt, retreat. I guess it's a different view on law "enforcement".
- brownbat 11y ago
  Huh, why don't criminals in Germany exploit this, always threaten confrontation and have their run of the city? EDIT: Granted there's a big difference between trying to deescalate when possible and raiding a sleeping guy's apartment on bad info. EDIT 2: This was an honest question and I felt like I got good answers despite the downvoting. Big thanks to everyone who took it at face value or applied the principle of charity, rather than just assuming I'm some kind of disruptive monster. http://philosophy.lander.edu/oriental/charity.html http://philosophy.lander.edu/oriental/charity.html
  - maxxxxx 11y ago
    Because the German cops are not push overs either. If somebody will attack them they will fight back. But by trying to deescalate first you set the tone for the interaction. Most of the recently published police violence in the US seems to come from really trivial situations, not from criminals. I watched the Sandra Bland video. The cop stops her for a trivial traffic violation (I often forget my turns signals too and I see a lot of people doing that too). She responds in an aggravated way. Instead of trying to defuse the situation he makes it worse by telling her to put out the cigarette. Why would you do that? This sounds like a pure ego-trip where the cop wants to assert his total dominance. He could have given her a ticket and just left.
    - brownbat 11y ago
      Thanks, I really appreciate your response, that adds useful context to your earlier comment.
    - 11y ago
serge2k 11y ago
I remember hearing about hwo the US military attempts to de-escalate first but the police don't.
kcbanner 11y ago
It does seem like the US officers prefer to shoot and ask questions later.
jotm 11y ago
Yeah, I was reading an article about how a police officer was forced to shoot an attacker... in the foot. It was kinda funny, which was sad. The guy had a knife and charged towards the officer, he fired off a warning shot in the air and then shot him in the foot. And he was very apologetic about it. Not the usual "I feared for my safety so I put 5 rounds in his center mass" we see from American police.

by jxm262 11y ago

tajen 11y ago

What does it mean for us Europeans, who still have, for the moment, more lenient police? Should we expect that America uprises against their own police? Draw a Fergusson every 3 months? Becomes either less economically stable or more economically agressive? Should we expect that US' political influence requires us to step up our police, the same way France escalated an NSA-style law six months ago? It worries me that a friend country's police goes more totalitarian, but are there actual consequences on us? It's an open question. For the last 6 years I've refused to set foot in US (and even declined free tickets to a very important tech conference in my field) because of your unpredictable trigger-friendly police [1] and your guantanamo-friendly interviews at border control [2]. I wonder it your unstability could reach me in Europe. [1] Being a foreigner, I'm not protected by your constitution and the officers haven't sworn to protect and serve me. [2] I do believe an intent to go to a conference could randomly be recategorized as seeking work, which is illegal, and using a false Facebook name could be recategorized as identity theft. I do believe it's therefore possible to be retained at your border for an undefined amount of time, with no record and no rights to a lawyer. I do believe I'd be upset in this situation and I could end up sentenced for life in your prisons.

maxerickson 11y ago
Your reaction is extreme. Working professionals from rich countries that come to the US on short term Visas are not subjected to intense scrutiny. No one is prosecuted for the name on their Facebook account.
- Elrac 11y ago
  You need to be a bit more careful with sweeping generalizations like "no one." Here are two cases just off the top of my head that almost perfectly contradict what you wrote. http://thetyee.ca/News/2007/04/23/Feldmar/ http://thetyee.ca/News/2007/04/23/Feldmar/ http://www.zdnet.com/article/think-before-you-tweet-why-two-teenagers-were-refused-entry-to-the-u-s/ http://www.zdnet.com/article/think-before-you-tweet-why-two-...
  - rory096 11y ago
    While those incidents are obviously outrageous, refusal at the border isn't the same as prosecution and certainly nobody was sentenced to life imprisonment.
    - Elrac 11y ago
      I grant part of that. But now _you_ have to tell me: How do you claim to know that no one was arrested and suffered life imprisonment? The point you seem to be missing is that you have no way of knowing! This is the "wonderful" thing about the Patriot Act: Even as an American citizen, you could be disappeared and shipped to a foreign country for torturing... and there's a good chance no one would find out, for years, maybe forever. I don't think you have an idea of how significant this is. America does not operate under the rule of law.
      - rory096 11y ago
        >The border guard then escorted him to his car and made sure he did a U-turn and went back to Canada. >To their surprise, however, when they arrived at L.A. International, they were not only detained and questioned at length by U.S. authorities, but were swiftly -- after a night in the cells, naturally -- plonked back on a plane back to England, and barred from entering the United States again. I'm not sure what you mean. They were each returned to their respective countries.
        fian 11y ago
Elrac 11y ago
For what it's worth, I feel the same way as you do about the US, and I'm a US citizen. I've told friends that I may return to the US "when the US becomes a democracy again." Unchecked police brutality is just one of a complex of problems I see in the news: The private for-profit prison industry that lobbies for more and longer incarcerations, the bail-and-debt system, civil forfeitures, plea bargaining, the unabashed wiretapping and widespread weakening of 4th Amendment rights... if you describe the US system of "justice" to a neutral party, he will guess you're talking about Russia or maybe North Korea. To answer your question, whether that state reaches Europe depends on whether the US' war of the rich on the poor spreads to Europe. The statesmen of the US are cheaply purchased pawns of various rich industries, and law & order are replaced by high-tech feudalism. If Europe finds itself ruled by corrupt evil clowns like the US is, then we'll see similar conditions here. That said, I have no idea how it will go. I have no knack at all for predicting politics. I'm betting on kicking the bucket before shit hits the fan.
smhg 11y ago
> For the last 6 years I've refused to set foot in US I have never been to the US, and although a trip to California would be an obvious to-do in my profession, the main reason I don't consider it is the death penalty. It sounds so unattractive to visit countries stuck with such laws. Despite all the nice things they have to offer. It might be easier to understand from a European perspective. [1] [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_in_Europe https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_in_Europe
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- wtbob 11y ago
  > I have never been to the US, and although a trip to California would be an obvious to-do in my profession, the main reason I don't consider it is the death penalty. Don't kill anyone and you'll be good. Or perhaps you're actually concerned about false conviction, which is a different problem and no less bad when someone spend the rest of his life in prison
powertower 11y ago
> Draw a Fergusson every 3 months? The majority of what you have been told by your media are "narrative" stories that are removed of all actual facts and details (to fit the narrative). Its pure politics. For example, in the Ferguson case, you where told that the police officer (Darren Wilson) saw Michael Brown, and for whatever reason, just murdered him on the spot, by shooting him through the back of his head - all while Michael Brown was doing nothing wrong, and holding his hands up. Except none of that is true. Here is the basic outline of what happened instead - http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/ferguson-shooting-13-facts/2014/11/25/id/609483/ http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/ferguson-shooting-13-facts/... Or here - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Michael_Brown https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Michael_Brown And that's still leaving allot out. In the case of Trayvon Martin, the spin was even worse. This is a racist "white" man - http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2013/02/06/zimmerman-brother-voted-obama/ http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2013/02/06/zimmerman... And a watermelon soda is an ice tea - http://www.examiner.com/article/trayvon-s-skittles-arizona-tea-and-something-called-purple-drank http://www.examiner.com/article/trayvon-s-skittles-arizona-t... I'm assuming the later was "modified" in the produced story by all the left-leaning news outlets because it was too stereotypical / and the narrative must be protected. If you don't believe it, check the crime seen photos and the court records - I did. And that's about 5% of the falsehood story. I could go on and on. > Should we expect that America uprises against their own police? Cops kill a reported 500 or so people every year. Maybe twice that much in real numbers. The majority of those people are violent criminals - some of which are firing at cops, using knifes to stab cops, garbing at cops' guns, using vehicles to run cops over, etc. Why would anyone that is not delusional with the political media spin revolt against cops?
- evan_ 11y ago
  Sorry but you're going to need to explain why having watermelon soda is a shoot-on-sight offense, and why it matters that it's soda and not ice tea.
  - powertower 11y ago
    > , and why it matters that it's soda and not ice tea. It matters that it was a manufactured lie. The "ice tea and skittles" was also mentioned every time the name Trayvon Martin was mentioned. Every. Single. Time. So it must have also had a great importance to everything and everyone. And the point was to show how these stories are manufactured by removing facts, and replacing them with the narrative... A young 12 year old kid just getting some ice tea and skittles on a bright sunny day - murdered by a white racist who had no injuries, was not arrested, was not handcuffed and taken-in, etc (all points proven false). > Sorry but you're going to need to explain why having watermelon soda is a shoot-on-sight offense Why would I have to explain it? What you just said is completely made up, and you are the one saying it. Trayvon was shot because he was beating Zimmerman's head into the pavement. They both made mistakes, it escalated. And everything that was reported was spun to the narrative.
adventured 11y ago
The next US response will be gradual de-escalation of its police aggressiveness. The beginning of the end of the war on drugs, body cameras, attention being cast on asset seizures and minimum mandatory sentencing - it has become obvious to most of the population that over the last 30 years the policing system has gotten out of control. You know it's understood to be bad when the president is openly discussing how much worse imprisonment is in the US than other countries, and becomes the first sitting president to visit a federal prison.
- mcherm 11y ago
  Except that it is possible this will become politicized. If one party becomes identified as the party supporting prison and law enforcement reform then the other party will then by default have to be the party opposing that. Then when THEY get into office they will oppose reforms. I hope this politicization does not happen but I am worried it may.
nickff 11y ago
I am not a US citizen, a supporter of the militarization of the police, or their unchecked use of power, but your third (numbered) point: "[1] Being a foreigner, I'm not protected by your constitution and the officers haven't sworn to protect and serve me." is incorrect. All persons on US soil are protected by the US constitution, whether citizens or not. Your (confusingly) similarly enumerated point earlier "[1] and your guantanamo-friendly interviews at border control" is also flawed, as there is no possible way (of which I am aware) for US Customs and Immigration to send you to Guantanamo Bay without the assent of the country you are leaving. US C&I can turn you back, or temporarily detain you, and have a great deal of latitude with respect to questioning and searches, but you are always protected by the US constitution and possibly the laws of the country you are attempting to leave depending on where you are being questioned. The reason that people were allowed to be transported to Guantanamo Bay is that they were captured as unaffiliated combatants (who are allotted few rights in the Geneva Convention,) within the borders of a country whose sovereign granted the USA custody, and allowed deportation for detention without conditions.
- taejo 11y ago
  > All persons on US soil are protected by the US constitution, whether citizens or not. That's my reading, too, but it's not clear that it's government's reading.
ahomescu1 11y ago
> It's an open question. For the last 6 years I've refused to set foot in US (and even declined free tickets to a very important tech conference in my field) because of your unpredictable trigger-friendly police [1] and your guantanamo-friendly interviews at border control [2]. I wonder it your unstability could reach me in Europe. This seems excessive to me, you're not going to run into the cops going to a tech conference. I've lived in the US for the past 5 years, and never had any issues with police or border control. In fact, I'd go as far as saying that the part of California I live in (Orange County) is safer than my home country in Europe.
Shivetya 11y ago
In Europe you are more likely to have lightly if unarmed cops because its more acceptable to have troops with fully automatic weapons deployed. I still remember quite a few pictures of such at airports if not on the streets so six of one, half dozen of another.

mc32 11y ago

For sure our police more often than necessary become very aggro. It may have to do with knowing anyone could own and possess either legal or illegal firearms. We need to reconcile gun ownership with the violence it can allow and our desire for less aggro policing. That said police most definitely need to be trained to deescallate rather than automatically double down. We need to seriously emphasize de-escalation.

guns 11y ago
> It may have to do with knowing anyone could own and possess either legal or illegal firearms. While this may have an influence, it's important to remember that police officers are also trained to be wary of knives: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_KJ1R2PCMM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_KJ1R2PCMM You can't totally disarm a population, so there are diminishing returns on this front.
- RoboSeldon 11y ago
  While this may have an influence, it's important to remember that police officers are also trained to be wary of knives Are you seriously comparing a knife with a firearm ?
  - eric_h 11y ago
    Within about 3-5 feet, a knife is just as dangerous as a firearm.
    - RoboSeldon 11y ago
      Lets try a metal experiment, you have your knife and 3 enemies attack you at the same time. How many can you neutralize from 5 feet with your knife ? Suppose you have special training and you can throw your knife and kill one of them, you still have 2 ... Try the same mental experiment when you have a firearm in your hand ... You can inflict much more damage with a firearm even without special training (not everybody can throw a knife and do some damages).

grecy 11y ago

> differences in police training from Germany vs the US To highlight this even more, Police in Germany used only 85 bullets in all of 2001 [1]. Given their population is about 4x lower than the US, the equivalent would be the Police in all of the US using only ~340 bullets for a year. In reality, The police in the US have KILLED over 400 people this year already. [1] http://www.thewire.com/global/2012/05/german-police-used-only-85-bullets-against-people-2011/52162/ http://www.thewire.com/global/2012/05/german-police-used-onl...

StavrosK 11y ago
Making the fact that they did it with only 340 bullets all the more impressive!
noinsight 11y ago
In Norway police only fired two shots in 2014. In Finland, 6 shots in 2013. http://www.thelocal.no/20150706/norway-police-shot-guns-twice-in-2014 http://www.thelocal.no/20150706/norway-police-shot-guns-twic... http://yle.fi/uutiset/finnish_police_fired_guns_only_six_times_in_2013/7701005 http://yle.fi/uutiset/finnish_police_fired_guns_only_six_tim...
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
_yosefk 11y ago
I don't think the amount of bullets used by the police in different places can be meaningfully compared without knowing the number of bullets fired at the police. Edit: a sister comment cites numbers according to which almost 8 times as many police officers are killed in the US than in Germany per capita. Of course the real question is how many are attacked; if the police is better at gunfights than the criminals it is not a cause for alarm, rather the opposite.
- colechristensen 11y ago
  Don't overlook the very likely strong coupling between the bullets fired 'at' and 'by' police and how it likely goes both ways. People want to shoot at police because police shoot at people so often is probably just as true as the converse. This is likely both true at the macro and micro level. That is, police behavior escalates individual situations into shootings which otherwise, with better training, could have ended peacefully. _And_ with the culture of police quick to use force, people are more inclined to acquire weapons and use them during criminal activity. Police positions on the usage and scale of force is a self-fulfilling prophecy. A violent, forceful police will create a violent, forceful criminal. Which side you believe has more to do with your internal bias. Do you believe that police are violent because criminals are or do you believe criminals are violent because police are? It's neither, though. It's a systematic problem with a systematic solution. Placing the blame isn't important, finding the solution is. You can do a little by trying to help people out of the situations where they're motivated to crime. You can do a lot by helping police nudge the outcome of interactions towards peaceful solutions. The media whipping everyone into a frenzy over every contentious interaction doesn't help anybody.

vowelless 11y ago

> One of the things that stuck out at me was the huge amount of hours they spend training to "not" shoot, and learning how to de-escalate situations. I think that the likelihood of civilians being armed in the US is a lot higher than in Germany, so I can imagine why American cops are a little more paranoid. I've seen cops put a hand on their gun as they approach suspects, which I think is part of the training here. I wonder how many cops in America get killed in line of duty compared to Germany.

fixxer 11y ago
When I was growing up in LA in the 80s, several family friends were cops in rougher areas like Hawaiian Gardens, etc. I recall hearing multiple times that engaging with violent force was discouraged because they never knew what kind hellfire was going to erupt. They proceeded with extreme caution and did not act like warrior cops. If there was any doubt, they backed way up. Now, I'm well aware of the sins of LAPD in that era, but with regard to use of violent force and this damned finger-on-the-trigger mentality, I really feel like this has been a post-2003 evolution in tactics. It wasn't always like this. I don't remember being nervous about getting shot during a traffic stop. Hell, I can even recall two distinct occasions where SWAT was deployed to my house because I had hit the emergency button on my phone (rediculous, I know). In those cases, guns were drawn, but they weren't aimed and extreme caution was taken.
- hellbanner 11y ago
  You hit the emergency 911 button and SWAT instead of regular police showed up? What kind of button was that?
  - fixxer 11y ago
    Kinda funny. I was about 10 and after the button was hit, it went on speaker and dispatch was listening for ~10 minutes trying to figure out what was going on. Second time was less funny.
Mithaldu 11y ago
No direct comparison, but, police officers killed in germany: http://www.corsipo.de/ http://www.corsipo.de/ (probably incomplete, but <5 per year) In the usa: http://www.governing.com/gov-data/safety-justice/US-Law-Enforcement-Officer-Deaths-annual-totals.html http://www.governing.com/gov-data/safety-justice/US-Law-Enfo... Extrapolating that into numbers: DEU: <0.6 police officers killed per 10 mio citizens :::: USA: ~4.6 police officers killed per 10 mio citizens Meanwhile the number of police kills are roughly: DEU: ~1 person killed by police per 10 mio citizens :::: USA: ~12.5 persons killed by police per 10 mio citizens The ratios are not all that far apart: DEU: ~1.7 persons killed per police officer death :::: USA: ~2.7 persons killed per police officer death

maxxxxx 11y ago

When I did my compulsory military duty in Germany I ended up being military police. We had a lot of interactions with American MPs due to the US military being stationed there. We always joked about how they behaved like movie action heroes, always ready to use force. We were trained to avoid confrontation at almost any price. When in doubt, retreat. I guess it's a different view on law "enforcement".

brownbat 11y ago
Huh, why don't criminals in Germany exploit this, always threaten confrontation and have their run of the city? EDIT: Granted there's a big difference between trying to deescalate when possible and raiding a sleeping guy's apartment on bad info. EDIT 2: This was an honest question and I felt like I got good answers despite the downvoting. Big thanks to everyone who took it at face value or applied the principle of charity, rather than just assuming I'm some kind of disruptive monster. http://philosophy.lander.edu/oriental/charity.html http://philosophy.lander.edu/oriental/charity.html
- maxxxxx 11y ago
  Because the German cops are not push overs either. If somebody will attack them they will fight back. But by trying to deescalate first you set the tone for the interaction. Most of the recently published police violence in the US seems to come from really trivial situations, not from criminals. I watched the Sandra Bland video. The cop stops her for a trivial traffic violation (I often forget my turns signals too and I see a lot of people doing that too). She responds in an aggravated way. Instead of trying to defuse the situation he makes it worse by telling her to put out the cigarette. Why would you do that? This sounds like a pure ego-trip where the cop wants to assert his total dominance. He could have given her a ticket and just left.
  - brownbat 11y ago
    Thanks, I really appreciate your response, that adds useful context to your earlier comment.
  - 11y ago

serge2k 11y ago

I remember hearing about hwo the US military attempts to de-escalate first but the police don't.

kcbanner 11y ago

It does seem like the US officers prefer to shoot and ask questions later.

jotm 11y ago

Yeah, I was reading an article about how a police officer was forced to shoot an attacker... in the foot. It was kinda funny, which was sad. The guy had a knife and charged towards the officer, he fired off a warning shot in the air and then shot him in the foot. And he was very apologetic about it. Not the usual "I feared for my safety so I put 5 rounds in his center mass" we see from American police.