Why (some among) US police behave so violently?

[Squeakmaan]

I think part of what makes me so angry at this, is that I really did believe (likely without cause) that while there were surely just a few bed eggs, that gross injustice would be dealt with within the system. The disillusionment was... painful.

[thejeff]

Caineach wrote:

bugleyman wrote:

Charlie D. wrote:

If a criminal is fleeing, shoot to kill.

I should hope not.

Not for the least because the Supreme Court ruled that unconstitutional in the 1980s

However the Grand Jury in Ferguson was instructed that that was the law before hearing Wilson's testimony.

Several weeks later that was corrected. When a juror asked about what actually had precedence he was told "this is not a law class" and not answered.

[thejeff]

Squeakmaan wrote:

I think part of what makes me so angry at this, is that I really did believe (likely without cause) that while there were surely just a few bed eggs, that gross injustice would be dealt with within the system. The disillusionment was... painful.

That's one of the interesting things about this and particularly about so much being caught on video. It's a game-changer in terms of public opinion, even if the video doesn't yet change the outcome of individual cases.

People who made all sorts of excuses for the Michael Brown case are aghast that there was no indictment in the Eric Garner case, because they can see it happen and have the visceral reaction to it.

[GreyWolfLord]

Going back some, I am not against Cameras at all, and I am in fact for cameras.

The cameras are there just as much for the police as it is for everyone else.

Imagine if there was a Camera in Wilson's Car...and what he said was what happened. Wouldn't having it on camera have helped him in the media tremendously?

Cameras are indiscriminate, and don't have an opinion. They can tell a lot more in many ways then simply hearing about it. They may not be entirely dependable, and may not always tell the full story, but it's better to have them there than not.

If police are honest, the camera is going to support their side of the story more often than not, and back up what they say. It can only be a boon for them in that light.

The biggest obstacle for cameras are their expense, but I think having them will only help all people involved.

[Icyshadow]

The only problem with cameras would be keeping the cops using them on a regular basis.

I am quite sure some will turn them off before doing something horrid, then claim the camera malfunctioned.

[BigNorseWolf]

Charlie D. wrote:

If you have ever been violently assaulted then I'll accept that you are the rare individual who is not traumatized by such a brutal event. But for the vast majority of people, a violent beating is not like on TV. First, any hard hit can kill or cripple.

I've been on the ground, being pummeled in the head (LAST time i ever tried walking away from a fight) put my hand into my pocket for my knife and said ".. nah, doesn't hurt that much"

Mind you, after he punted me in the head I got a little loopy afterwards, but that took a few minutes to kick in.

[Yuugasa]

Squeakmaan wrote:

I think part of what makes me so angry at this, is that I really did believe (likely without cause) that while there were surely just a few bed eggs, that gross injustice would be dealt with within the system. The disillusionment was... painful.

Yeah, that was painful for me too, also the broken bones, those hurt a lot as well.

[Irontruth]

Icyshadow wrote:

The only problem with cameras would be keeping the cops using them on a regular basis.

I am quite sure some will turn them off before doing something horrid, then claim the camera malfunctioned.

It's one of the problems. In places where body cameras have been adopted there have been officers who have a history of "malfunctions". There are a couple other issues as well that need to be resolved.

One is the issue of privacy. There are groups in the US that use various freedom of information acts to obtain any and all documents from police. While that tends to be a good thing, it almost means that when police officers enter your home, they're essentially filming the interior which will be made public. Is that okay? Should it be public information? Do the answers depend on whether you're charged/convicted of a crime?

The other issue is the system used to determine whether the officer behavior appropriately or not. In the Eric Garner case a bystander captured video of his death and that was part of the evidence for the grand jury, but it chose not to indict. Even if we have video evidence, if we don't hold officers accountable, it doesn't really change anything.

[thejeff]

Irontruth wrote:

Icyshadow wrote:

The only problem with cameras would be keeping the cops using them on a regular basis.

I am quite sure some will turn them off before doing something horrid, then claim the camera malfunctioned.

It's one of the problems. In places where body cameras have been adopted there have been officers who have a history of "malfunctions". There are a couple other issues as well that need to be resolved.

One is the issue of privacy. There are groups in the US that use various freedom of information acts to obtain any and all documents from police. While that tends to be a good thing, it almost means that when police officers enter your home, they're essentially filming the interior which will be made public. Is that okay? Should it be public information? Do the answers depend on whether you're charged/convicted of a crime?

The other issue is the system used to determine whether the officer behavior appropriately or not. In the Eric Garner case a bystander captured video of his death and that was part of the evidence for the grand jury, but it chose not to indict. Even if we have video evidence, if we don't hold officers accountable, it doesn't really change anything.

Agreed. On what grounds the tapes can be released needs to hashed out, as does how it is treated when a camera "malfunctions".

Mind you the first issue has been raised already with civilians filming police-citizen interactions - with police insisting we don't have that right in order to protect the privacy of those they're questioning. It hasn't gone very far.

The video evidence will not, as legal evidence, change the system. What it will do, what it is already doing, is make the public aware of how bad the problem is and thus change public opinion about the system and make it possible to change it.

[Sissyl]

Malfunctions in a situation where something bad happened is going to seem extremely suspicious. Far worse than without the camera. Still, it is a sodding shame the police has to be watched like that.

[thejeff]

Sissyl wrote:

Malfunctions in a situation where something bad happened is going to seem extremely suspicious. Far worse than without the camera. Still, it is a sodding shame the police has to be watched like that.

"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?" It's an old problem.

My personal preference would be to treat it like destroyed evidence - basically assume it shows the worst or it wouldn't have been destroyed. Also shows intent.

But it will be a long time before we get there. Cameras will help, but they're only part of the fix.

[Gaberlunzie]

Caineach wrote:

bugleyman wrote:

Charlie D. wrote:

If a criminal is fleeing, shoot to kill.

I should hope not.

Not for the least because the Supreme Court ruled that unconstitutional in the 1980s

Oh why am I not surprised the cop apologist is actually advocating murder? Never seen that before! /s

[Gaberlunzie]

I know in Sweden, as part of cop education, they are taught that when a lot of people gather, the people lose their individuality and become part of the mob. This is used to justify beating anyone who is at the same place where any kind of political lawbreaking occurs, so that if it's a large peaceful protest and someone throws a firecracker or empty can the cops can charge right in and ride/run over kids, because the protesters no longer have any individuality and are now just a violent mob.

(and then of course lie about it)

Incidentally enough, that never seems to apply to cops.

[thejeff]

Gaberlunzie wrote:

Caineach wrote:

bugleyman wrote:

Charlie D. wrote:

If a criminal is fleeing, shoot to kill.

I should hope not.

Not for the least because the Supreme Court ruled that unconstitutional in the 1980s

Oh why am I not surprised the cop apologist is actually advocating murder? Never seen that before! /s

In fairness shooting a fleeing criminal is allowed if the criminal is dangerous.

Quote:

The justices held that deadly force "may not be used unless necessary to prevent the escape and the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious bodily harm to the officer or others."

Now the common objection in the Michael Brown case is that he was only suspected of stealing some cigars, which is hardly a "significant threat of death or serious bodily harm".

The response to that is that if Wilson's testimony is true, then Brown was a significant threat: He made an unprovoked attack on a police officer, coming close to killing him in 3 blows one handed while casually handing off his stolen goods to his accomplice and then nearly killed the officer with his own weapon. He was able to overpower Wilson, no small man himself, as easily as Hulk Hogan would overpower a 5 year old child. He ran off in a cloud of dust, but when the brave officer pursued this demonic figure, turned and was bulking up to ignore the bullets, leaving Wilson no choice but to shoot him dead.

Obviously he was a terrible threat and we should thank the heroic cop for saving us from this horrible monster.

Unless the story is b!*%%!&%, of course.

[Freehold DM]

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

I always liked the sound of that.

[Krensky]

Quidquid Latine dictum sit altum videtur.

[Freehold DM]

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

Illi qui non spirant.

[Freehold DM]

Krensky wrote:

Quidquid Latine dictum sit altum videtur.

Etenim.

[Krensky]

Noli nothis permittere te terere.

[Kirth Gersen]

Freehold DM wrote:

Etenim.

Eminem?

[Krensky]

And, as always;

Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.

[Terquem]

Reese's Pieces?

[Kirth Gersen]

Terquem wrote:

Reese's Pieces?

And cops behaving badly!

[Juda de Kerioth]

Angstspawn wrote:

Like many people all around the world I saw images of police violence, I heard or read about American policemen shooting teenagers or children, and I'm puzzled. I don't judge but try to understand.

From abroad it seems to me some policemen act like an occupation army's soldiers: "I identify a potential threat in a hostile zone, being the most likely target in the area, no caring much as these people are not mine (if not openly my enemy), I shot. If I was right I saved my life, if I was wrong this violent behavior will intimidate locals. Last but not least, as I'm in a warzone I'm protected and won't be prosecuted as long as I'm not committing a war crime (rape, mass slaughter, etc...)".

first of all This:

Angstspawn wrote:

I heard or read about American policemen shooting teenagers or children

Why all of you call yourselves Americans? where to America? México? Argentina? Brazil? all of that are in America and your country is named United States. So, the thing starts right here, in this sentence at all.

Call yourselves USA´s Dwellers or something else, not American, thats offensive for the rest of the people in the entire continent at all.

Starting with that you can imagin why the behavior of cowardice and selfishment from your police officers at all. I don´t want to state hate thread, just pick the way that the rest of the world see you at all.

But it is not only in your country, it is happening all arround. My country have been keednaped by mafia and corrupt goverment, also, the police just kill 43 students, and the ONU (USA´s pet), have stated that they want to "defend" our country (which means that USA´s goverment want to came and steal our oil, just as he did in asia ten years ago), and steals from your own people your friends lifes for that purpose.

Look at spain at all, goverment failing since the issue with the houses and the bank who seems to just find a djini, asking wishes for money that do not exist, and dont belong to them.

The world is in crisis, and we stills do nothing to help at all.

[Comrade Anklebiter]

Juda de Kerioth wrote:

The world is in crisis, and we stills do nothing to help at all.

Waited until now before interjecting some shameless socialist self-promotion:

Spread the Protests!
Labor must champion black freedom!
For workers revolution to smash police terror!
Alas, I don't know any commie slogans in Latin!

Estadounidenses: Find a Black Lives Matter action near you!

Mexican Brethren: An article about the disappeared Ayotzinapa students; you can probably find a better article somewhere, but this one was written by a high school student comrade in New Jersey and her first article in the paper and we're all so proud of her. For the development of communist youth leaders!

Other Americans: You're on your own.

For workers revolution from the Yukon to the Yucatan! And everywhere else, too!

[thejeff]

Comrade Anklebiter wrote:

Juda de Kerioth wrote:

The world is in crisis, and we stills do nothing to help at all.

Waited until before interjecting some shameless socialist self-promotion:

Spread the Protests!
Labor must champion black freedom!
For workers revolution to smash police terror!
Alas, I don't know any commie slogans in Latin!

Laborantes mundi adunare! Sed nihil est quod perdam vincula.

Spoiler:

That's what Google Translate is for

[Terquem]

Laborare est orare

[Fergie]

thejeff wrote:

Michael Brown is accused of assaulting a cop and "going for his gun" when the cop drew the gun to shoot him.

define: accused "charge (someone) with an offense or crime."

Not to split hairs, but Officer Wilson's claims are not an accusation in the context of a court setting.

[Fergie]

Just a quick friendly reminder to everyone:

"The Gaming Community
...You may find yourself in a debate on our messageboards, and disagreements are bound to happen. Focus on challenging the idea, rather than the others in the conversation. Remember that there’s another person on the other side of the screen. Please help us keep it fun!

Baiting

Posts or threads made solely to provoke a strong negative reaction or conflict do not contribute to the inviting place we’d like our community to be. Threads with provocative titles will be locked, and posts removed as necessary."