The "All cops are Bastards" bullshit needs to go die in a fire

[Simon_Jester]

My wife and discussed it the other day and we are baffled by the idea that going out and deliberately hunting cops is somehow going to make them friendlier and more tolerant...

It won't, but it might make them scared to pull their guns on a black guy unless they're really sure he has a weapon and intends to use it.

And yes, I am aware that angry young men with AR-15s and Molotovs are a lousy way to go about that, but if various police disciplinary organisations were doing their damn jobs then this wouldn't be happening.

Thing is, it is quite simply NOT going to have the desired effect, it will actively make things much much worse.

It means that the people who DO decide to pull out weapons and attack police officers when lawfully stopped will feel entitled to do so, because on some tribal level they're viewing the police as "enemy of my tribe," rather than as "the guy who enforces the law I just broke." This means that more police officers will be in greater danger, will be harassed and abused more often, and will become more trigger-happy.

It's an incredibly bad strategy, except it honestly isn't a strategy at all, it's just resentment finding an outlet for itself by way of thuggishness.

Given the encounters I, my family and several of my friends have had with the local power-tripping gestapo wannabes and their friends in the courts, I'd rather hold my own. It's not like police prevent crime or protect people anyway. All they do is show up to make sure the evidence gets picked up and the bodies sent to the morgue.

Police forces are human institutions and human institutions can have problems. That does not mean anarchy is a preferable alternative. How many people are considered guilty of a crime, only found by actual evidence collected by actual professionals to be completely innocent? A large number. Vigilantism is almost always unjust,while reliance upon the legal system is only sometimes unjust.

For a lot of crimes, the presence of police in an area also prevents those crimes from being committed. They can root out criminal organizations as well.

But probably their most important function is acting as cogs in the gears of our society. Contracts can be enforced because ultimately there is recourse to the police (if someone does not pay rent, or tries to remove you from your apartment even though you HAVE paid rent). They can help resolve disputes without having to go to court (ex. freeloading roommate argument, neighbors call police, officer calms everyone down). In the event of a breakdown in public infrastructure, they are available to direct traffic, or help evacuate civilians.

Plus, if you think you can "hold your own", you are a deluded moron. Everyone who would prefer anarchy always assumes they will somehow be OK. But in an anarchy, you have only those rights you can defend, and I guarantee you when the fabric of civilization collapses, you wont be able to defend much.

Yes. The best comparison here is to places where police forces truly do not exist and law is handled informally between citizens. Such areas of the world are typically underdeveloped, poor, and violent even by US inner city standards, with good reason. Businesses cannot function due to the frequency of petty theft, vandalism, and breaches of contract- or if they do function, they are forced to remain below a certain maximum size, so that they can stay in business while working only with trusted employees, customers, and suppliers. Infrastructure doesn't get built and doesn't get maintained; even if it exists there is no one to prevent gangs from taking control of roadways or bridges and levying tolls. People become suspicious, clannish, and isolated, because it's dangerous to travel and meet new people who are potentially hostile.

It's not a good state of affairs. It's like every bad thing we've ever experienced in the lawless and unpleasant parts of the developed world, amplified.

I think seeing convictions for officers who break the law, and, just as importantly, sentences comparable with or harsher than (due to breaking public trust) what a civilian criminal would get would go a long way in repairing relations.

Trials involving police officers may also need some sort of special public access so that when a verdict comes back "not guilty" for an officer who is shown on video doing something questionable and "everyone knows he's guilty" people can see a reason for it.

The problem with that latter half is that guilty/not guilty verdicts are often handed down by juries. If you make a jury's deliberations public, then they are vulnerable to intimidation and harassment.

If a judge rules on a police abuse case, perhaps they should be required to write an opinion on the facts of the case and explain their decision, though.

[Alyrium Denryle]

The problem with that latter half is that guilty/not guilty verdicts are often handed down by juries. If you make a jury's deliberations public, then they are vulnerable to intimidation and harassment.

If a judge rules on a police abuse case, perhaps they should be required to write an opinion on the facts of the case and explain their decision, though.

You could probably split the difference. Require each juror to explain their reasoning in an anonymous letter "Hi, this is Juror #3. I voted not guilty because *such and such*"

[Simon_Jester]

That really pushes the line of what could be permissible, and it sets a precedent I don't think is a good one in general. If we're going to have juries at all, then it's a very important principle that jurors deliberate in total privacy, with a strong wall that protects them from outside information that might bias them, and from any fear of the consequences of their verdict- guilty OR innocent.

Putting a crack in that wall of privacy, even for a theoretically good cause, does not strike me as a good idea. Police brutality cases aren't the only ones where people can argue that "the public has a right to know" why jurors let the person we want to believe is guilty go free.

Plus, of course, there will be cases where some of the evidence is itself not public for reasons that are entirely legitimate- in which case how can a juror explain their reasoning without revealing that information?

[Zeropoint]

Cops . . . are they bastards?

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/ ... ds_up.html

Yep.

[Zor]

Cops . . . are they bastards?

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/ ... ds_up.html

Yep.

So you're going to call the approximately 764,999 American Cops who had nothing to do with that bastards as well? That's stupid.

Zor

[U.P. Cinnabar]

Cops . . . are they bastards?

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/ ... ds_up.html

Yep.

Some cops are bastards, and should face the consequences of their actions, before a jury of their peers.

But that just means the system's broken and needs fixing. It's not to be taken as an excuse to destroy the system, and replace the rule of law with the rule of men allowed to do what they damn well please, at the expense of all the "wrong" people, because that's exactly what those in power in this country want, what the enablers of the bad cops want, and what they had, for a while, before people tried making rule of law, and all those other high-sounding words mean a goddamned thing.

[Alyrium Denryle]

Cops . . . are they bastards?

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/ ... ds_up.html

Yep.

All evidence indicates fantastic levels of personal fail on the part of that officer. He should certainly be fired in the interests of public safety, but it was not an act of malice or even strictly negligence. Just... basic competency failure.

[Zeropoint]

It's not to be taken as an excuse to destroy the system, and replace the rule of law with the rule of men allowed to do what they damn well please, at the expense of all the "wrong" people

I didn't say that, and that's not what I want. What I am saying is that yes, all cops are bastards . . . because they're either the REALLY rotten murderous bastards that DO this kind of stuff, or they're the moderately rotten bastards that are okay with it.

If there are non-bastard cops who care more about protecting and serving than they care about the "blue wall"; who police themselves and vigorously reject the murderers from their ranks . . . we sure as hell don't hear about them.

When I hear a headline like, "Police officer shoots unarmed black civilian, is immediately disarmed and handcuffed by fellow officers", then I'll believe that not all cops are bastards.

Heck, I'd settle for "Police officer who killed unarmed civilian charged with murder, being held in jail awaiting trial; fellow officers firmly denounce killing."

[Alyrium Denryle]

I didn't say that, and that's not what I want. What I am saying is that yes, all cops are bastards . . . because they're either the REALLY rotten murderous bastards that DO this kind of stuff, or they're the moderately rotten bastards that are okay with it.

Or they are just people trying to do their jobs, who are NOT okay with it. Jesus fucking christ we have one of them here. Posting in this fucking thread.

If there are non-bastard cops who care more about protecting and serving than they care about the "blue wall"; who police themselves and vigorously reject the murderers from their ranks . . . we sure as hell don't hear about them.

We absolutely fucking do. Ironically, the Dallas PD purged itself of assholes in the past few years. Phoenix PD does not have nearly the same asshole problem that that Maricopa County Sheriffs Office does.

Some of the problem is unconscious bias. Cops are being racist in their threat determination decisions and dont know they are being racist. When someone gets killed, ANY human group is going to try to defend its members--particularly with jackasses like you calling them all bastards. You are not helping. No matter how decent they all are, that is what will happen if the case is at all ambiguous. More so with police who can envision themselves in the same position, and wonder if they would have done differently. That is a hard burden to overcome. The only way to fix it is to convince them there is a systemic problem (and that is happening), and then make sure their training and other procedures get modified to reduce the harm (which is also happening).

None of this is helped by the fact that until very recently we have only the faulty memories (even with perfectly honest people, memory is a terrible record of information) of officers and witnesses to go on. Now we have video. That helps. But we also need mandatory reporting standards, and fully independent investigatory bodies. Leave issues of The Blue Wall out of it for a moment. Having Internal Affairs do an investigation into an officer involved shooting is a conflict of interest because they answer to the Brass, and the Brass wants to avoid a civil suit.

DAs dont want to prosecute because juries tend to give high amounts of BoD to officers in shooting cases (but not other cases, so this phenomenon is particular to shootings. Not corruption, hit and runs etc) precisely because the positions officers are in are difficult. That fucks up their win rate, and their win rate is how they get promoted or keep their jobs come election season (depending on the state).

In other cases, departments are simply corrupt to their core (Ferguson) and drive out the decent human beings on an institutional level. Whole different solutions are needed for those. Said solutions involve the FBI and massive RICO indictments (Which have happened. Most notably in Texas).

Heck, I'd settle for "Police officer who killed unarmed civilian charged with murder, being held in jail awaiting trial; fellow officers firmly denounce killing."

http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/loc ... /82403496/

They dropped his ass like a hot rock.

[U.P. Cinnabar]

If there are non-bastard cops who care more about protecting and serving than they care about the "blue wall"; who police themselves and vigorously reject the murderers from their ranks . . . we sure as hell don't hear about them.

When I hear a headline like, "Police officer shoots unarmed black civilian, is immediately disarmed and handcuffed by fellow officers", then I'll believe that not all cops are bastards.

Happens more often than the media will lead you to believe. See, the media, especially Faux News as of late, disproportionately reports on all the "bad cop" incidents, for their own reasons.

You rarely hear of the cops who give rides to work to civilians a little bit down on their luck, or the cops who are just gutted after having to handle a domestic, or a child abuse case, or arresting a couple cooking meth in the same house, sometimes, even the same room as their children...and, all I can give on those is anecdotal evidence.

And, I apologize for inadvertently putting words in your mouth, Zeropint. That certainly was not my intention.

[U.P. Cinnabar]

https://photographyisnotacrime.com/2015 ... est-video/

An Georgia sheriff’s deputy from Bibb County was fired and arrested after an assault on a handcuffed man which was caught on video.



Nathaniel Woodard, 28, is seen in the August 2014 recording kicking Devasco Holly, 38, in the chest while he is handcuffed on the ground.

“If you get up one more time, I’m going to kick you in the fucking chest.” the Georgia deputy is heard threatening Holly in the video.

Holly is seen attempting to get up on his knees when the deputy kicks him square in the chest, knocking him to the ground.

The incident began after Holly’s girlfriend had called police to say that he was trespassing on her property and had kicked down her door.

The deputies told the woman that if he returned, they would issue a warrant and arrest him. A few hours later, he returned. And so did deputies, who accused Holly of resisting arrest and biting one of them.

Following the assault by deputy Woodard, Holly ended up being charged with criminal trespass, making terrorist threats, obstruction of a peace officer and reckless conduct.



On July 10 of this year, the prosecutor’s office moved to dismiss the charges against him saying it was “in the interest of justice.”

On Friday, Woodard was booked for simple battery and violation of oath of office and was held on $2,840 bond. He was fired following the charges.

“Deputies are expected to enforce the law, not break it. I will not tolerate this blatant disregard for the oath we all took to uphold,” Bibb County Sheriff David Davis said in a statement to the press.

Woodard is not the first deputy from the Bibb County Sheriff’s Office to be arrested this summer.

In July, Bibb Sheriff’s Correction’s Deputy Sheryl Denise Smith was arrested on dog fighting charges after eight injured dogs were found at her home. She was also immediately terminated from the department.

In June, Deputy Mitchell Tharpe was arrested for driving under the influence in his patrol vehicle while he was off-duty. He was suspended pending an investigation.

This one was written by a college friend of mine, so I might be a little bit biased:

http://www.macon.com/news/local/crime/c ... 82657.html

BY JOE KOVAC JR.
jkovac@macon.com
Waitresses at downtown Macon’s Waffle House were so fond of Bibb County sheriff’s deputy T.J. Freeman that six or seven of them attended his funeral the other day. Freeman, 29, a narcotics investigator and a SWAT officer, was killed in a May 5 car chase. When he was off duty, he worked as a weekend-night security man at the restaurant, which overlooks Riverside Drive near Spring Street. Workers there said he liked the sausage, egg and cheese sandwiches, which he washed down with Mr. Pibb. Freeman had a midnight-to-5 a.m. shift at the diner, which is a wee-hours gathering place when bars let out on Friday and Saturday nights. On occasion, trouble shows up. About 3 a.m. on April 23, Freeman was outside keeping an eye on things from his car when he noticed a man step out of another car. The man was drinking a Corona beer. Freeman walked over and told the man he couldn’t drink there. The man, 31, looked at Freeman and cussed him, saying, “Get the … out of here.” Freeman then asked to see the guy’s driver’s license. Freeman, in his report — which was meticulous and a testament to the observant and squared-away cop that colleagues say he was — was sure to note what the man said next. “He stated that he was the designated driver and that he had quit drinking earlier,” Freeman wrote. “I advised him that he still had the beer from which he was drinking in his hand. He stated that I was doing too much.” Then the man handed over his license. Freeman went to his car to call for an on-duty officer. While Freeman was in the car, the man walked over. “You are doing too (expletive) much,” the man complained, cussing some more and saying he was leaving. Freeman told the guy he wasn’t going anywhere. “I can go where I want and you can’t stop me,” the man said. Freeman asked the man to assume the arrest position, to put his hands behind him. But the man broke free. By then another deputy had arrived, and that officer fired his Taser at the man. The device’s prongs missed the man, but proved enough of a distraction for Freeman to corral the man. Freeman grabbed him from behind and clutched his shoulders. The “belligerent” man, who was charged with obstruction and disorderly conduct, was wrangled to the ground. Freeman handcuffed him and handed him over to another officer. By then it was 4 a.m. There was still time left in Freeman’s security shift, one more hour to watch over the Waffle House and whatever downtown Macon might send its way.

And, while not police-brutality related, per se:

https://www.policeone.com/archive/artic ... ond-Death/

Ga. Police Suspend Use of Tasers After Second Death
Apr 25, 2004

Warner Robins, Ga. -- One Middle Georgia law enforcement agency has suspended the use of Taser stun guns, and another is taking a wait-and-see approach before using them, following the death of a second person shocked by Houston County sheriff's deputies.

Tasers, which can temporarily incapacitate someone by delivering a 50,000-volt shock, are normally used to stun and gain control of people who are not cooperating with officers. The manufacturer says the guns are safe, and many law enforcement officers say they are effective.

But others have their doubts.

There have been more than 40 in-custody inmate deaths in which a Taser was used since it was first introduced to law enforcement in 1998, but none has been attributed to the device, says the Taser manufacturer. Taser International also says its studies have found that the gun's shock, which temporarily overrides the central nervous system, cannot cause a heart attack.

But Amnesty International USA says there have been no independent studies on the medical effects, and that use of the Taser should be suspended until such studies are done. The human rights organization also says there's a potential for abuse, mistreatment and even torture.

On April 16, a 38-year-old inmate of the Houston County jail died after he was shocked three times with a Taser. Melvin Samuel of Savannah was being held on a Houston County probation violation for failing to pay $700 in fines. An autopsy by the Georgia Bureau of Investigation found no obvious cause of death, though toxicological and pathological test results are pending.

It was the second death in six months involving the use of a Taser by a Houston County deputy. A GBI medical examiner attributed the Dec. 9 death of Curtis Lawson, 40, of Unadilla, to a cocaine overdose, and not the Taser.

Houston County Sheriff Cullen Talton has defended the Taser's use. Although the Samuel tests aren't yet complete, Talton said he does not believe the device caused Samuel's death.

Talton noted that deputies and jail administrators receive eight hours of training on how to use the device and that each must be shocked with the Taser to experience its effects before being allowed to carry it. In all, about 75 sheriff's deputies and jail administrators are trained to carry a Taser, he said.

Centerville Police Chief Ernie Pardo said he is a firm believer in the Taser as a non-lethal and life-saving law enforcement tool. All but two of 16 full- and part-time officers at the Centerville Police Department have received eight hours of Taser training, and each of the 14 of those trained have taken a hit from the Taser, he said.

Pardo said he's seen a 90 percent reduction in the number of officer injuries since the seven Tasers were deployed among his officers in February 2003.

Pardo said the Taser is a much safer alternative than the use of a police baton or a gun, while pepper spray is less effective because it can also get into the eyes of officers and bystanders. For instance, a knife-wielding suspect who recently threatened to turn the knife on himself was shocked once with a Taser and the knife taken away, which Pardo said probably saved the man's life.

Choosing to use Tasers

The Taser, which comes in two models, one for $400 and the other for $800, looks much like a gun, has a cartridge at the end of the barrel that shoots two No. 8 fish hooks into the body. Wires attached to the fish hooks deliver an electric shock in five-second intervals. The cartridge also is removable, and the same shock can be delivered through two prongs revealed at the end of the barrel.

If the fish hooks are still attached to the body or the Taser tongs are pressed against the skin, repeated shocks may be administered by holding down the trigger.

The Taser manufacturer says a feature of the device is a computer chip that stamps the time, date and duration of each shock. Pardo said a report is done every time a Taser is used and the device checked to ensure what the officer writes in the report matches what's recorded on the chip.

But the Taser is not used everywhere in Middle Georgia:

• The Macon Police Department suspended the use of Tasers, which were assigned only to its Special Weapons Assault Team, on April 19 in light of the Houston County incidents, said Macon police spokeswoman Melanie Hofmann. The suspension is indefinite, pending the outcome of the GBI investigation of the most recent death, she said.

• The Fort Valley Police Department had considered the use of Tasers but backed off because of the numbers of deaths nationally, said Police Chief Jan Cary.

"We're waiting until the smoke clears to get a definitive answer on what's going on," Cary said.

The manufacturer says that, through March, there have been 42 in-custody deaths in which a Taser was used. Although that's only a small percentage of what the manufacturer says is 70,000 total Taser shocks, it still raises concern, said Cary. "The jury is still out in my mind whether we are going to use them or not," he said.

• Warner Robins Police Chief Brett Evans said eight Tasers were purchased under the previous administration and some officers have been trained in their use. However, before the Tasers are deployed, a policy for their use must be developed. The policy is now in the works, he said.

• The Bibb County Sheriff's Office has two Tasers, with deputies undergoing training, but the devices have not yet been deployed as a departmental policy is still being developed, said Lt. David Davis, sheriff's spokesman.

• The Perry Police Department has fewer than a dozen Tasers, with a policy in place and officers in training, but the devices are not yet in use, said Police Chief George Potter.

• The Peach County Sheriff's Office has none. "I'm not knocking the Tasers," said Sheriff Johnnie Becham. "We just don't have any and we don't use them. ... We depend on pepper spray."

About 4,400 of the nation's 18,000 law enforcement agencies use Tasers, according to Taser International. Company spokesman Steve Tuttle said that in all of the 42 deaths, the Taser was found not to have caused the deaths. Most of the deaths were attributed to drug overdoses and/or heart failures, said Tuttle.

But while the Taser may not have been named as the cause of the death, the medical examiner's findings were inconclusive or unavailable on the cause of death in three of the 42 deaths, and no autopsy reports were available on eight of the 42 deaths, according to summaries of the deaths and Taser use provided by Taser International.

In a Taser International study, the hearts of animals were shocked directly by the Taser and there were no deaths, Tuttle said. Also, before the animals were shocked, the animals were given drugs that simulated an adrenaline rush, mimicked the cardiac effects of PCP and enhanced the heart's sensitivity to electrical stimulation, Tuttle said. He argued that the Taser can actually save lives because the device is less harmful than the use of police batons and guns to bring someone under control.

But Edward Jackson, media director for Amnesty International USA, said there are no independent studies to support the Taser studies and questioned whether the electric shocks induce, or are a catalyst to, the drug overdose.

He contends that dog hearts used in the Taser study may not react the same way as would a human heart. Jackson said he's dubious whether medical examiners are even looking to see if the Taser could have contributed to the deaths. And he said he believes there's potential for abuse of the device, which could result in the ill treatment and torture of persons in custody.

Jackson also said there's no outside or independent monitoring to determine whether the Taser is being administered in only potentially life-threatening situations, or instead whenever an inmate doesn't move fast enough for a guard or smarts off.

Tuttle points to the computer chip as a way to monitor the Taser's use and safeguard it from abuse. But Jackson doubts most law enforcement agencies actually monitor Taser use or even have the computer capabilities to do so.

At least one of the inmate deaths in which a Taser was used was attributed by a medical examiner to "positional asphyxiation" in which a person suffocates to death from being placed in a prone position while restrained in custody, according to the summary of deaths and Taser use from Taser International.

In the recent Houston County inmate death, Samuel was restrained by at least two belly chains and a set of leg irons, according to the sheriff's incident report. Samuel was breathing heavily when he was placed face down in a holding cell. The report noted that the restraints were positioned to provide him the use of his hands if he needed to reposition himself.

Gary Rothwell, special agent in charge of the GBI Perry Office, declined to speculate on Samuel's death. Rothwell said the final report from a GBI medical examiner was still out.

No indictment on the taser, but it does show that vast majority of LEOs are not out to needlessly kill civilians either.

[Zeropoint]

And, I apologize for inadvertently putting words in your mouth, Zeropint. That certainly was not my intention.

Thanks. No hard feelings; it's easy enough to misinterpret and I've done it myself from time to time. I'd say that what I am desiring is more civilian oversight and more transparency in police departments.

Happens more often than the media will lead you to believe. See, the media, especially Faux News as of late, disproportionately reports on all the "bad cop" incidents, for their own reasons.

Yeah, that's a good point. It bothers me a bit how the traditional media can act as gatekeepers for news stories . . . even if we don't believe anything they say about the world and the events, they still have way too much control over WHAT events we hear about, and that can have a huge effect on our perceptions of the world--like the way many people think the world is becoming more violent, when the opposite is true.

You rarely hear of the cops who give rides to work to civilians a little bit down on their luck, or the cops who are just gutted after having to handle a domestic, or a child abuse case, or arresting a couple cooking meth in the same house, sometimes, even the same room as their children...and, all I can give on those is anecdotal evidence.

I guess I'll dial it back to merely stating that far too many cops are murderers, and far too many seem okay with that, but not all.

[U.P. Cinnabar]

Thanks. No hard feelings; it's easy enough to misinterpret and I've done it myself from time to time. I'd say that what I am desiring is more civilian oversight and more transparency in police departments.

I think most of us here can agree that more oversight and more transparency are needed on this.

Yeah, that's a good point. It bothers me a bit how the traditional media can act as gatekeepers for news stories . . . even if we don't believe anything they say about the world and the events, they still have way too much control over WHAT events we hear about, and that can have a huge effect on our perceptions of the world--like the way many people think the world is becoming more violent, when the opposite is true.

I wouldn't say the world itself is becoming more violent, but there are too many people in this world, especially in this country, who want the quick and easy solution, even if it solves nothing, just because it makes them feel empowered. Unfortunately, for those too many people, violence is their quick and easy solution.

And, the desire for the quick and easy solution is also fed by the media and the entertainment industries.

I guess I'll dial it back to merely stating that far too many cops are murderers, and far too many seem okay with that, but not all.

On that we can agree. Even one peace officer who betrays his badge is one too many, and even one person who accepts that corruption is equally one too many.

[Kamakazie Sith]

It's not to be taken as an excuse to destroy the system, and replace the rule of law with the rule of men allowed to do what they damn well please, at the expense of all the "wrong" people

I didn't say that, and that's not what I want. What I am saying is that yes, all cops are bastards . . . because they're either the REALLY rotten murderous bastards that DO this kind of stuff, or they're the moderately rotten bastards that are okay with it.

If there are non-bastard cops who care more about protecting and serving than they care about the "blue wall"; who police themselves and vigorously reject the murderers from their ranks . . . we sure as hell don't hear about them.

When I hear a headline like, "Police officer shoots unarmed black civilian, is immediately disarmed and handcuffed by fellow officers", then I'll believe that not all cops are bastards.

Heck, I'd settle for "Police officer who killed unarmed civilian charged with murder, being held in jail awaiting trial; fellow officers firmly denounce killing."

As Alyrium Denryle said there are going to be those that defend the actions of others for many reasons. However, you wanted to hear from some officers that disagree...OK. Here is comments from the forum of a popular police forum.

"Negligent discharge. Should have checked for weapons and then treat him as the victim he is. Not add insult to injury and keep him handcuffed. That's bad bad bad."

"So you're saying that the officer INTENTIONALLY shot at an autistic guy and a proned-out therapist who had his hands up?
Yeah, that's so much better....
Joe, your loyalty is commendable, but open your eyes - not all officers are deserving of protection."

"He should be prosecuted, the same as any citizen would be prosecuted."

"If a civilian accidentally out of negligence took a life they will face charges. Same should for our own. If you don't hold them accountable for taking a life. We are going to continue to have problems. Own up and take your licks!"

"3 shots fired? This was no accident. Why did you fire? "IDK"? How about, "because I'm an idiot"."

"joehoffman,

Nobody here is arresting or charging the involved officer. This is a discussion forum to talk about incidents, based on the information that is available at the time. The information that is available, when viewed in the eyes of a reasonable peace officer, would suggest that this shoot wasn't a good one. Yes, when the investigation is done, perhaps it will look different. But it is not, so we look at what we have.

"Reasonable peace officer" tends to suggest the opinion of other peace officers with similar training and experience. Look at the other comments from all the other officers on here. You seem to be the odd man out. Learn from that."

"Well Joe, apparently someone did something wrong...

A second police officer, Emile Hollant, has also been placed on administrative leave without pay after giving conflicting statements to investigators, Spring said.

As for the officer that shot, he is reportedly a member of their SWAT team. Other news outlets are relaying comments from the agency involved that the officer intentionally shot at the other person (the one holding the toy truck) and that "...his shot went astray." Clearly, something went wrong there. If you can't see that, I'm glad I don't work with you."

"I think everyone on here is glad they don't work with you. You just don't understand the concept of the P1 discussion forums or the fact that things don't always go right in our profession. I've been a cop for over 29 years. I've learned to survive by debriefing and discussing calls BEFORE some month long investigation is done. It's how we learn and stay alive."

"Blue lives matter ribbons, pats on the back, thankyous from strangers, enormous new found public support and here comes this idiot to flush it down the toilet with one press of the trigger.

I have said it numerous times on this site and sadly im saying it again............... we are our own worst enemy. Im as mad about this as ive been in a very long time.

If you work with a moron, and we all do, its time, actually its long past time, to take them aside and square them the f*ck away before we do more stupid sh*t we wont recover from. If you don't have the nuts to confront the idiots among us you may be one of the idiots too.

This crap has got to stop."

"What....in....the......fuck
**FACE-PALM**
Don't really know what else to say. What CAN you say?
.....our jobs aren't hard enough without stupid shit like this. Yes, I'm calling it stupid shit. I don't care. I've been a cop long enough to know stupid shit when I see it. I actually Do feel for the gentleman who was shot. He seems like a pretty reasonable dude. We really didn't need this right now."

Anyway, now you've heard from them. I could keep going but I don't want to clutter up the thread.

[Zeropoint]

Okay. They can talk the talk, at least among themselves. Next step is going public with the denunciation of the murderers, and the step after that is DOING something about it.

[Simon_Jester]

Going public with the denunciation- well, who exactly is supposed to do that? There are people who serve in the role of spokesmen on behalf of policemen nationwide, but not many.

Also, this guy is being investigated for a crime. While he certainly looks guilty, police organizations condemning him by name would be prejudicial to the presumption of innocence in a way I'm not entirely sure I'm comfortable with. I don't want us to create a world where we expect police organizations to pre-emptively try to convict their own members in the court of public opinion. Some day that would happen to someone who is subsequently, and correctly, found innocent. Some day not too far from now.

Condemn the fearful, trigger-happy brutality and casual murders, yes. Condemn individuals who have not yet been put on trial for the crimes we want to believe they committed... preferably not.

[Kamakazie Sith]

Okay. They can talk the talk, at least among themselves. Next step is going public with the denunciation of the murderers, and the step after that is DOING something about it.

Who needs to go public? Police agencies? Unions? Individual officers?

[Ralin]

I would assume that cops who did that as individuals would risk being fired, frankly.

[Alyrium Denryle]

I would assume that cops who did that as individuals would risk being fired, frankly.

Possibly worse, actually. In departments that are on the up and up they probably dont need to do much because the department will drop malefactors like hot rocks. In some of them though (I am looking at the NYPD here because this happened to gay officers in the IIRC the early 90s) they could risk being put in life-threatening situations without backup. And yeah, there have been instances where whistleblowers have been fired.

[Ralin]

In some of them though (I am looking at the NYPD here because this happened to gay officers in the IIRC the early 90s) they could risk being put in life-threatening situations without backup.

That did occur to me, but I figured getting into trouble/fired would be the more universal issue. Not even necessarily unjustly, since plenty of civilians have been fired for saying something their employer didn't like on less serious issues.

[Lord Revan]

There's also the issue that not all cases of possible police brutality/abuse are clear cut and you don't want to send a message of "Our department PR matters more to us then proper police work" to officers. After all if PDs consider even false accusations to be correct before the investigation says anything that's not help breaking down the "blue wall" if anything it'll make it stronger since actual dirty cops can now rely on sympathy from their fellow police since actual guilt matters no more, just whether of not the department got bad PR.

You want to above all avoid situations where police brutality cases are seen as "guilty until proven innocent" or worse "guilty and will be convicted as soon as we get enough evidence" regardless of the actual guilt or innosence of the officer(s) in question, since you'll essentially defang the police forces as each officer will be more conserned with covering their own ass then with dealing with crime not mention this kind of system would get honest cops fired first (or scare them off) since they won't as good as covering up anything that might resemble wrong doing. Also you got to remember that pretty much every criminal in existance thinks they were unjustly arrested so you again want to avoid making police brutality a de facto "silver bullet" against being arrested.

Though obviously dealing with the existing brutality/abuse effectively at the same time.

[Zeropoint]

I have to admit that I'm mostly coming from an emotional rather than coldly logical place on this thread. I see that we have a police abuse thread 18 pages long, and I see that we can have a fresh new case of crimes committed by police every day, and have an emotional sense of wrongness and betrayal, because these are the men and women who are supposed to be HELPING the public, and ENFORCING the law. Damn it, who watches the watchmen?

Maybe some people will say that I've got unrealistic expectations, or that I'm holding the police to too high a standard . . . well, I DO hold the people charged with upholding and enforcing the law to a higher standard of lawfulness. People who can't meet it at all shouldn't be cops, and people who can take it or leave it should be kept in line by knowing that the full force of the law will come down on them if they don't live up to the responsibility that they volunteered for.

Sigh.

I have a tendency toward black and white thinking; for believing that right is right and wrong is wrong and never the twain shall meet . . . I'm sure that's coloring my reaction.

Still, I'd like to see EVERYONE held to the same legal standards.

[Ace Pace]

I have to admit that I'm mostly coming from an emotional rather than coldly logical place on this thread. I see that we have a police abuse thread 18 pages long, and I see that we can have a fresh new case of crimes committed by police every day, and have an emotional sense of wrongness and betrayal, because these are the men and women who are supposed to be HELPING the public, and ENFORCING the law. Damn it, who watches the watchmen?

You're in a nation of over 300 million, filled with guns and a strong culture of arguing with authority and a strong culture of police being above the law. What do you expect? To be Sweden? It's nice to say it'd be better that way but it ignores reality.

I assume Alyrium or someone else has the stats on hand but how precisely do police abuse cases spread out geographically? I'd imagine they're clustered in some geographic regions.