US police and the use of firearms

[Stuck]

In my opinion some here are looking at unions as protecting cops with bad attitudes... There' s another factor that veterans are aware of. Comradrie with with your group and covering anyone's back if they will cover yours..

They do. Ive seen it time and time again. As long as youre a good little union stooge it will back you 100% of the time, unless it really makes the union look bad.

 

[Truckedup]

They do. Ive seen it time and time again. As long as youre a good little union stooge it will back you 100% of the time, unless it really makes the union look bad.

This attitude has been with cops and firemen before they were unionized...the first hints of police unions were just after WW1....but it wasn't till about the early 60's when the fraternities were recognized as unions.

 

[Thefishguy77]

But on the flip side, what about the cops that are trying to catch criminals?

Case in point, we have a "tweaker patrol" in the town I live in. They are looking for drug activity. I got profiled hard one day making a quick trip to the parts store in my beater car. Sure it was a nuisance, but the interaction with the cop after he pulled me over was about 45 seconds after he saw my credentials and the fact I'm not a meth head. Sure it took time out of my day, but I fully support them looking for drug activity and catching the "bad guys".

He gave a total bullshit reason for pulling me over too.

I have been pulled over the 26 in a 25. I told him his equipment wasn’t that accurate. This was before laser Or whatever they use now. He didnt like that but agreed...
Thats fishing I dont guve a fuck what their reasoning is. The means have to justify the ends. Pull me over for a light put fine, driving bad, cracked windshield, fine everyone of those is legit. But fishing if fucked and just give cops a bad name.

 

[Motorcharge]

quote from elsewhere on the internet. Defund IS EXACTLY as insane as it sounds. Defund is NOT reform, defund IS abolish.

Reform is needed, but starting at the chopping block of ending police and not starting at the chopping block and ending the shit web of laws they "enforce" IS the problem.

Show me where I said anything about abolishing the police. In fact, I said that cutting before reforming is a bad idea. Like I said before, shifting resources and responsibilities isn't a bad idea. You don't need police for most civil issues.

I'm not advocating knee jerk reactions like what Seattle did to appease a vocal minority. Alternatives to police in certain situations need to be implemented and established. At that point you can 'defund' the police and shift a lot of that budget around as needed.

From a PR perspective, "defund the police" sounds idiotic. But really it's about the above and about police not needing military grade hardware in most cases. Maybe major metro areas need some, but most places don't. These small towns don't need fucking MRAPs, APCs, ect. They don't need Camaros, Corvettes, ect as police cars to show off.

Like most issues, this one is caught up in extremes and hyperbole, but there's a lot of shades of grey and middle ground on both sides of it. But, policing in this country has gotten out of hand and needs a to be fundamentally evaluated and overhauled from the ground up.

 

[evernoob]

A cop is a citizen and has the same rights as every other citizen to own, carry, use a firearm. A cop should also face the same repercussions as any other citizen.

they should have no more rights, but no less rights.

Incorrect. I have to remind you of why American History X put that speech into the movie: to make it seem like only Nazis say it.

Police are endowed with extraordinary privilege in order to enforce the Law. These are privileges that you and I do not, and should not have. One of those privileges that was taken away was the privilege to beat the ever-loving shit out of Rodney King if he was speeding down the highway, high and drunk, and got out of his car fighting the cops. The revocation of that privilege directly led to the death of George Floyd and the current mess we're in. If the cops could have Rodney King'd George Floyd, he'd be a live right now.

 

[evernoob]

LOL, Americans PROVE everyday they cannot handle simple alcohol and weed. Making MORE drugs readily available is a solution? How do you think users get the money to get drugs? The attitude for Cops is everything can be handled with a gun. That MUST be changed. One fact I know, a situation almost always goes from bad to worse when the cops show up. Except if you're a looting protestor.

You and every other Boomer conservative on this board need to change your approach.

You and others like you figured back in 1992 that if/when the cops lost their ability to handle violent arrests, you'd just let it happen. It was probably not the wrong idea at the time. We figured that just letting the lawyers and Pols handle it.

They removed the ability of the cops to protect themselves and instill respect in the community. NYPD up until this year had that respect, there are a million stories and inteviews about the NYPD losing the streets.

Then, the Private Crime Industry got involved. No, NOT private prisons, those are a minority of cases and even Texas is phasing them out.

I mean your friends and all the faggots that own/invent Tasers, Less Lethal Bags, Security Belts, Cop Training, and all the rest of the bullshit industry that grew up around Cops. Now it's a billion-dollar/yr industry. They have gotten the Cop Unions and stupid slavish Cops to buy into the gadget and gizmo solution.

There was literally less crime and less police 'brutality' when the cops used to beat the shit out of recalcitrant perps with sticks.

The whole Cop Fetish thing, and many people here have this sickness, is the cause of it. Allowing black woman Prosecutors to bully the Police Forces down, and instead of fighting and reversing it, buying into the coonsoomer gadget industry.

 

[evernoob]

but that's been the justification for everything shitty about the legal system for the last 50 years.

no knock warrants? looking for drugs that might be destroyed.
Warantless searches on the side of the road? I smelled weed.
Seizure of property and money without a crime being committed? Well it must be drug related if you're carrying 10K cash.

So, just because Siezures got abused doesn't mean you end the war on drugs. It means you hire Politicians that change the laws.

For fuck's sake the knee-jerk of this society has gotten shitty.

Legalizing pot, mushrooms, LSD, and MDMA would be fine, as long as the Israelis get shoved out of the business and it's taken over by Americans. LIke old hippy chemists we put in jail for it.

Hard drugs are bad, mmm'kay? That shit needs to end and everybody is sitting on the sidelines becasue it's a huge activity for Cops and Cop-related industries.

The War on Drugs CAN and SHOULD BE won. It's very fucking simple. You Build a Wall, patrol the seas, and bust criminals and shut down industries bringing it in. You go after the Real Estate investors, the luxury item (sportscars) salespeople, and other SCUM that benefit from it. That's RICO corruption, they know where that money came from.

 

[87manche]

So, just because Siezures got abused doesn't mean you end the war on drugs. It means you hire Politicians that change the laws.

For fuck's sake the knee-jerk of this society has gotten shitty.

Legalizing pot, mushrooms, LSD, and MDMA would be fine, as long as the Israelis get shoved out of the business and it's taken over by Americans. LIke old hippy chemists we put in jail for it.

Hard drugs are bad, mmm'kay? That shit needs to end and everybody is sitting on the sidelines becasue it's a huge activity for Cops and Cop-related industries.

The War on Drugs CAN and SHOULD BE won. It's very fucking simple. You Build a Wall, patrol the seas, and bust criminals and shut down industries bringing it in. You go after the Real Estate investors, the luxury item (sportscars) salespeople, and other SCUM that benefit from it. That's RICO corruption, they know where that money came from.

except you'll never succeed with prohibition dumbass.

if you give government, and by proxy the police, power to intrude in your life they will. always.
so yeah, I'd rather deal with the "consequences" of all drugs being legal.

freedom is dangerous bud.
and you really need to lay off the fucking jewish conspiracy theories. you sound like a whackjob.

 

[Filthy McChevy]

And now for something completely different... Everknobs meanings of life.

 

[evernoob]

except you'll never succeed with prohibition dumbass.

if you give government, and by proxy the police, power to intrude in your life they will. always.
so yeah, I'd rather deal with the "consequences" of all drugs being legal.

freedom is dangerous bud.
and you really need to lay off the fucking jewish conspiracy theories. you sound like a whackjob.

You have absolutely no place telling me 'freedom is dangerous bud'

You are the stock-standard conservacuck, and I am the hated and edgy faggot that stirs you all up by making you look at yourselves and your impotent behaviors. That is the standard on this board because I made it the standard. Bud.

You're so ignorant, you think that the Israeli dominance of the MDMA trade is a 'jewish conspiracy theory'. That's how fucking ignorant you are.

https://www.haaretz.com/1.4723857

• Israelis at Center of Ecstasy Drug Trade
• In recent years, organized crime in Israel, some with links to criminal organizations in Russia, have come to control the distribution of the drug in Europe, according to a Bureau for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs document.

etc

Haaretz is an Israeli newspaper, dope.

New let me fill your very naive ass in on well-known facts: You use google to verify these facts, I am done holding babby's wee widdle hand on this.

Alcohol is at the center of Western Civilization, and there are actual classes and careers spent studying exactly that.

Drugs are not part of Western Civlization, they are a tool used by white-hating Chinese and other groups to weaken the US in the same way the British used drugs to break up China in the Opium Wars. This is not an accident at all. It is deliberate.

Drugs will always exist and the drug trade will always exist. We don't need to coddle the police forces and DA's offices around the Country because they lobby for laws that make sure that drugs are always in the public's mind and a problem that perpetually needs solving.

The DA's and cops have been COMPLICIT in the spreading of the drug war to rural America, which has cost hundreds of thousands of lives. This empowers local Podunk law enforcement to make siezures, get budget increases, and do more coply activities like play with their tiny dicks and their toys.

Wake up and stop arguing like a Karen, in a binary fashion where theoretical viewpoints are seen as absolute. Grow up, and act like a man.

 

[Provience]

Show me where I said anything about abolishing the police. In fact, I said that cutting before reforming is a bad idea. Like I said before, shifting resources and responsibilities isn't a bad idea. You don't need police for most civil issues.

I'm not advocating knee jerk reactions like what Seattle did to appease a vocal minority. Alternatives to police in certain situations need to be implemented and established. At that point you can 'defund' the police and shift a lot of that budget around as needed.

From a PR perspective, "defund the police" sounds idiotic. But really it's about the above and about police not needing military grade hardware in most cases. Maybe major metro areas need some, but most places don't. These small towns don't need fucking MRAPs, APCs, ect. They don't need Camaros, Corvettes, ect as police cars to show off.

Like most issues, this one is caught up in extremes and hyperbole, but there's a lot of shades of grey and middle ground on both sides of it. But, policing in this country has gotten out of hand and needs a to be fundamentally evaluated and overhauled from the ground up.

I didn't say you said to defund, but wanted to put your post with the quote from the article that just highlights the two sides of people on the defund side

one says "defund means reform" and the other says "fuck that, defund means defund" so no, i strongly disagree that it is "really about" just taking some of their hardware.

policing needs work? sure. the laws need more work and are the source of that stuff. While i have issues with policing, the laws are where the focus needs to be. it's just like the mask debate, it's a total side show that has fuckall to do with the issue. defund=masks

but "really" these fucks protesting in the street want to tear down capitalism, long held belief

 

[Provience]

except you'll never succeed with prohibition dumbass.

if you give government, and by proxy the police, power to intrude in your life they will. always.
so yeah, I'd rather deal with the "consequences" of all drugs being legal.

freedom is dangerous bud.
and you really need to lay off the fucking jewish conspiracy theories. you sound like a whackjob.

end the war on drugs, bring back opium dens.

fuck, put them across the street from narc. anon. meeting spots.

 

[Weasel]

I absolutely do not buy the argument "shoot until the threat is neutralized" That is simply murder. One shot, pop the balloon, call for back up and the medics. Little League umpire shit, read, pause react.

Neither do I. I also don't think Police need to push certain issues. There a a ton of times were they don't "have to do anything" or they don't "have to engage" when they can contain and wait and deescalate as much as possible.

I still feel that they should not be able to shoot until shot at. We run wars with those ROE.

 

[Truckedup]

I still feel that they should not be able to shoot until shot at. We run wars with those ROE.

The wars we run like that never come to a satisfactory conclusion... lol.....of course no one wants the cops to shoot first unless it's someone they dont like...you know, rapists, murderers, rioters and child molesters, you hear it right here...

 

[Hooligan]

I don’t get all the hoopla. Sure, a few people die each year..which we find out after the fact generally don’t matter anyways. If the point is to save lives, then ban cars, they cause more deaths, shit ban doctors, medical malpractice kills or maims far more people.

as pointed out, there isn’t a “war” on drugs. A war would have defined tactics and a planned end result. I agree with prohibition, outright legalization would be a nightmare for those of us that want a civilized place to live.

 

[45acp]

I don’t get all the hoopla. Sure, a few people die each year..which we find out after the fact generally don’t matter anyways. If the point is to save lives, then ban cars, they cause more deaths, shit ban doctors, medical malpractice kills or maims far more people.

as pointed out, there isn’t a “war” on drugs. A war would have defined tactics and a planned end result. I agree with prohibition, outright legalization would be a nightmare for those of us that want a civilized place to live.

I don't think it would be a nightmare. Imagine- super cheap heroin OTC at Walgreens. (Or meth). An addict would be able to afford their chosen poison, and would then be free to kill themselves in a timely manner. Not dragging it out over years and years due to lack of money, limited supply, time off the drug incarcerated etc... let's help make their chosen path an express lane.

Also, we'd see a huge drop in theft/burglary as most of those crimes are drug related. Imagine forgetting your garage door open all night and its no big deal because the tweakers have a nice affordable endless supply and are all home killing themselves instead of cruising for an easy theft target.

We can do this. First 5 years will be raunchy, but itll work.

 

[87manche]

The items on your list are all examples of lazy law enforcement.
the only time a noknock should be used is its a life threatening situation. Destruction of evidence isnt one.

Warrantless searches are a necessary tool BUT the courts should hold officers to the higher standard that using them requires. I smell weed does not meet the exigent standards for a warrantless search. If thats the case the officer should call in for a warrant.

The only time property should be seized iis if there are charges filed and the property is seized as evidence. If charges are dropped the property should be returned immediately. Civil forfeiture without charges is bullshit.

and I can post story after story where every one of those things happened. Hell, I've lived "I smell weed" and had my shit searched.
I didn't go to jail, so I guess there wasn't any weed in the car.

oh, and I smell weed is exigent now.
thanks supreme court:
https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supre...t/09-1272.html


you're talking about what should be the case, and I'm telling you that it isn't. If you haven't figured that out by now I don't know what to tell you other than you're being willfully ignorant. This shit is abused, daily.

everknob's blather

yep, it's all a big worldwide conspiracy to bring down the wihite man.

You're a fucking lunatic.
your posts argue against themselves. in one breadth you'll say fuck the police, and in the next you'll say they need more power to punish groups of people you don't like.

go away already. You're a rambling idiot.

 

[Johann]

I don't think it would be a nightmare. Imagine- super cheap heroin OTC at Walgreens. (Or meth). An addict would be able to afford their chosen poison, and would then be free to kill themselves in a timely manner. Not dragging it out over years and years due to lack of money, limited supply, time off the drug incarcerated etc... let's help make their chosen path an express lane.

Also, we'd see a huge drop in theft/burglary as most of those crimes are drug related. Imagine forgetting your garage door open all night and its no big deal because the tweakers have a nice affordable endless supply and are all home killing themselves instead of cruising for an easy theft target.

We can do this. First 5 years will be raunchy, but itll work.

Absolutely. Having it packaged responsibly by Walgreen's would eliminate the Fentanyl dice roll that get a lot of people. People have been altering their minds since cave man days. Nothing will stop us from trying to turn off our big brains for a while. Let them do it. Make tax money on it like the ABC store and put that money towards addiction treatment.

DWI laws and other means to keep people from hurting others while impaired would still need to be in place along with ad campaigns to reinforce. "Gettin High? Stay home!"

 

[87manche]

Absolutely. Having it packaged responsibly by Walgreen's would eliminate the Fentanyl dice roll that get a lot of people. People have been altering their minds since cave man days. Nothing will stop us from trying to turn off our big brains for a while. Let them do it. Make tax money on it like the ABC store and put that money towards addiction treatment.

DWI laws and other means to keep people from hurting others while impaired would still need to be in place along with ad campaigns to reinforce. "Gettin High? Stay home!"

it must be a coincidence that when Ohio decided to "crack down" on doctors over prescribing pain medications is when the "opioid epidemic" started right?

the state lacks a fundamental understanding of the problem. Cutting off the supply doesn't make addicts stop doing drugs, it just makes them go find more dangerous drugs with 0 quality control and oversight.
When they were all doing oxy nobody was dying in the streets.
and now they are. every week.

because prohibition is what causes the fucking problems.

You'd have thought we learned that a hundred years ago when we tried it with alcohol and literally gave rise to organized crime in this country as a response to the market demand for alcohol.

but whatever.

 

[grumpy356]

1

and I can post story after story where every one of those things happened. Hell, I've lived "I smell weed" and had my shit searched.
I didn't go to jail, so I guess there wasn't any weed in the car.

oh, and I smell weed is exigent now.
thanks supreme court:
https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supre...t/09-1272.html

I am also going to leave this here.

It wasn't brought up directly, but it applies
.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florid...20was%2074%25.

False alerts in the field[edit]


In Harris, one of the major points raised by a number of the amici curiae is that a dog's training or certification does not necessarily reflect that dog's reliability in the field. They point to what they say are "the most comprehensive data available on the rate of false alerts in real-world settings"[SUP][4][/SUP] – several years' of studies undertaken by an independent government agency in Sydney, Australia, under the Police Powers (Drug Detection Dogs) Act 2001.[SUP][25][/SUP][SUP][26][/SUP] Police dogs went through an initial 6 weeks of training to detect cannabis, ecstasy, methamphetamine, cocaine and heroin, received additional training weekly, and were tested and re-certified every three months. The police dogs would randomly sniff individuals at train stations, licensed premises, on streets and sidewalks, at nightclub strips, shopping centers, concerts, and other public locations – the dog would sit next to a person if it alerted. In the first 9 months of 2011, dogs alerted (and police searched) 14,102 times, and drugs were found only 2,854 times—a false alert rate of 80%. Those results, they say, are surprisingly consistent – in 2010, the false alert rate was 74%.[SUP][3][/SUP] Further still, the study found that individual dog's performance varied wildly, with accuracy rates ranging from a high of 56% to a low of 7%, with two-thirds of the dogs performing below the average. The New South Wales' Ombudsman summarized his report by saying:

Despite the best efforts of police officers, the use of drug detection dogs has proven to be an ineffective tool for detecting drug dealers. Overwhelmingly, the use of drug detection dogs has led to public searches of individuals in which no drugs were found, or to the detection of (mostly young) adults in possession of very small amounts of cannabis for personal use. These findings have led us to question whether the Drug Dogs Act will ever provide a fair, efficacious and cost effective tool to target drug supply. Given this, we have recommended that the starting point, when considering this report, is to review whether the Drug Dogs Act should be retained at all."[SUP][27][/SUP]​

Prosecutors, on the other hand, say that does not prove anything. They point to "residual odors", meaning that the individuals may have in fact been in contact with drugs earlier and the drugs were no longer present, or the drugs may have been extremely well-hidden. In a reply brief, P.J. Bondi, Attorney General of Florida, wrote:

When you enter the kitchen and smell popcorn, the fact that someone has already eaten all the popcorn and put the bag outside in the trash takes nothing away from the fact that you accurately smelled popcorn in the kitchen."[SUP][28][/SUP]​

Decision[edit]


The United States Supreme Court returned a unanimous decision on February 19, 2013, ruling against Harris and overturning the ruling of the Florida Supreme Court.[SUP][29][/SUP] In the unanimous opinion, Justice Elena Kagan stated that the dog's certification and continued training are adequate indication of his reliability, and thus is sufficient to presume the dog's alert provides probable cause to search, using the "totality-of-the-circumstances" test per Illinois v. Gates. She wrote that the Florida Supreme Court instead established "a strict evidentiary checklist", where "an alert cannot establish probable cause ... unless the State introduces comprehensive documentation of the dog's prior 'hits' and 'misses' in the field ... No matter how much other proof the State offers of the dog's reliability, the absent field performance records will preclude a finding of probable cause."[SUP][30][/SUP]

The Court did not, however, rule out the questioning of reliability where specific grounds are present.[SUP][29][/SUP] Kagan also stated that "a defendant must have an opportunity to challenge such evidence of a dog's reliability, whether by cross-examining the testifying officer or by introducing his own fact or expert witnesses. The defendant may contest training or testing standards as flawed, or too lax, or raise an issue regarding the particular alert."[SUP][31][/SUP]

 

[45acp]

it must be a coincidence that when Ohio decided to "crack down" on doctors over prescribing pain medications is when the "opioid epidemic" started right?

the state lacks a fundamental understanding of the problem. Cutting off the supply doesn't make addicts stop doing drugs, it just makes them go find more dangerous drugs with 0 quality control and oversight.
When they were all doing oxy nobody was dying in the streets.
and now they are. every week.

because prohibition is what causes the fucking problems.

You'd have thought we learned that a hundred years ago when we tried it with alcohol and literally gave rise to organized crime in this country as a response to the market demand for alcohol.

but whatever.

Not just Ohio, but virtually everywhere. 10-15 years ago heroin didn't exist in this region. Yes, rx opiates were everywhere... sometimes abused. There was virtually zero crime associated with the pain pills because if you wanted a buzz you simply went to the dr with your "bad back".

Now you can get your dick bit off by an alligator and will be lucky if they even give you a couple Tylenol 3's. Hair-run is everywhere, possibly even more popular than meth, and the relatively harmless functional addicts have all turned into flu-zombies. Cracking down on the pill writers simply moved us from a level 4 drug problem to a level 7 drug problem.

 

[87manche]

Not just Ohio, but virtually everywhere. 10-15 years ago heroin didn't exist in this region. Yes, rx opiates were everywhere... sometimes abused. There was virtually zero crime associated with the pain pills because if you wanted a buzz you simply went to the dr with your "bad back".

Now you can get your dick bit off by an alligator and will be lucky if they even give you a couple Tylenol 3's. Hair-run is everywhere, possibly even more popular than meth, and the relatively harmless functional addicts have all turned into flu-zombies. Cracking down on the pill writers simply moved us from a level 4 drug problem to a level 7 drug problem.

and the new problem will be used as justification to expand the police state.

it's a self licking ice cream cone.

 

[Russell]

I don't think the police issue is a gun issue. It's an accountability issue. I say we treat the cops just like they treat an every day citizen.

If they pull a gun on you - They are charged with pointing a firearm and need to prove in court why they were justified in doing so. If they shoot someone they are charged with murder and need to prove in court why taking a life was necessary. If they are speeding down the highway without lights or sirens or driving dangerously they should be charged with stunting and have to prove in court why their driving behavior was appropriate. If they tackle someone and injure them they should be charged with assault etc. Three proven guilty charges inside of a 5 year period and they are gone and barred from ever working in law enforcement ever again. This doesn't prevent them from taking immediate action, but it will certainly make them think twice about it. Most do so anyways, but there are plenty of jerk wads that don't think things through and escalate situations for the thrill of it.

Citizens should also be able to raise complaints of brutality or corruption with an impartial 3rd party and if the complaint is founded then the officer receives a permanent black mark on their record. 5 complaints found to be legit and they lose their jobs and are barred from the profession. Put a system in place that if you have a Karen who lodges complaints or charges against police officers chronically that they will be dealt with harshly with massive fines and jail time.

Cops under investigation should be on unpaid leave until they are proven innocent. If they are proven guilty they forfeit that pay. If innocent they are back paid with interest.

Yeah, the courts would be bogged down for a while until the police behavior changes, but I'd rather hire a thousand more public service workers to deal with that backlog than to live in fear of my life should I have a chance encounter with a brutal cop with an itchy trigger finger. I still believe that most cops are doing the right thing most of the time in their own work, but all of them are guilty of following the thin blue line and allowing their bad apple co-workers to get away with murder without doing something about it. Once we weed the assholes out, then the courts would slow down and things will go back to normal.

I think that simply defunding them won't correct the issues. Getting rid of them outright would be a whole other disaster in of itself. We need law enforcement, but they need to be held to higher standards than your average ever-day citizen.

 

[xr-nut]

I'm the odd "conservative" with the stance to de-fund the police. Like- fire all the officers, close the buildings and screw the doors shut. My white middle age privilege has kept me free from almost entirely any police contact(sarcasm-it is because I don't break the law, except for driving faster than an arbitrary number on a sign).

I read on the other place some time ago, one of us posted about having that gut feeling anytime you drive past a leo at an intersection, waiting for them to pull out behind you. I feel that way too, despite my before mentioned whiteness, and lack of breaking any laws at that moment in time. There are just too many instances of leo wrong doing to not feel that way. At least a little. That feeling isn't made up and I can only guess what it must be like for "people of color". Until I watched a video by Phil Vischer. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGUwcs9qJXY

In that video he talks about why black people are so upset. In the video he explains how our "system" has literally been engineered to keep black people down. I would wager that most black people have not seen this video and that the ones pissed in public now are protesting due to the floyd guy. However they should be protesting the ideologies in that video.

The militarization of our police is out of control. The only way to end it, is to end it all together. So then the question becomes, who will protect my family. I'd like to think that would fall on me. I think I am capable of it, at least when they are with me. But what happens when they venture out on their own.

I do not know what the answer is, but we cannot keep on going the direction we are going much longer.

 

[clodhopper]

I don't think the police issue is a gun issue. It's an accountability issue. I say we treat the cops just like they treat an every day citizen.

If they pull a gun on you - They are charged with pointing a firearm and need to prove in court why they were justified in doing so. If they shoot someone they are charged with murder and need to prove in court why taking a life was necessary. If they are speeding down the highway without lights or sirens or driving dangerously they should be charged with stunting and have to prove in court why their driving behavior was appropriate. If they tackle someone and injure them they should be charged with assault etc. Three proven guilty charges inside of a 5 year period and they are gone and barred from ever working in law enforcement ever again. This doesn't prevent them from taking immediate action, but it will certainly make them think twice about it. Most do so anyways, but there are plenty of jerk wads that don't think things through and escalate situations for the thrill of it.

Citizens should also be able to raise complaints of brutality or corruption with an impartial 3rd party and if the complaint is founded then the officer receives a permanent black mark on their record. 5 complaints found to be legit and they lose their jobs and are barred from the profession. Put a system in place that if you have a Karen who lodges complaints or charges against police officers chronically that they will be dealt with harshly with massive fines and jail time.

Cops under investigation should be on unpaid leave until they are proven innocent. If they are proven guilty they forfeit that pay. If innocent they are back paid with interest.

Yeah, the courts would be bogged down for a while until the police behavior changes, but I'd rather hire a thousand more public service workers to deal with that backlog than to live in fear of my life should I have a chance encounter with a brutal cop with an itchy trigger finger. I still believe that most cops are doing the right thing most of the time in their own work, but all of them are guilty of following the thin blue line and allowing their bad apple co-workers to get away with murder without doing something about it. Once we weed the assholes out, then the courts would slow down and things will go back to normal.

I think that simply defunding them won't correct the issues. Getting rid of them outright would be a whole other disaster in of itself. We need law enforcement, but they need to be held to higher standards than your average ever-day citizen.

Your idea will result in the opposite of what you think. Good cops will find new careers outside law enforcement and the assholes, who don't care anyway or are on a power trip, will be the only ones left employed.

 

[clodhopper]

I'm the odd "conservative" with the stance to de-fund the police. Like- fire all the officers, close the buildings and screw the doors shut. My white middle age privilege has kept me free from almost entirely any police contact(sarcasm-it is because I don't break the law, except for driving faster than an arbitrary number on a sign).

I read on the other place some time ago, one of us posted about having that gut feeling anytime you drive past a leo at an intersection, waiting for them to pull out behind you. I feel that way too, despite my before mentioned whiteness, and lack of breaking any laws at that moment in time. There are just too many instances of leo wrong doing to not feel that way. At least a little. That feeling isn't made up and I can only guess what it must be like for "people of color". Until I watched a video by Phil Vischer. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGUwcs9qJXY

In that video he talks about why black people are so upset. In the video he explains how our "system" has literally been engineered to keep black people down. I would wager that most black people have not seen this video and that the ones pissed in public now are protesting due to the floyd guy. However they should be protesting the ideologies in that video.

The militarization of our police is out of control. The only way to end it, is to end it all together. So then the question becomes, who will protect my family. I'd like to think that would fall on me. I think I am capable of it, at least when they are with me. But what happens when they venture out on their own.

I do not know what the answer is, but we cannot keep on going the direction we are going much longer.

Chasing the idea that there is a "perfect solution" is going to get us in a situation much worse than we are currently in. The police have become militarized at the request of the citizenry wanting perfect safety while criminals become more violent. You do know that the police aren't some separate authority, right? That they operated according to the policies of the politicians and demands of the citizens? I am fine with rolling back policing, but doing so comes with an increase in crime, some petty, some not so petty.

There are a whole lot of people who are so comfortable in modern safety that they have disconnected their logic circuits on this topic. "Police are evil, and eliminating them will provide an overall reduction in violence!" Seriously?!? Go back and think about what you are saying before you open yer yap. You may be peaceful but there are plenty of people out there that are opportunists. Not everyone thinks like you do in the ways of peaceful community culture.

Also, you come across as a person suffering from massive amounts of "white guilt". Not sure if that was your intent.

 

[Provience]

I'm the odd "conservative" with the stance to de-fund the police. Like- fire all the officers, close the buildings and screw the doors shut. My white middle age privilege has kept me free from almost entirely any police contact(sarcasm-it is because I don't break the law, except for driving faster than an arbitrary number on a sign).

I read on the other place some time ago, one of us posted about having that gut feeling anytime you drive past a leo at an intersection, waiting for them to pull out behind you. I feel that way too, despite my before mentioned whiteness, and lack of breaking any laws at that moment in time. There are just too many instances of leo wrong doing to not feel that way. At least a little. That feeling isn't made up and I can only guess what it must be like for "people of color". Until I watched a video by Phil Vischer. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGUwcs9qJXY

In that video he talks about why black people are so upset. In the video he explains how our "system" has literally been engineered to keep black people down. I would wager that most black people have not seen this video and that the ones pissed in public now are protesting due to the floyd guy. However they should be protesting the ideologies in that video.

The militarization of our police is out of control. The only way to end it, is to end it all together. So then the question becomes, who will protect my family. I'd like to think that would fall on me. I think I am capable of it, at least when they are with me. But what happens when they venture out on their own.

I do not know what the answer is, but we cannot keep on going the direction we are going much longer.

there are plenty of areas that are currently "underpoliced" and police that are "underfunded" to the point that all they can do is respond to 911 maybe and maybe investigate horrific crimes.

those places exist. what do they look like? absolute shit holes. this isn't some novel idea that just hasn't been tried right enough before. there are whole cities that refuse to work with police, are they more safe than others? not a chance. are they bastions of freedom? fuck no. they are the embodiment of corruption and black holes for money. they STILL find ways to add more laws to be arbitrarily enforced.

 

[clodhopper]

Here is an idea.

Quit looking at this problem from the point of view of the average schmo who is getting pulled over periodically and has a beef with "the man".

Start looking at this problem as if YOU were responsible for the community safety. That means trying to prevent crime in all forms, catch/punish criminals, all while dealing with public criticism from all sides. Is eliminating the cops still an option for you? If so, what is your idea for what will replace the current police force? Remember, you are still responsible for maintaining peace and controlling crime. So, our safety is now in YOUR hands and failure means people will die and you will be treated to public humiliation for the rest of your life.

Ready? GO!

 

[idahojeep]

Here is an idea.

Quit looking at this problem from the point of view of the average schmo who is getting pulled over periodically and has a beef with "the man".

Start looking at this problem as if YOU were responsible for the community safety. That means trying to prevent crime in all forms, catch/punish criminals, all while dealing with public criticism from all sides. Is eliminating the cops still an option for you? If so, what is your idea for what will replace the current police force? Remember, you are still responsible for maintaining peace and controlling crime. So, our safety is now in YOUR hands and failure means people will die and you will be treated to public humiliation for the rest of your life.

Ready? GO!

Yeah right. Too much nuance for the crowd that sits around rubbing their dicks on their ARs.

 

[Stuck]

and I can post story after story where every one of those things happened. Hell, I've lived "I smell weed" and had my shit searched.
I didn't go to jail, so I guess there wasn't any weed in the car.

oh, and I smell weed is exigent now.
thanks supreme court:
https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supre...t/09-1272.html


you're talking about what should be the case, and I'm telling you that it isn't. If you haven't figured that out by now I don't know what to tell you other than you're being willfully ignorant. This shit is abused, daily.

.

Im not being willfully ignorant and youre taking my comment out of context. I never said it didnt happen. I know it does. I said its bullshit pulled by lazy LEOs