Slashdot Mirror
FBI Chief Links Video Scrutiny of Police To Rise In Violent Crime (nytimes.com)
HughPickens.com writes: This year, murders have spiked in major cities across America. According to FBI director James B. Comey the additional scrutiny and criticism of police officers that has come in the wake of highly publicized incidents of police brutality may be the main reason for the recent increase in violent crime. "I don't know whether that explains it entirely, but I do have a strong sense that some part of the explanation is a chill wind that has blown through American law enforcement over the last year," says Comey. He says he's been told by many police leaders that officers who normally would stop to question suspicious people are opting to stay in their patrol cars for fear of having their encounters recorded and become video sensations.
That hesitancy has led to missed opportunities to apprehend suspects and has decreased the police presence on the streets of the country's most violent cities. Officers tell Comey that youths surround police when they get out of their vehicles, taunting them and making videos of the spectacle with their cell phones. "In today's YouTube world, there are officers reluctant to get out of their cars and do the work that controls violent crime," says Comey. "Our officers are answering 911 calls, but avoiding the informal contact that keeps bad guys from standing around, especially with guns."
That hesitancy has led to missed opportunities to apprehend suspects and has decreased the police presence on the streets of the country's most violent cities. Officers tell Comey that youths surround police when they get out of their vehicles, taunting them and making videos of the spectacle with their cell phones. "In today's YouTube world, there are officers reluctant to get out of their cars and do the work that controls violent crime," says Comey. "Our officers are answering 911 calls, but avoiding the informal contact that keeps bad guys from standing around, especially with guns."
If the police acted respectfully during encounters with private citizens, I doubt there would be much need to record these encounters. I know I don't record my neighbor getting his mail or washing his car, because I don't consider either behavior threatening. Police have abused their positions of trust and the recording is one of many symptoms of this fact.
Sorry, but do your job withing the confines of the law (including the constitution). You get no free pass. If you cannot do your job within those confines, then press to have those laws changed, in an open and democratic manner. If you do not, you are little (or no) better than the thugs and gangsters you wish to imprison.
Silence is a state of mime.
Lack of respect slowly eroding civilization.
Here is a radical proposal:
don't choke to death petty criminals, don't shoot fleeing suspects in the back. Don't kill people in the vans on their way to the police station, etc... And more importantly: don't support the police officers who do this!
And finally, actually discipline officers for their misdeeds.
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
The first police department in LA was a gang. We've been fighting crime with paid criminals since then.
Crime is down. He's lying. End of story. We don't have to consider to a word this person says.
Yes. It's the evil stoners. Aggressive lot. They'd kill for their fix on junk food...tomorrow!
Officers tell Comey that youths surround police when they get out of their vehicles, taunting them and making videos of the spectacle with their cell phones. "In today's YouTube world, there are officers reluctant to get out of their cars and do the work that controls violent crime," says Comey.
Tough shit. Don't like it? Get another job. That's what we in the private sector have to do. And you have to have a certain mentality to want to walk around in public with a badge and gun. It's a primitive desire for physical dominance - it's the ape brain's desire.
Some officers, he said, scrutinize minorities more closely using a mental shortcut that “becomes almost irresistible and maybe even rational by some lights” because black men are arrested at much higher rates than white men.
Of course they are. They are policed more and as a result are caught more often doing things that many people do - like smoking pot. When we get rid of these ridiculous drug laws, we'll see a huge change.
Anyway, I don't see any data to back up what this guy says.
The problem isn't just with police only, or politicians, or public figures... it's mostly everyone. People are too literal in their intepretation of procedures. There is such a thing as leniency, giving someone the benefit of the doubt. Unfortunately, and I speak mostly for my generation (~20-35 yrs), there is little there. It's always black and white.
If a person even looks suspicious, then it's cause to question them, assume they're a bad person, and treat them as such.
That's the typical attitude, to varying degrees. Too much drama in television, movies, and the media. It's more a psychological influence of how to behave: everything has to be intense. Everything is critical, because it _could_ become critical... though less than 0.001% of the time, it actually is critical.
Then you have the other side: the criminals who aren't afraid to commit the crime, but are afraid of the punishment. A conflict, I suppose, of moral judgement of behavior. Again, influence of dramatic behavior and examples, and language. News, and marketing, and advertising, make things seem so much better / worse than they really are.
This, in turn, has given us a generation of people who think things _are_ or _have to be_ dramatic... and thus, the literal interpretation and unmoving nature has come about.
Take a homeless guy who looks like he's been making some really stupid decisions. Some dumbass young cop might equate his unclean looks, ragged clothes, bad teeth, and putrid smell, as, "fuck, this guy must be a bad person," when in reality, he was a former engineer who helped build the very roads and bridges this cop patrols. But the cop don't give a shit. He's made up his mind that, because this homeless guy is simply _talking_ to people, that they need to be "asked to leave."
Or some shit.
Beat people
Get filmed
Blame the film crew for the beatings?
No shit violent crime is up when no one respects the police anymore
An increase in crime is a small price to pay in exchange for officers doing what they should be doing - leaving people alone, showing up when called, taking reports and investigating after the fact, stop fishing, not trying to predict and prevent crime at the expense of freedom, not trying to coercing confessions, not profiling, not harassing people who are doing "suspicious" things, not shooting unarmed suspects in the face, and not shooting people's dogs.
Besides most crime happens in crime-ridden communities, and if people want to let their communities go to hell in a handbasket, it's their problem. If you're in one and don't like it, work harder and move, or just don't raise your kids to be criminals.
the best part is that the director of the FBI says police are afraid of kids with phones who mock them. the police should resign if they are so afraid.
The purpose of the police is to enforce the will of the courts (whoever controls those). Don't believe it?
If you catch someone in the middle of home invasion, have eye witnesses, fingerprint proof, and objects owned by the invader left behind in the house......the police still might not prosecute. They'll just let the guy go.
But an eviction notice? The sheriff will do his duty every single time.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
2012 had the lowest crime rate since 1970 and even with the so called spike, the murder rate stills remains far below the record marks witnessed two to three decades ago, in the late 1980s and early ’90s. Can someone in the media call bullshit ?
Whether or not to stop, detain, punch or shoot a suspect is always a judgement call — calculations weighting pros and cons, risk and reward are automatically made in our heads.
The additional scrutiny — and TFA talks about all kinds of scrutiny, not just video, that's Hugh Pickens' manipulations — shifts that balance towards the safer (for the policeman) course of action. Because if they do apprehend a dangerous criminal cleanly, at most, they'll get a pat on the back. But if they screw up, or even if they don't, but merely appear to — the entire "Hands up don't shoot" meme is based on a lie, remember? — their lives will change dramatically. For the worse.
The scrutiny is not going anywhere and that, on balance, is a good thing, in my opinion. The public — and the police — just need to learn not to rush to judgement. And the wronged cops need to receive their days in court — of public opinion — not merely "left alone", when they are exonerated. That might push the balance back a little...
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Nobody talks about the fact Trayvon Martin, Michael Brown, and *ALL* of the recent highly-publicized decedents that interfered with police had marijuana in their blood.
All of these people were habitual substance abusers. Rodney King has crack cocaine in his system too.
Which police officer fears being filmed doing their job correctly?
Or, put another way, which police officer has been harmed after applying violence only proportionate to that dealt out, as a result of being filmed applying that violence?
As for people surrounding government cars and filming them, what exactly is the problem? Oh nooo, I have the opportunity to demonstrate that I can do my job properly! Would you prefer to be surrounded by people who are NOT recording evidence of what's actually going on? because that can happen too.
Its simple: "If the police don't obey the law, why the hell should anybody else?"
is a license to break the law. Cops need to be held accountable for their misdeeds, just like everyone else. Maybe the cops that are afraid to be recorded don't know how to do their jobs while following the law.
In other words, police have no idea how to do their job without being able to assault people, racially profile them, and generally be dicks. If these police are afraid to do their jobs because they might be filmed, the easiest solution is to hire police officers who don't do anything wrong that will be an issue if it ends up on tape. The reason people are taping the police constantly now is because they expect the police to do something wrong because they have shown in a lot of cases they do. If the police get better and stop setting the expectation they will treat people like garbage, then people won;t expect it and won't feel the need to film them constantly.
"Information wants to be expensive" - Stewart Brand, the same guy who said "Information wants to be free"
To get any reforms through you'll need approval of the unions. The unions will say no. You aren't anti-union, are you?
My Other Computer Is A Data General Nova III.
Pretty sure there's a link between violent police and violent crime.
"In today's YouTube world, there are officers reluctant to get out of their cars and do the work that controls violent crime," says Comey.
If they have nothing to hide, why are they afraid of being recorded? If they aren't breaking the law, then they should not fear to do their jobs. That's what they've been telling us all along; if we have nothing to hide, we shouldn't fear their disregard for the fourth amendment. But if the cops have to break the law to save it, what are they fighting for anyway?
The cops are still playing this issue like it's part of the non-existent "war on cops". There is no such thing. Instead, there's a ground swell of support for the idea that the cops should be made to follow the law just like the rest of us, or even moreso. With great power comes great responsibility.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
But he acknowledged that there is so far no data to back up his assertion
Now there's a surprise.
Since wer're posting anecdotes and vague "feelings", here's what I've noticed.
I've lived in my neighborhood for decades, and haven't had any problem with police... except this year, in which I was stopped and questioned three times. Make that "stopped, handcuffed, searched, ID'd, and questioned" three times. One time I had a prescription in my jacket pocket (antibiotic), and the officer jotted down the drug, my name, and the prescription number in his notebook.
We're supposed to be free to go about our business, and we're not required to interact with police when they call out to us. Police can walk up to someone and try to start a conversation, but I've always been told that they are like any citizen, and you can choose not to interact with them.
In all three cases I *could not* avoid interacting with the police despite trying, and all three situations ended in a confrontation. The officer *began* the encounter visibly irate, and escalated to *enraged* when I wouldn't interact. (Yes, I'm aware of my state's "must identify" law. I don't/didn't lie to them, but I don't show ID when asked.)
One told me he was going to taser me if I didn't show ID, one actually arrested me for not having ID (while hiking on a public trail), but then changed the charge at the last minute. On that last one, the officer stated that not carrying an ID was illegal.
I'm white, elderly, and live in a low-crime bedroom community, and I can't take a walk at night without fear of being randomly intimidated by an angry cop.
A neighboring town had a pumpkin festival last year, and the police had snipers out during the event.
I don't know what it is with America these days, but we're definitely seeing more angry police, and this is reflected in the public's perception.
I think it's counter productive. I won't have anything to do with the police now, and I don't know anyone on my block who will. If they come door-to-door asking if we witnessed some crime, they get nothing from me.
The chance of abuse is too high for me to have any interaction with them. If they come door-to-door, I didn't see anything.
yeah right marijuana is the same as crack cocaine
Police are afraid of video cameras and don't do their jobs because of it?
Seriously, how can we fuck around, beat you, shoot you, and violate your rights on a whim if you pesky citizens are going to video us all the time?
Signed,
The Police
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
538 recently ran a piece on this misguided and largely misleading storyline police are touting. It's worth a read if you like facts. But this is /.
http://fivethirtyeight.com/fea...
1) With the way some cops have treated people of all colors, its no surprise that people don't want to be policed and have a bad reaction to american policing. e.g., traffic stop turns into murder, the cop shoots the unarmed occupant(s), and its happened to whites as well, its not just a cops vs blacks problem. Or, on a less non-violent level, people perceive police to be dogmatic enforcers of traffic or other minor violations and its viewed as harassment. There's also too many stupid laws and regulations, and policing is often perceived as a way to generate revenue for the State.
2) If people want to harass cops in certain neighborhoods and don't want them around, then the police should just let those people kill each other and just answer the 911 calls and take the bodies away, which is where we are at now, e.g. Baltimore and other towns. This non homogeneous society we live in is falling apart, america lacks cohesion among its diverse groups of citizens and there is a feeling of alienation and disenfranchisement on all sides. No amount of policing or police tactics is going to solve that problem.
3) We need video and other surveillance of authorities, it has a way of bringing to light cases where abuse of power occurs. This police state we live in now works both ways Mr FBI Director.
Citation needed, AC.
Let's use the usual police argument:
If you have nothing to hide and don't break any laws, why would you object to being recorded and scrutinized?
The move lately to release felons (ostensibly "nonviolent", but's that for just the latest, often plea-bargained-down, offense) from prison back onto the streets, and to prohibit police from stopping and questioning people who they have reason to believe are up to no good are more likely a larger contributing cause. Then there's California's new Proposition 47 law where a number of former drug and property-crime felonies have been reclassified as misdemeanors, even potentially retroactively for existing felons, so now habitual offenders know they can operate and just expect citations and not arrest. Then they don't show up in court and just keep going. Combine that with California shoving thousands of felons out of its prisons to local jails, where they end up being released because there's no room, and you have a crime wave in CA. Car breakins are up 47% in San Francisco, robberies up 28%, car theft up 17%, violent offenses up 21% in Los Angeles.
Becuase they can now be held accountable for doing their job properely and by the book. They are now refusing to do so.
So the increase in crime should correlate with places that have relaxed drug laws. I didn't see that in the results. Where are you getting your statistics from?
Learn to love Alaska
First there is no statistical increase in crime. On a day to day basic crime will random walk allover the place. The general trend for crime is downward. As for the recording of police detering the police from doing their job that should only be if their job was killing unarmed black men. If it wasn't then they shouldn't worry about it.
They also had red and white blood cells coursing through their veins. These phychosis-inducing blood cells must be eradicated!
Sandra Bland didn't.
Martin didn't interfere with police. He was stalked down a blind alley by an aggressive man with a gun who had indicated a desire to hunt. He defended himself when he thought himself cornered, according to the Stand your Ground laws, and was executed by Zimmerman.
Learn to love Alaska
If the police routinely harass, put in hospital, and arrest for "disrespect cop" random people, you would expect crime rates to go down. After all they'll get lucky occasionally and pick someone who was just about to rob a gas station or something.
Apparently the FBI thinks that's a great way to reduce crime. Which isn't unexpected given the FBI's views on warrantless surveillance.
and the people are NOT as afraid of the police as before !
They can't bully, beat, harass, shoot, stalk, etc the people without a witness anymore !
This is my opinion based on what little I know and understand of the rumors and lies Thanks, Randal
See subject: They're NO DIFFERENT than trolls online - they'll taunt & keep @ you, then wonder WHY they got their asses kicked... & personally? IF I saw that or was that policeman?? Blow the little fucks away...
Why?
It'd set an example for the REST of "their kind" that don't RESPECT anything else, let alone logic & reason + they think MERCY is 'weakness' - that is until one of them gets put into the morgue & it's "discrimination" BULLSHIT!
(Street SCUM pieces of shit that don't realize MINUS THOSE POLICEMEN, we'd have fucking chaos).
* I don't care about what anyone thinks - I have to LIVE near shit like that & yes, cops have even given ME A CLEAN SLATE/GO/GREEN to knock the fuck out of them (& I've had to, admittedly slicing them or taking bats to their heads - of course, when no one is around to fuck me over + when they've TRIED & yes badly failed @ "gang jumping" me) - not officially of course, but I've had roommates who witnessed the entire thing... & in front of police cameras, not TOO long ago, I knocked the FUCK out of one such scumbag... he never did it again, & right in front of HIS neighbors, his daughter (who unfortunately was crying) etc.
Why? To stop anymore such occurences.
About a year++ ago around here, I put myself @ risk doing it & I'm not afraid (lol, NOW @ least) of what I did, since it worked out for everyone around here - calmed that fuckhead's jets FAST & in the end I told him "Motherfucker, you get OUTTA LINE? You'll think this was a swedish massage!" - store owner gave me shit, but I was like "Did you see him swing first?" He said "Yes" & I said "Well, so did the camera - we'll see what happens!" Nothing EVER did - why? I ran it by the RIGHT GUYS first - policemen! They're not ALL "dirty", in fact I'd say MOST aren't, but the crap they see, day in & DAY OUT? Would make most people mad/nuts I figure - I also feel these guys who are police shouldn't be on the street TOO long (I have pals I grew up with as police, even a former employee of mine when I was loss prevention decades ago who are - the shit they see would mess with YOUR MIND - it's not good to be exposed to, too long)
APK
P.S.=> Do I think that THIS is the ONLY REASON we have murder rates going up? Hell no - It's mainly when you have a POOR ECONOMY breeding a lot of HAVES vs. HAVE NOTS, you get not only culture shock, but also unrest internally inside society, as happy people who are fat & content DO NOT CAUSE TROUBLE or upset the status quo - but THAT, like so much else, HAS TO BE CORRECTED @ THE HIGHEST LEVELS OF SOCIETY (in other words, the wealthy - they've gotta GIVE some to get some, giving back - it's not the Bill Gates of the world, they already ARE trying that - it's the stockmarket wannabe Bill Gates' out there that do)... apk
Our criminal justice system is biased in favor of Type II errors (false negatives), rather than Type I errors (false positives). We think it is worse to jail, kill, or harass an innocent person than to let a criminal go free. Recently, we have had a lot of Type I errors (false positives), and we have corrected our procedures to reduce this type of error. There is a corresponding rise in false negatives (criminals going free), but this is the way we have deliberately designed the system. We are going back to the way we want things to be.
there should be a record of EVERYTHING that goes on around a patrol car when either its stopped or the lights/sirens are going (full 360 coverage)
get clever and have it stamped with a running hash of timestamp/frame content (to prevent tampering) and things should calm down.
Of course part of this is in any case that the deciding evidence is the Video Record if that record is MISSING it should result in the LEO losing the case.
but in any case if you do film a LEO please
1 be respectful
2 make it available when asked
... is that we citizens are filming it more, and thus able to back up claims of police violence.
Violence AGAINST police, on the other hand, is down. (Watch! While authority cherry picks data and adjusts charts to reflect their narrative! More at 11!)
Martin wasn't "cornered". His body was not found in a corner or in any place where he wasn't readily able to flee from.
He attacked Zimmerman, Zimmerman defended himself. Nothing in the forensic evidence suggests that Zimmerman instigated the violence.
The FBI is telling me that taking pictures of the people who MURDER unarmed men and get away with it means I have to tolerate being MURDERED by people who will not get away with it?
Can you say "PROPAGANDA"?
I can!
Correlation is not causation.
For example, murders are typically not stopped by police at all as they are very rarely crimes of opportunity. This person must know that. That he choses to ignore this knowledge is is a very bad sign, but what do you expect from the chief official of a police-state. What he also completely ignores is that some of the officers that have become "video sensations" are cold-blooded murderers. He seems to imply that these scum being caught is somehow a bad thing. Another strong indicator the US is a de-facto police-state, because only in a police-state is catching criminal policemen a bad thing.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
UK police don't mind being filmed. They have received training in various procedures and they're applying those procedures. If there's something wrong with the procedures then they need to be changed. They do not make up stuff as they go.
They have this holding position where they twist your arm towards your back, which can be painful if you resist, but otherwise you're pretty immobilised while still on your feet, with the officer also a safe distance away from you. If you decide to act as if you want your arm broken then the officer will swiftly do that for you - also part of their training.
Trayvon Martin also owned an illegal pistol, and had pictures of himself posing all "gangsta" with it on Facebook. They sure took *that* picture down a hury.
Please feel free to reference any of the evidence from the case to show how my comment is wrong.
AK Marc alleges that Martin was cornered as an affirmative defense to Martin's instigation violence towards Zimmerman. The evidence does not suggest that.
You're free to reference the prosecution's evidence if you disagree.
This is a bad thing. Yes, there are a few bad cops who get put on Youtube and become many people's understanding of what a cop is.
These are just people trying to do their job. How would you like to have people filming you work, ready to scrutinize your actions with millions of internet viewers?
Could it be that so much police work is done illegally or in violation of policy that they have trouble doing their job unless they can commit criminal acts? And it is racist as it can be. How much stop and frisk and the like goes on in wealthy, white neighborhoods? If cops acted the same way with wealthy people that they do with poor people every cop on the force would get fired quite quickly.
That doesn't make sense. Relaxed drug laws don't mean people do more drugs - they mean that people don't go to jail for doing the drugs they are doing. In fact, you'd expect more crime where the tougher drug laws are as people are going to drugs regardless. If people couldn't get drugs we'd not have a "drug problem." It's not like lax drug laws means people will suddenly decide to go do heroin. If they want drugs they can already get them.
So, no, the crime rate will not correlate with lax drug laws. And the GPP was a moron but we knew that. Weed doesn't usually make you go out and commit additional crimes in and of itself.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
'Zeno Effect' Verified: Police Officers Won't Move While You Watch
I'd much rather have my ass beat or murdered by a criminal who likely will do hard time for it, than by a cop who gets away with it 'because he's a cop'.
This sig intentionally left blank.
I live near it, I see it, & I have had to DEAL with it http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...
APK
P.S.=> Yes, there are "bad cops" but MOST are what you said - just fellow human beings that yes, made a conscious choice, accepting a job where you WILL see things that mess with your mind (which is why I closed the above the way I did, that they ought not be "on the street" too long) - what do they call it? A "thankless job" but MINUS cops, good cops?? Trust me, I live in inner urban areas FULL of little shits that don't respect *ANYTHING* but a good busted head to curb their bullshit - yes, it's SAD to have to resort to it, scary too (anyone can die), but I'll never forget this Black Guy "ULYSSES" I met right after another such occurrence 3-4 yrs. ago by now that I told Hairyfeet (another member here) about telling me (after he saw me take care of another scumbag that tried following me to where I live after I humiliated him in "front of his own" in the street):
"MAN, if more people did what YOU just did? There'd be a LOT LESS of those shithead punks!"
Verbatim!
Heck, after you read the above link, IF you do (pure truth, no bullshit)? People can & DO help police "in their own way" @ CONSIDERABLE risk but it's amazing what you can accomplish that stops a lot of it (not all the time, but only when it needs doing & you don't CROSS the police that is, or have witnesses against you (Funniest part was, I did, the DIGITAL STREET CAMERA KIND, but, knowing the moron was STOO-PID & thought he was a "bad ass"? I got him to swing first... NO problems then, none @ all, never happened again))... apk
There is no "rise in violent crime". It's still lower than it was in the '90s, and one data point does not a trend make.
https://www.washingtonpost.com...
Also,
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10...
So really, it could very well be that the rise in violent crime is the result of increased surveillance on the general population rather than increased surveillance on police.
You don't have to be dishonest to be in law enforcement, but it helps.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Rodney King has crack cocaine in his system too.
Still? After all these years? Wow, must have been some party.
Okay, with that out of the way I'll try to be serious.
Nobody talks about the fact Trayvon Martin, Michael Brown, and *ALL* of the recent highly-publicized decedents that interfered with police had marijuana in their blood.
Some surveys of Americans show regular marijuana use as high as 25% of the population. Few will show marijuana use lower than 10%. Marijuana users tend to be the kind of people that would find themselves running into police. Marijuana can be detected in the blood and urine of casual users for days, perhaps weeks, after last use. Regular users will show detectable amounts of marijuana metabolites for a month or more.
Warning, sloppy use of statistics follows....
Assuming 25% of the population has used marijuana in the last year, and marijuana use can be detected for a week, then my math tells me that picking 50 people at random will show a high probability of finding someone with THC detectable in their blood or urine. If 10% of the population are regular users where marijuana can be detected for a month then just pulling 10 people at random and you'll find someone with THC in their system. Add on top of that selection bias, people that don't have marijuana in their system after getting arrested or killed don't make the news, and you have a recipe for equating marijuana use with criminal behavior.
While we're at it lets test these people for alcohol. Alcohol use can also be detected for a long time after use, as long as four days. If you pick up someone for speeding on a Monday morning, and test them for alcohol use like we do for marijuana, then we're going to have to clear out a lot of prison space for all of those "drunk" drivers.
Having read the history of marijuana prohibition I see that the prohibition was not based on anything scientific. What it was based on was racism, immigrants from Mexico brought their marijuana habit with them and people were looking for ways to make them look like the bad guys. Same goes for opiates, the Chinese brought opium with them and that scared people. Considering the damage alcohol does to society I think we did Prohibition all wrong, keep the alcohol ban but let people get their weed and heroin. However, Prohibition was doomed to fail, it's not like it takes a chemical engineering degree to make a moonshine still. Same goes for marijuana, it grows every where, why else do you think it's called "weed"?
Opium, on the other hand, doesn't grow well in the USA so banning it here may have worked in the age of sail. Now, with two day express shipping from China, there is no hope to contain it.
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
"I don't know whether that explains it entirely, but I do have a strong sense that some part of the explanation is a chill wind that has blown through American law enforcement over the last year," says Comey. He says he's been told by many police leaders that officers who normally would stop to question suspicious people are opting to stay in their patrol cars for fear of having their encounters recorded and become video sensations.
Then you fucking fire them from their 100K + a year jobs.
And Comey is some useless fascist left over from the "Dubya" era of idiocy.
"If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
Trayvon Martin also owned an illegal pistol, and had pictures of himself posing all "gangsta" with it on Facebook. They sure took *that* picture down a hury.
Mainly because it's irrelevant to all except those that mistakenly think that justifies Martin's death.
"I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)
Martin was cornered, down the alley he lived on. When Zimmerman blocked the exit of the alley, Martin attacked the armed aggressor.
Zimmerman stalked and threatened Martin, and Martin defended himself, so Zimmerman killed him in cold blood.
Learn to love Alaska
The AC's assertion was that using drugs results in higher violent crime. AC implied usage increases as legalization increases. Using the AC's own assumptions, violent crime should be higher in places where legalization has hit.
Learn to love Alaska
Funny thing... Opium poppies grow just fine here, no matter what the DEA says about them. The problem is that it is very hard to hide a field full of bright red flowers.
I think there's a much stonger correlation between the rise of violence and the extreme gaps between wealthy and poor - but that's just my history books talking to me. Clearly the solution is more and less accountable law enforcement to keep people in check.
Which is why I pointed out that the AC was a moron.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
WRONG. You cannot grow Opium in North America.
really? thats what happened?
because his girlfriend said, in court, under oath, that trayvon made it home, and then went back out to confront "that cracker"
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
thats some great fan fiction there
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
As we saw in Baltimore when the police stopped doing their job because of one incident, the rate of murders surged. Oddly, the very people who whined about the police being too aggressive turned around and pleaded for police protection because of the huge rise in murders and other violent crimes.
Therefore, it isn't surprising that when police take their time when people are filming them that crime rates will rise. After all, the reason crime rates were lower was because police were doing what they were supposed to do.
Now, since everything they say or do can be misinterpreted by armchair lawyers, they don't bother doing what they've been doing since the vast majority of people wouldn't understand why they do things certain ways. This is the result.
As we saw with Michael Brown, rather than comply with a simple request (quit walking in the middle of the road and use the sidewalk), thugs and other rejects think they can get away with not observing basic rules of society. When the police do what they have been tasked with doing, suddenly they're in the wrong, not the criminal who broke the law (robbing a store and assaulting the owner in this case).
One can only hope this trend of increased murders continues. The drug users/dealers will keep killing each other, turf wars will be settled by carcasses on the streets, business owners will move out because things have gotten too dangerous resulting in people whining the government has to do something because things have gotten so dangerous, completely oblivious to the fact they're the ones who created the situation.
Of course if people wouldn't be criminals there would be no need for any of this, but since that would require personal responsibility and living within a civil society, that won't be done. It's easier just to be a criminal rather than a productive member of society.
Martin was cornered, down the alley he lived on. When Zimmerman blocked the exit of the alley, Martin attacked the armed aggressor.
Zimmerman stalked and threatened Martin, and Martin defended himself, so Zimmerman killed him in cold blood.
I watched the entire Zimmerman trial, and I mean literally almost every second of it, switching between the several cable networks which were carrying it live or nearly live. None of what you said is supported by the evidence presented at trial.
Zimmerman made several foolish choices that night, and his life since is clearly fubar based on news reports, but none of what you asserted is supported by the actual facts presented at trial.
- T
All this shows is just how far out of touch police have become with the communities they're supposed to be serving. The problem isn't the videos, it's the police. They need to de-militarize and become community officers who not only get out of their patrol cars, but don't even patrol in a car in the first place, instead choosing to walk among and be friends with the people they're supposed to be a part of and protecting.
Let me get this straight, recording the police committing crimes is causing the reported crime rate to go up. WELL DUH! Making it illegal to video the police committing crimes is not the solution, prosecuting the criminal element within police departments is. If Comey is too stupid to figure that out he is too dumb to be employed pumping gas. Most teens right out of high school I've talked to doing this job have much more common sense than Comey does.
Uh... they grow fine in Canada. very similar climate in parts up here, to Afghanistan. Many varieties of poppy in fact produce it, the RCMP just don't care unless someone has whole fields of poppies.
It was not an "alley" with only one "exit", but a paved walk between the backyards of homes on different streets;
"alley - a narrow passageway between or behind buildings." - a dictionary
So why would you put alley in quotes? Because you are unable to accept words you don't like the "feel" of, despite them being used exactly to the dictionary definition? Sounds like you have an emotional problem related to this issue.
There was no evidence that Zimmerman threatened Martin, and the mere act of following does not in itself constitute a threat
Is that your legal opinion? It's wrong. Following someone is a threat. Oh, and Zimmerman had made numerous comments that indicated he was "hunting", which wasn't a specific threat, but a more generic threat.
There was no evidence supporting self-defense on Martin's part during the altercation
Yeah, he was dead, thus unable to stage the scene before police responded, and unable to give testimony on his behalf.
Killing someone during a physical fight, even an avoidable one, clearly does not accord with the usual concept of "in cold blood"
Zimmerman was hunting. Zimmerman killed his unarmed prey. That's cold blood.
Zimmerman made several foolish choices that night, and his life since is clearly fubar based on news reports,
Zimmerman's life is fubar based on his statements, and his statements alone. He followed a "suspect". He didn't try to follow him, but was lost one block from his house, and thought he best way to find an address was to chase the dangerous person he just called in to the police down a blind alley, looking for street signs and addresses to give to 911. After chasing the suspect into the blind alley, he lost him, and was walking back to his vehicle when the prey, who realized he was being stalked, defended himself from the armed pursuer.
Learn to love Alaska
Slightly colored language, consistent with Zimmerman's testimony. I believe Zimmerman, and would have convicted based on his own accounts, were I on the Jury.
Learn to love Alaska
And Zimmerman claimed he left his car to look for a house number to give 911, and walked down the blind alley to Martin's house. Who walks down a blind alley to find a house number for where they are parked on the street? Who gets lost one block from their house?
Learn to love Alaska
That causes the "why" of WHY things are going nuts - imbalance in society in general. MOSTLY financial based. See, & I'm sure you know this - when times are good? People who are "fat & happy" do NOT rock the boat! Guess what we don't have now? Guess what the result is - in the end, murders - people KILL for money (not only due to greed, but their lives are on the line or that of their kids).
Don't think these street freaks are totally stupid either.
In my time, I've met some with FAR SUPERIOR BUSINESS SAAVY to so-called 'business leaders' in the Fortune 100-500 I've know or met personally. They just know when things aren't right. There's no other way for them (due to wasting their youth yes, not educating their way out).
HOWEVER: There's always the blue collar route. We aren't a manufacturing nation anymore. They're getting squeezed. I saw that b.s. being pushed in the 80's in my 1st degree & told my profs that THIS TODAY, yes almost exactly this, would be the result (as a 19 yr. old kid product of UNION workers families no less).
I've read stats where it was said IF THEY PULLED BACK ALL THE OFFSHORED JOBS THEY SENT AWAY, WE'D ALL HAVE OVER $25/hr. jobs... the stupid shits in business don't realize that those are their CONSUMING PUBLIC... they can't BUY goods & services above rent/mortgage, food, utilities anymore. Prices due to shenanigans much higher up have created this along with the stock market Bill Gates 'wannabes' forcing mgt.'s hand.
We truly HAVE real "1% Haves" (with HUGE slices of pie that goes to waste, as in underutilized capital that sits in banks who absond with it anyway, & we foot the bill AGAIN ontop of it).
Man - the effects of that thievery just doesn't "go away" - it raises costs of EVERYTHING just like retail shoplifting theft does but at FAR HIGHER & FASTER RATES on everything, every good or service!
As that's what businesses DO to counter losses... sure, roughly a 10% "shrink" (loss) figure is automatically assumed & built-in vs. say, thefts or perishable goods loss, but the ripoffs going on ABOVE street-level are the root... the root of that?
The STOCK MARKET...
You, of all people if you're really involved in this field professionally (yes, I think you have been for a bit now, ~ 5 yrs., right?), should KNOW that!
Yes - it's also why "noobz" are hired, & we get "noob" quality in wares - especially online ones, or they're just contractors that do a 1/2 ass job, knowing the customer themselves won't know if say, actual safe typed variables & stored procedures + secured OS & database engines are used vs. SQLInjection vulnerable 'direct query' insecure b.s. is used - "when the cat's away" (or is essentially blind), it's done...
Yes, I've SEEN it &/or had to correct for it (especially going from "original ASP" to .NET driven stuff).
* Yes, there IS an element of slime out there that no matter WHAT YOU DO, they're going to be there & I know that kind personally...
Imo, they're literally totally sociopathic saying "If I don't 'get the gold' first, some other one like ME will beat me to the punch so make hay while the sun shines"... this goes ALL THE WAY up from street levels with drug dealers right up into banking, the stock market, & wallstreet.
(HOWEVER - Most of the fools I've seen in my life pulling b.s. like that aren't "I've got to get rich to get the 'holy dollar' because my 2" penis is TOO SMALL to get women any other way" (for those still @ 'the mercy of their hormones', usually meaning youth, mostly men youth too) - they're fools that made SOME BIG MISTAKE & are desperate to try "get out of it" - most times JUST to feed their kids, sometimes, to "save their dreams" (John DeLorean being a PRIME EXAMPLE to save his DMC company, dealing blow to try save it, being caught or ratted out etc.)).
APK
P.S.=> That's my take on it, & Andy? I've lived all over this country + been all over this planet in my 51 yrs. (which is a he
Now now, don't go bringing FACTS of all things into this. This is about FEELINGS, and it FEELS better to be righteously indignant over a non-story that's been manipulated into national news.
But that means I can't be righteously indignant about it, so it must be wrong.
That causes the "why" of WHY things are going nuts - imbalance in society in general. MOSTLY financial based. See, & I'm sure you know this - when times are good? People who are "fat & happy" do NOT rock the boat! Guess what we don't have now? Guess what the result is - in the end, murders - people KILL for money (not only due to greed, but their lives are on the line or that of their kids).
Don't think these street freaks are totally stupid either.
Now, as to your "fear the cops beating the death out of them"? Remember Rodney King? About 2-3 months BEFORE that happened to him?? I had it happen to me (yes, I won a lawsuit settlement for it)... but I do NOT hate or FEAR the police (& yes, they were wrong, why else pay me? They busted right into my then apartment & beat the shit out of me with nightsticks... bad move! Should've killed me!).
In my time, I've met some with FAR SUPERIOR BUSINESS SAAVY to so-called 'business leaders' in the Fortune 100-500 I've know or met personally. They just know when things aren't right. There's no other way for them (due to wasting their youth yes, not educating their way out).
HOWEVER: There's always the blue collar route. We aren't a manufacturing nation anymore. They're getting squeezed. I saw that b.s. being pushed in the 80's in my 1st degree & told my profs that THIS TODAY, yes almost exactly this, would be the result (as a 19 yr. old kid product of UNION workers families no less).
I've read stats where it was said IF THEY PULLED BACK ALL THE OFFSHORED JOBS THEY SENT AWAY, WE'D ALL HAVE OVER $25/hr. jobs... the stupid shits in business don't realize that those are their CONSUMING PUBLIC... they can't BUY goods & services above rent/mortgage, food, utilities anymore. Prices due to shenanigans much higher up have created this along with the stock market Bill Gates 'wannabes' forcing mgt.'s hand.
We truly HAVE real "1% Haves" (with HUGE slices of pie that goes to waste, as in underutilized capital that sits in banks who absond with it anyway, & we foot the bill AGAIN ontop of it).
Man - the effects of that thievery just doesn't "go away" - it raises costs of EVERYTHING just like retail shoplifting theft does but at FAR HIGHER & FASTER RATES on everything, every good or service!
As that's what businesses DO to counter losses... sure, roughly a 10% "shrink" (loss) figure is automatically assumed & built-in vs. say, thefts or perishable goods loss, but the ripoffs going on ABOVE street-level are the root... the root of that?
The STOCK MARKET...
You, of all people if you're really involved in this field professionally (yes, I think you have been for a bit now, ~ 5 yrs., right?), should KNOW that!
Yes - it's also why "noobz" are hired, & we get "noob" quality in wares - especially online ones, or they're just contractors that do a 1/2 ass job, knowing the customer themselves won't know if say, actual safe typed variables & stored procedures + secured OS & database engines are used vs. SQLInjection vulnerable 'direct query' insecure b.s. is used - "when the cat's away" (or is essentially blind), it's done...
Yes, I've SEEN it &/or had to correct for it (especially going from "original ASP" to .NET driven stuff).
* Yes, there IS an element of slime out there that no matter WHAT YOU DO, they're going to be there & I know that kind personally...
Imo, they're literally totally sociopathic saying "If I don't 'get the gold' first, some other one like ME will beat me to the punch so make hay while the sun shines"... this goes ALL THE WAY up from street levels with drug dealers right up into banking, the stock market, & wallstreet.
(HOWEVER - Most of the fools I've seen in my life pulling b.s. like that aren't "I've got to get rich to get the 'holy dollar' because my 2" penis is TOO SMALL to get women any other way" (for those still @ 'the mercy of their hormones', usually meaning youth, mostly men youth too) - they're fools that m
Opium, or more precisely, the plant which it is harvested from, groes quite nicely in the USA.
However people using Marihuana are usually not the same people taking Opium.
In deed I would not care about an alcohol ban much if Marihuana or Hashisch would be available legaly at low cost.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
Yes, yes, a handful of police officers breaking the law means all police officers are assholes. Just like a couple of citizens breaking the law means all citizens are assholes. Great job, everyone.
Honestly, this is simple to solve. The police should start taking videos of everything they do as well. If an edited video pops up of them doing bad things, then they can simply post the video from their perspective. Now no more "look at this video of a cop beating this innocent man" AFTER the supposed "innocent man" kicks the officer, except not on camera or edited out. Mass surveillance works in every way. Govt. -> public -> police -> public.
Officers tell Comey that youths surround police when they get out of their vehicles, taunting them and making videos of the spectacle with their cell phones
This is why you should always have your camera on as well, officers! Showing your point of view is the best defense, if the review panels and judges are not tainted by the lunacy of the masses and you remember your training before the corrupting influence of your peers.
Nothing in the forensic evidence suggests that Zimmerman instigated the violence.
Zimmerman got out of his car, instead of going about his business. Had he even remained in his car, as a sensible person would have done, he would be believable.
His girlfriend was in that house? She was able to see him?
No? Do we have any data to confirm that story? Can you even show me where that was her testimony?
At least the 911 call was recorded. Wha ican find of her testimony indicates a creepy ass cracker following him but nothing about him getting home. She did apparently lie about being in the hospital, or was wrong about it but nothing to support your particular allegation.
For example, murders are typically not stopped by police at all as they are very rarely crimes of opportunity.
Ironically, if an unarmed citizen was killed by a police officer this would indeed be a crime of opportunity.
Their "jobs" were never to break the law. All this whining about pressure on cops is utter BS. If they had been doing their actual jobs, instead of being criminals, they'd be fine. This is simply their own malfeasance coming back to bite everyone -- us and them -- in the ass.
Every cop that breaks the law is a criminal. Every cop that knows about such things and does not turn the criminal in is a criminal accessory. That's cop culture. They think they are above the law, instead of its servants. I have no sympathy for their current situation at all. I do regret that they have been allowed, both by their internal culture and by the courts, to screw the public over so badly. And that the courts, in particular the supreme court, has failed to obey their oaths to uphold the constitution, instead wreaking sophist havoc on its meaning and intent.
I honestly do not think there is any chance at all of fixing this. The downhill slide is too profound; the public almost completely unaware of the issues at hand until they too are caught in the toxic, broken gears of the system. When that happens, they often disappear into the depths of the world's largest imprisonment undertaking. When (if) they come out of that, they're treated as unemployable and sometimes worse.
The "retribution, not rehabilitation" mindset the media has inculcated into the American public and to which their legislators pander, creates a permanent lower class whose only hope for advance is more lawbreaking, and this constrains almost all of those who actually pursue an upwards economic path. The rest are hopeless, and rightfully so. There is little hope to be had.
The root cause is bad legislators, bad law, bad police, and bad courts. There's actually no reason to expect this to work well. Nor does it.
Now the cops are paying for it, a little bit, as the Internet makes public what used to be a quiet secret known only to the cops themselves and their victims. It won't be enough, though. Because it isn't just the cops. The entire system reinforces these results, from top to bottom.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
i watched the entire trial live (out of work at the time) go watch it yourself if you dont believe me. the information is there for those who actually want it
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
...Links Public Oversight of Said Police State to All Kinds of Bad Stuff" Also see: "Abusive Advertisers Link Doom, End Of World, to use of Ad Blockers"
Does that mean harassment is required on a massive scale? informal contact that keeps bad guys from standing around
Then there has to be a better way.
That is not a good state of affairs. One can only sympathise with the owners of donut stores - perhaps they are eligible for bail-out money?
Fortunately for crime-prevention stats, history has shown that even the fastest unarmed suspicious black youths can be shot through the window of a police cruiser.
Requiem for the American Dream
What a load of shit!
To say that increased visibility of those responsible for our safety and security when they perform their duties leads to danger is a non sequitur.
I don't worry about additional audits or information on any process for business or manufacture. If fear is they only conclusion they have, their premise is false.
"Don't fear death... fear not living..." -me
James Comey has made numerous dick-like remarks and been involved in constitutionally questionable behavior:
http://it.slashdot.org/story/15/09/29/0134232/how-the-fbi-hacks-around-encryption
http://news.slashdot.org/story/15/09/11/1714254/spy-industry-leaders-befuddled-over-deep-cynicism-of-american-public
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/15/05/08/0146207/james-comey-the-man-who-wants-to-outlaw-encryption
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/14/10/16/1915216/fbi-director-continues-his-campaign-against-encryption
Therefore consider the source. He probably also thinks that any principled opposition to him or his ideas are criminal, un-patriotic, part of a degenerate culture, or alien.
IIUC, opium poppies are (were?) white. During pioneer days every household grew them, as they were an effective pain medication.
OTOH, L. Frank Baum, in The Wizard of Oz, said they were red, and also said that smelling their perfume would send you to sleep. Perhaps he was right...
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
Well, users of marijuana are generally safer drivers than users of alcohol...but I'm not sure whether that would change if it were legal.
Still, the social effects of drug prohibition are so bad that I'd be in favor of legalizing ALL drug use, if you could just keep people from advertising brands of them.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
Of all the reasons, scrutiny of police is not the top reason. Detail all of the actual/potential reasons and include them for comparison/scrutiny or you are just pushing a single false narrative. Don't tell us, give everybody the facts and examine everybody's conclusions.
Social media sharing of inappropriate police response is part of it, but what are the the specific causes of the inappropriate police responses? Quotas? News media bias.. not telling the whole stories over and over? People not only notice what the news tells you, they are also able to identify what the news doesn't tell you. People are aware of who manages the media as well. The irony is this Slashdot story itself doesn't tell you any of the other actual/potential links to an asserted increase in violence. Think since the public doesn't say anything about it that they don't notice? Many do.
The summary reads like propaganda. The (intended?) takeaway by the less-critical thinkers could easily be something like.. Oh shit.. more violence.. it's because of people with cell phones.. they aren't letting police be saints because the police are afraid of being demonized on video. Maybe this is just another reason to take away their guns... and while their cell phones are good to track the public's communications and locations.. it kind of fucks us up when they can see us being dicks. So damn... FBI is "some big shit" so I guess this story is legit. lol. nah...
US police forces do not consist of 100% heroes. Many are decent folks... many are not. There are officers who wanted to be cops "just to bust some punks and beat some asses". If you sifted them out you wouldn't have the same headcount. The best of the best on Earth simply aspire to be something that isn't police related.. generally speaking. And even if they were all the absolute top notch best human beings to ever exist in the history of time, like literally ever single one of them.. they don't make the policies they enforce. Those are politicians and lawyers. Politicians and lawyers are a crooked breed by nature. Queue the lawyer jokes. Some of them are decent people too. There are many variables with humans. The hypothetical best you can do is have public agreement every time on policies. This is also hard to do in a multi-cultural society now isn't it.
Imagine just immediate cultural diversity (forget about racial, cultural is not racial) in USA basically equally distributed. Even just 3. Take 100 million from China. Take 100 million from India. Take 100 million from Russia. Roughly double the US population. Move them right into USA and pretend there is housing for every single family... and that social services are all there too... Nearby Walmart's for everybody, etc. All copacetic, except culture. What would you expect? Who to govern, how to govern? Everybody would be safer with guns for sure huh. You would be fools to test it.
What is the actual cultural diversity of police though? Not all US police are even Masons, by a long shot. Merely the immigration at the Mexican borders is a huge deal. They are not all even Mexican. I don't have a problem with Mexican people whatsoever but the nature of an immigrant who literally swims here to the rescue of our social services... is detrimental to the social services paid for by citizens. Politicians don't know this? Of course they fucking do. The border patrol know it too... but again.. they don't make the policies. They rely on career politicians... who are also swayed by the group-think/propaganda everybody else in society are swayed by... with even more facets and even enticements.
Now queue the xenophobia accusations, even accusations of racism, all the other lies too. If you want to break USA simply send ships to any third world country and move them ALL to USA. South Africa may be happy to come. Go get them. Is the infrastructure capable of coping with the strain? The USA is 18+ trillion dollars in debt as is. Will the hypothetical new immigrants increase domestic manufacturing to the extent the USA is back in the black again? I bet not. So it goes if you trickle vs all at once.
Be looking for subterfuge.
So the increase in crime should correlate with places that have relaxed drug laws. I didn't see that in the results. Where are you getting your statistics from?
Fox News and the 700 Club.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Most police are too stupid for that kind of thing - a result of the mandatory limit on intelligence when hiring. They shouldn't be expected to find "suspicious" people. If they see a crime in progress, after asking a more intelligent member of the public, they can engage.
I guess we could use the old "NSA logic".
If they've done nothing wrong, they have nothing to hide.
Recording admirable actions should have no negative reactions.
AFAIK poppies come in a variety of colors and potencies. Here in the real Oz the red poppy means one thing, href="http://www.greatwar.co.uk/poems/john-mccrae-in-flanders-fields.htm">Flander's Field. Legend has it that all the poppies in Flanders Field where white, the bloodshed of WW1 turned them red. There is a national holiday where lots of people wear the (fake) red poppies that are sold by the 'RSL' - a highly regarded returned soldiers charity.
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
Bad people want to be cops. The power trip draws them. Sure there are good cops, but there are way too many bad ones.
Bad cops do bad things, then lie about it and get away with it.
It makes me mad just thinking about it, and that effect is what is causing the rising crime rate, and I'm not even the demographic that gets hurt by bad cops.
I think that all the bad cops and all the government people that help them get away with it should be fired with a clause that they are not trustworthy for any unsupervised work and thus can never be cops again, anywhere.
This won't be fixed until we get some REAL whistleblower laws. Whistleblower laws could help curb the runaway illegal abuse by government TLA's too. Make it a law that everyone that knows about a crime must report it or be charged with a crime. Make it a law that there are no unknown laws and anyone who says you must obey one gets locked up. Of course none of this will happen. Our beautiful government will see to that.
How can violent crime be going up when you have these magical items that lower crime just by existing?
He says he's been told by many police leaders that officers who normally would stop to question suspicious people are opting to stay in their patrol cars for fear of having their encounters recorded and become video sensations.
This makes no sense to me. First officers "talking" to suspects do not make for internet sensations so why would officers be shy of such?
Is it because their standard procedure for "questioning" suspects on the street includes beating the answers out of them?
It seems we should be able to expect police officers to be braver than this. If they are scared of a bit of fame, what will it take to get them out of their cars when the shooting starts.
Is the increase in the murder rate from "street" shootings where suspicious looking people are walking around looking for their victims? Or is it from domestic violence levels and irresponsible gun owners leaving loaded weapons laying around to be used in their next argument. I suspect the murder rate has nothing to do with nervous cops hiding from cameras in their cars.
I sometimes wonder if the answer is something we don't want it to be -- that heavy handed policing is repugnant, but the nature of our society is that the poor, urban populations suffer from so much social malaise that without heavy handed policing they will tear themselves apart while inflicting collateral damage on the rest of society through crime and violence?
The causes of malaise are often unjust -- discrimination, lack of opportunity, but also include self-inflicted problems of unplanned/bad parenting, purposeful rejection of positive social choices (dropping out of school, etc) and so on. It's not completely their fault, but it's not completely a question of inescapable victimhood, either.
Heavy-handed policing is likely not the best course to *solve* these problems, but the scale and nature of them is such that the costs and scale of the social welfare solutions which could possibly be more effective are seen as an impossible burden (which itself is a byproduct of economic inequality and ineffective governance).
Heavy-handed policing is thus seen as the most obtainable possible solution -- the least worst possible alternative.
In other words, we may hate heavy handed policing because it also as collateral damage of all kinds, including gross injustices, but without it we may have a kind of chaos that ends up being worse.
This guy does not speak for the police. He is the Director of the FBI. He's probably completely making this up, just like he does every other week when talking about just about everything else.
This guy is just cajoling you into thinking that he speaks for police. He's trying to get you to assume that there is some federal hierarchy that all police information rises up through. It's easier to subvert the police into being under federal control if the public thinks they already are, especially if the public thinks there are problems with them that being under federal control will solve, and they're inching that process along step by step.
Don't be fooled by them.
the last article i read said common law crime is at an all time low. (crime with a injured victim).... Regardless, the police can void scrutiny altogether if they treated everyone like their neighbor (any reasonable man might brutalize another for certain conduct i.e. caUGHt raping a kid) . Then, they wont have to whine about being "watched" as they abuse people. State statutes and Supreme Court jurisprudence have destroyed the moral fabric of America, largely in the last 100 years, ramping up intensity each decade (now each month). If police want to enjoy population's UNconditonAL Support, they could give Top priority to common law crime, before tackling the victimless crime BS i.e. merriJane, administative burdens like driver license, gun permitting.... OR $h!t, how bout ACTUALLY INvestiGating the Trillions robbed from Americans by Banks/CorpsOrations.... and jailing them, instead of Mikey and his $30 bag of weeds.... or the Senseless Wars killing MiLLioNs of INNOcENT inhabitants (not involved in govt) WorlDWiDe.. for 50+ years. FBI should LEAD BY EXAMPLE, and tackle CRIMES that HURT folks..... but then they would have to go after their Masters... Banks & LArgest DonorLobby Groups.... and that will NEVER happen.... How effective is The People's Lobby ???? not very
Perhaps govt has been hiring then training violent psychopaths to be cops
I'm tired of hearing the term "Law Enforcement"... What happened to "Keeping the Peace"?
why must even the smallest infraction be prosecuted to the "Nth" degree of the letter of the law?
This only breeds hate and discontent.
Defuse! don't escalate the situation!
Too many "Barney Fife's" running around,but instead of 1 bullet, its 17 rounds in a Glock...
and too,too many police agencies, I can't even think of all the three letter acronyms there are ...
everybody's got their own police force, and its bringing out all the amateurs, (e.g. - Tesla dust-up)
so lets go back to "Peace Officers", and maybe it will change the mindset.
A profiler who is a friend of a friend says that police profiles are almost the same as those of serial violent offenders and the like.
I think they should pay them more. I worked for the feds, and the people were somewhat more professional, if only because they were paid more, and had more to lose. And personally, although I'd like to be a cop, it's 1/2 to 1/3 the pay of what I make, so sorry, I think I'll stick with computers.
My other idea is to have a draft, like the military, where everyone has to be a cop for 3 months or 6 months or whatever. Doesn't sound very libertarian, I know, but then again, exposure to all of the different parties involved probably wouldn't hurt anyone. Hopefully it won't get to that point, but it would be better than societal decay and vigilantism.
Cops: "We can't do our jobs well if you watch us and make sure we abide by the law, so crime and is sucking at our jobs is your fault, citizens."
Well, isn't that special.
saying for decades.
The police are a criminal class.
TL;DR: You are woefully misinformed or outright lying. Of course, those are not mutually exclusive states. A point-by-point refutation follows.
It was not an "alley" with only one "exit", but a paved walk between the backyards of homes on different streets;
"alley - a narrow passageway between or behind buildings." - a dictionary
So why would you put alley in quotes? Because you are unable to accept words you don't like the "feel" of, despite them being used exactly to the dictionary definition?
Perhaps you could take a few moments to review a map of the paved walkway behind the houses in question, which should make it obvious that it does not fit the definition of an alley in consideration of the yards on either side of it. By the isolated dictionary definition you quoted, many city streets would fit the definition of alley, yet we do not call them alleys; near where I grew up, some of the city streets were more narrow than the walkway (including the backyards) Martin took. I put it in quotes because you (intentionally) misused it.
If you had ever looked at a map of the neighborhood, it should also have been obvious that you misrepresented the nature of the "alley". Zimmerman could not have "blocked the exit" as you had stated, because the pathway was not a dead end, and furthermore there was also the option of Martin simply going into his father's fiancee's home through the back entrance. Finally, there were many backyards in which he could hide, and spaces between the townhomes through which he could have exited had he felt cornered. To be clear, I'm not asserting that Martin had a duty to flee, but rather that it is not reasonable to assert that his exit was blocked. Note that his destination was away from the shooting, and per the timeline established in the trial, Martin had several minutes to go the short distance to it. So, either you never actually looked at the evidence and have no idea what you're taking about, or you simply lied about the environment and situation..
Sounds like you have an emotional problem related to this issue.
To the extent that annoyance is an emotion, and I tend to become annoyed at clumps of assertions not based in facts, I suppose there might have been some emotion involved, but certainly not at a problematic level. Upon re-reading your post, the emotional froth still comes through quite clearly. Also, see below.
...the mere act of following does not in itself constitute a threat
Is that your legal opinion? It's wrong. Following someone is a threat.
I merely re-iterated the consensus of multiple commentators, who were actual attorneys (some even licensed in Florida), on multiple news outlets, including outlets hostile to Zimmerman, such as MSNBC. Of course, perhaps those attorneys were wrong, as you seem to be very confident. If so, you should be able to cite the relevant portion of Florida law which states that mere following is a threat. I'll note that the prosecuting attorneys couldn't do it, but I'm pulling for you.
Oh, and Zimmerman had made numerous comments that indicated he was "hunting", which wasn't a specific threat, but a more generic threat.
Would you cite this from the trial transcripts? No? Because it doesn't exist, right? Go ahead and do a Google search for "Zimmerman Martin +hunt" (w/o quotes) and see what comes up - nothing. Try it with +hunted and +hunted, and you'll still get nothing. Some of the links come up with "witch hunt" and unrelated headlines about hunting season, but nothing like you claimed. He has said all kinds of stupid things on Twitter the last few years, but maybe I would, too, if the Black Panthers had a $10,000 bounty on my head.
There was no evidence supporting self-defense on Martin's part during the alter
I would normally just say fu$k this bull$hit, but then I saw it was a NYT piece, a newspaper which has turned into the onion, but without the self awareness.
Police are the teeth of government. When they are hired and tasked to enforce bad laws and become revenue agents for the police departments and courts by fines and asset confiscation, they are no longer friends of the innocent. It hardly matter whether you start out as a good guy, after a few years on force you lose the the altruism and go for the job security. That means get the little offenses, get the revenue, don't push against bad cops and corruption,
Police officers are the new Mafia. They are an armed gang of thugs that are generally more interested in their own profit than the well-being of ordinary citizens. They pick and choose which laws to obey, and who to muscle in on. Now the interesting thing is that mob-run neighborhoods are generally pretty safe. The mob doesn't want rival criminals around, because it's bad for business. Cops don't like rival criminal gangs for much the same reason. The power of video-recording is that it brings 'heat' in the form of bad press, which everyone must pay lip service to. Of course, cops are basically the lowest paid foot soldiers in the Blue Mob, you've got judges, prosecutors, and politicians who really organize and run the system.
I expect this to get modded to oblivion, but seriously, f-ck you knee-jerk anti-cop enthusiasts. I'm not a cop, but I have quite a few friends who are--good men and women, working their butts off to make this country a safer place. No one brings a camera to your job--no one mocks you and taunts you, trying to goad you into doing something wrong. The president hasn't passively condemned your profession categorically, while supporting people who are known criminals, simply because those known criminals were on the receiving side of a handful of bad actors. I'm not a republican--heck, I even voted for Obama at one point, but...
You make it easier for someone to choose to not do their job? Guess what happens, psychology student? Get off your @#$@#$ moral high horse, we're talking about humans who are now under the impression that they are considered guilty before violent offenders are. You're talking about people who will get paid whether or not they stop a crime in progress... And then tell them that if they stop a crime in progress, there's a high likelihood that they're going to face incredibly negative public scrutiny, even if none was actually there.
Screw the bad cops, but they aren't the majority, they're the minority.
And screw you all for vilifying people who have an incredibly tough job.
It's the typical point and dodge tactic. Blame something else for what you don't like. There was a floating argument that there was a spike in attacks on police and it was allegedly due to the increase in police surveillance, however statistics actually a decrease in attacks on police (possibly because they acted nicer? hmm). Now there is a spike in crime ('tis the season) and agents are trying to portray the innocent bystander as the culprit. I call BS on the "strong sense". I blame training (evangelized fear) on why police officers are "staying in their cars".
There are consequences for acting out of line on the warfield. No such consequences exist for domestic police. That's all there is to it.
I think "oppressors" is the correct term here. A "dick" is something you call your disrespectful neighbor, i.e. someone who holds equal power to yourself, not greater power.
If they aren't doing anything illegal they have nothing to fear about being watched, right?
Are there any studies that look at the efficacy of police stops? That is, how useful are these opportunistic police efforts to stop and question someone, in terms of preventing crime? The FBI Director's claim relies on a belief that spontaneous stop-and-question interactions are responsible for preventing an extremely significant percentage of violent crimes.
Dave Crocker bbiw.net
What about the content of the video being captured, showing examples of excessive force and abuse of power? After seeing a video like this:
https://youtu.be/kr9pcplqHhE
It's hard to swallow the opinion that because cops have become afraid to interact with citizens, it's the citizens' fault for putting them under increasing video scrutiny. It's more plausible to believe that citizens have become increasingly afraid of armed law enforcement and lack any other means of defense but to document the interaction.
Why should anyone listen to this Brownshirt-in-Chief, who finally reveals he has no evidence to support his ludicrous assertion?
'He who has to break a thing to find out what it is, has left the path of wisdom.' -- Gandalf to Saruman
"In today's YouTube world, there are officers reluctant to get out of their cars and do the work that controls violent crime,""
No, this is evidence that they have already lost control of the situation. They were in danger before YouTube, already outmanned and outgunned, it just wasn't on display so readily.
Our largest cities are being lost to the welfare/gang/drug class. this isn't about race, per se, as any race caught in that trap would likely do the same things and be in the same situation. Blame the governmental responses that have created the conditions resulting in war zones.
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
groes
Marihuana
In deed
legaly
Stop it. Just STOP IT already, you nigger.