Despite the name, a persecutor's job is not to prosecute. It is to seek justice, if a case is wrong or sufficiently weak his job is to not prosecute.
Violating department policy is not against the law. It gets you fired, not put on trial.
Complaints filed against an officer do matter, it actually affects their careers. Its a certainty that some complaints are bogus but if one cop is getting a lot of them the department becomes suspicious. Many do look for bad cops, why? Because bad cops eventually get caught on tape and cost the city/county tens of millions in lawsuits. Many departments will get rid of bad cops because it costs them money.
Cameras are great. They keep the bad guy on both sides of the camera honest.
And as for volunteering to do my part, been there done that, seen things from the inside.
How many of the 10% shot with their own gun were shot by themselves or another police officer ?
The FBI stat was for officers shot in the line of duty, so suicide would not count. Regard another police officer, the other officer has his own gun so one cop accidentally shooting another would not count.
You are woefully ignorant of police. An MRAP does not make the average cop think he is in danger. It makes the average copy think he is safer because other cops are here and we have a whole lot of intimidation with us. MRAPs are not used for a lone cop on patrol, its used for groups of cops in special situations.
The steady rise of no-knock warrants over often petty offenses would suggest otherwise.
Not really. That has more to do with the SWAT teams using low risk warrant situations as ad-hoc training exercises for high risk warrant situations. You gotta practice with all that gear and those tactics.
The real problem is the militarization of police. Does every friggin department need a SWAT team? No. A large enough city or a county SWAT team, sure. SWAT teams get used because they exist, not necessarily because anyone is afraid.
Prove he went for the cops gun. You can't, there is no evidence, and only the cop himself says it.
Skin tissue from his hand where the bullet grazed him is found in the car. His blood is on the gun, inside the car and on the cop's uniform in a manner consistent with the cop being seated in his car.
"reply verbally in kind" is not escalation. The citizen is well within their rights to say, "Well you don't need to be a complete asshole about it. Just shut up and give me the ticket."
That is not an escalation. Yelling at the cop and walking toward him to get in his face would be an escalation.
They would rather get into a physical altercation to defend their honor than to be bowed by a policeman breaking the law (which is what most likely will happen in my scenario).
A cop talking like an a-hole is not breaking the law. Perhaps it is breaking department policy. File a report. Yell and get in his face and you are a fool giving the rare bad cop the excuse he needs. You let him goad you into crossing the line. Getting played like that doesn't defend your honor, it just makes you look the fool, a sucker.
Its not about what they are doing being OK. Its about what you are doing being stupid and counterproductive. A bully on the playground you punch. A bully in uniform on the street, you fight with the law not a punch.
There is nothing brave about a criminal fighting a cop, its just an example of stupidity.
There's nothing brave or free about a situation where government thugs will use excessive force against someone who merely resists them, which is what is happening. I expect cops to behave absolutely professionally and to respect people's liberties even in extreme circumstances.
The problem is some people have a strange definition of excessive force. There was just another shooting near Ferguson. An 18 year old pointed a 9mm pistol at a cop and was shot. Protesters are at the police station claiming he should have been tasered or maced.
When being arrested you are no longer at liberty, that is sort of the inherent definition of being under arrest.
the problem is all of the innocent people who get hassled and harrassed by the police. like random patdowns, or civil foreclosure, or general mafioso-style intimidation tactics. when you put thugs and criminals in a blue suit they are still thugs and criminals.
If you want to talk about the militarization of the police, civil forfeitures, etc I'm with you. However the fact remains that the police do a dangerous job even when done right and that violence against police, again 10% of those shot are shot with their own gun, is the primary thing behind the police resorting to deadly force so quickly. Getting into a wrestling match or fist fight may be a minor thing to you and I but it is *not* so to a cop. While there are a few "thugs in blue", most of the shootings are "self defense by blue".
Brown was shot because he escalated the situation to a "high risk arrest" by going for the cop's gun.
it was never an arrest situation to begin with, it was just an a-hole cop bullying people on the street. sometimes people get tired of being bullied.
"At 11:53 a.m., a dispatcher reported a "stealing in progress" at the Ferguson Market and a brief description of the suspect, who was believed to have taken a packet of cigars. Officers were told to look for a black male wearing a white T-shirt, running toward the QuikTrip convenience store. Additional information was soon added: the man was wearing a red Cardinals hat, khaki shorts and yellow socks; a second man was with him.
At noon, Wilson asked the officers searching for the robbery suspects if they needed assistance. An officer responded that the men had disappeared.
Two minutes later, at 12:02 p.m. Wilson radioed in, "Put me on Canfield with two. And send me another car," a request for additional officers.
Sources have told the newspaper that prior to making that call, Wilson claimed he told Brown and his friend Dorian Johnson to stop walking in the street. Wilson said it was after that that he recognized that Brown matched the robbery suspect's description, called for backup and stopped his SUV next to the two men." http://www.cbsnews.com/news/fe...
Um, he got shot more than once. More than twice. More than three times. Perhaps ONE of the six times he was shot, his hands were near the gun. Which says NOTHING about whether or not he was in the car.
Except for the fact that the bullet fired in the car tore off some skin tissue and left it in the car.
"Comply or die." -The land of the free and the home of the brave
There is nothing brave about a criminal fighting a cop, its just an example of stupidity. They rarely get away with it, maybe they delay the arrest at the price of more charges and longer incarceration. Smart criminals comply, thereby avoiding injury and getting out of jail sooner.
Again, exceptions don't prove the rule.
You have an odd definition of "exceptions", when I specifically included both the bad cops and the rest of their departments.
Not really. The exception I referred in both my posts was a video showing bad behavior by police. A video is what we call anecdotal, not statistical. The number of police is a single video is irrelevant.
Why, in that first video I linked, you don't get to see the context - That the guy had just run over a spike mat, lost control of the vehicle, and almost hit a cop. Clearly that missing details justifies half a dozen armed thugs beating the shit out of an unconscious guy lying bleeding on the side of the highway
You have an odd definition in "context". When a spiked mat is layed out they are generally dealing with a fleeing suspect who is endangering civilians in some manner, i.e. high speed chase. Getting dragged out of the car, forcibly put on the ground and handcuffed is a pretty reasonable response. Also the odds are fair in such incidents that the suspect was armed when things started. That said, there is no excuse for beating a suspect.
And that is why police hate hate hate mandatory camera policies...
Actually in that department in California where the long term test has been going on the officers like the cameras.
Police who are overly aggressive and verbally abusive tend to provoke ordinary citizens with a sense of dignity and self respect. When citizens reply verbally in kind to unfair and abusive treatment from the police...
Actually by doing so the citizen is escalating the situation too. As the Mayor of NY told is son, just shut up and comply and things can get sorted out at the police station. Ie file a report against the officer. Escalating things at the scene is a dumb thing to do.
Sorry, coroners reports say there was gun powder residue on Brown's hand. You are severely misinformed.
All that means was that his hand was within a few feet of the gun when it went off. He could have been defending himself, hiding his body or grabbing for the gun. But there is no proof of one over the other.
Except for the bullet hole in the police car telling us Brown's hand was deep inside the car and that the cop was sitting down.
And bystander videos do not exactly tell the whole story. The cops on the scene may see or have seen many things that the bystander never did, or the bystander failed to record. That is why police body cams are so much more useful. We get to see a far more complete portrayal of events.
Brown was shot because he escalated the situation to a "high risk arrest" by going for the cop's gun. Period.
We have no evidence that Brown was trying to take Wilson's gun, only the word of a cop who's been caught lying before. Cops know that "he was going for my gun" are magic words to justify themselves when they commit murders.
Sorry, coroners reports say there was gun powder residue on Brown's hand. You are severely misinformed.
And of course it's irrevelvant whether Brown tried to get control of Wilson's gun earlier in the confrontation. Brown was not trying to do so when he was murdered, he was (according to the majority of witness testimony) attempting to surender.
You have progressed from severely misinformed to absolutely clueless. Minutes earlier he went for the cops gun, that is highly relevant and it absolutely controls everything that followed. It escalates the situation to "high risk". As "high risk" he is more likely to be pursued than to be left to flee. As "high risk" the officer is consider by training and law to be in danger and justified in not allowing the suspect to get close to him.
Regarding witnesses, many have proven to be lying. Seriously, we have one lady changing her story once the feds showed up and said she didn't really see it, she just repeated what her boyfriend told her had happened because she wanted her boyfriend's story to get out there. Witnesses had claimed he was shot in the back, proven false. Witnesses had said he had his hands up, proven false, a bullet grazed his arm indicating otherwise. Seriously, go read the released testimony regarding the evidence rather than rely on what some guy on the internet told you because your "facts" are way off from reality. There is a problem with cops and the communities they police and some cops are bad but in **this** one particular case these factors are not present. People foolishly tried to use this case to highlight these legit problems before the facts were in and now they are having a hard time coming to terms with the facts, that they picked the absolute wrong case to highlight the issues.
You are woefully ignorant of police. An MRAP does not make the average cop think he is in danger. It makes the average copy think he is safer because other cops are here and we have a whole lot of intimidation with us. MRAPs are not used for a lone cop on patrol, its used for groups of cops in special situations.
Selection against intelligence, a bogus claim. The two guys I went to high school with who became cops were taking all the college prep math and science classes and doing quite well, trig, pre-calc, chem, physics, etc.
Speaking of groups of cops. One of the most effective ways to reduce their fear is to not send them out alone. When a partner is present a cop is far more likely to use a less-than-lethal weapon like a taser or baton than his gun.
Cameras are only a partial solution. While they tend to keep **both** sides honest and calm, they don't really change the fact that if the cop is in danger he will react with deadly force out of fear. Another part of the solution is to not send cops out alone, always have them go out in pairs.
If a cop is alone and fears a person may try to take his gun he will not let that person get close enough for a wrestling match. He will shoot.
If a cop is not alone he is far more likely to use a less-than-lethal weapon such as a taser or baton since his partner will have a lethal weapon at the ready should the person get ahold of the cop's gun.
Cops are paranoid about losing control of their gun, according to the FBI about 10% of those cops shot are shot with their own gun. Having a partner greatly helps reduce this fear.
Brown was shot because he escalated the situation to a "high risk arrest" by going for the cop's gun. Period. That is the single factor that dominated all that followed. According to the FBI 10% of the cops who get shot are shot with their own gun after losing control of it. So go for an cop's gun and the rules of engagement radically change. You will not be allowed to get close enough for a wrestling match. Once you go for the gun your not just some guy who stole some cigarettes and shoved a store clerk. You are according to police training and the law a lethal threat if you try to get close rather than comply and get on the ground.
I really don't care about violence against police, but if this bullet points helps convince PD's to adopt cameras then super!
What an ignorant statement you offer. Violence against police is why police react so forcefully. According to the FBI nearly 10% of police officers who get shot are shot with their own gun. That is why unarmed people who try to get into a wrestling match with cops get shot, because the cops are very afraid of losing control of their own gun.
People who are compliant tend not to get shot. People who react violently are far more likely to get shot. So if you actually care about people getting shot you should care about violence against police.
Thinking anyone is envy of big Russian territories boosts the Russian self-esteem, but it is a lie. Rarely anyone thinks what will China actually do after it had sucessfully invaded Siberia.
Harvest the resources of the region. Siberia is quite rich in minerals, oil and natural gas, timber and fisheries. And technology is making "harvesting" more and more practical in hostile environments.
You might also notice that China is going to great lengths to secure resources around the world.
They mangage/manipulate their currency so that there is effectively a huge discount to all products and services in China.
That's a myth as pointed out in my summary... Currently, the black market rate is the same as the official rate. If it is really undervalued, I would think the black market would reflect that.
Sorry, your hypothesis is simply mistaken.
The US Treasury department says the RMB is significantly undervalued and that this is primarily due to government intervention. That the value is *not* a market determined rate. However they then play the political game and say this is not "manipulation". Note I used "mangage/manipulate" to reflect this political game of words. The simple truth remains, the rate is government engineered not market determined.
Economists outside of government and those in business and finance tend to refer to the rate as manipulated. Tend to quantify that undervaluation in the 10% range, giving every product and service an instant 10% discount just by purchasing in China. Again, this 10% is purely from the currency manipulation; externalization of environmental and other costs, lower labor costs, etc are *not* included in this 10%.
By what terminology would refer to the process I described in my first post?
Slashdot Mirror
Despite the name, a persecutor's job is not to prosecute. It is to seek justice, if a case is wrong or sufficiently weak his job is to not prosecute.
Violating department policy is not against the law. It gets you fired, not put on trial.
Complaints filed against an officer do matter, it actually affects their careers. Its a certainty that some complaints are bogus but if one cop is getting a lot of them the department becomes suspicious. Many do look for bad cops, why? Because bad cops eventually get caught on tape and cost the city/county tens of millions in lawsuits. Many departments will get rid of bad cops because it costs them money.
Cameras are great. They keep the bad guy on both sides of the camera honest.
And as for volunteering to do my part, been there done that, seen things from the inside.
How many of the 10% shot with their own gun were shot by themselves or another police officer ?
The FBI stat was for officers shot in the line of duty, so suicide would not count. Regard another police officer, the other officer has his own gun so one cop accidentally shooting another would not count.
The steady rise of no-knock warrants over often petty offenses would suggest otherwise.
Not really. That has more to do with the SWAT teams using low risk warrant situations as ad-hoc training exercises for high risk warrant situations. You gotta practice with all that gear and those tactics.
The real problem is the militarization of police. Does every friggin department need a SWAT team? No. A large enough city or a county SWAT team, sure. SWAT teams get used because they exist, not necessarily because anyone is afraid.
When being arrested you are no longer at liberty
You still have plenty of liberties that the police must respect.
No, you have rights not liberties. Both good things but different sorts things.
Prove he went for the cops gun. You can't, there is no evidence, and only the cop himself says it.
Skin tissue from his hand where the bullet grazed him is found in the car. His blood is on the gun, inside the car and on the cop's uniform in a manner consistent with the cop being seated in his car.
"reply verbally in kind" is not escalation. The citizen is well within their rights to say, "Well you don't need to be a complete asshole about it. Just shut up and give me the ticket."
That is not an escalation. Yelling at the cop and walking toward him to get in his face would be an escalation.
They would rather get into a physical altercation to defend their honor than to be bowed by a policeman breaking the law (which is what most likely will happen in my scenario).
A cop talking like an a-hole is not breaking the law. Perhaps it is breaking department policy. File a report. Yell and get in his face and you are a fool giving the rare bad cop the excuse he needs. You let him goad you into crossing the line. Getting played like that doesn't defend your honor, it just makes you look the fool, a sucker.
Its not about what they are doing being OK. Its about what you are doing being stupid and counterproductive. A bully on the playground you punch. A bully in uniform on the street, you fight with the law not a punch.
There is nothing brave about a criminal fighting a cop, its just an example of stupidity.
There's nothing brave or free about a situation where government thugs will use excessive force against someone who merely resists them, which is what is happening. I expect cops to behave absolutely professionally and to respect people's liberties even in extreme circumstances.
The problem is some people have a strange definition of excessive force. There was just another shooting near Ferguson. An 18 year old pointed a 9mm pistol at a cop and was shot. Protesters are at the police station claiming he should have been tasered or maced.
When being arrested you are no longer at liberty, that is sort of the inherent definition of being under arrest.
Acting professionally, yes, that is required.
the problem is all of the innocent people who get hassled and harrassed by the police. like random patdowns, or civil foreclosure, or general mafioso-style intimidation tactics. when you put thugs and criminals in a blue suit they are still thugs and criminals.
If you want to talk about the militarization of the police, civil forfeitures, etc I'm with you. However the fact remains that the police do a dangerous job even when done right and that violence against police, again 10% of those shot are shot with their own gun, is the primary thing behind the police resorting to deadly force so quickly. Getting into a wrestling match or fist fight may be a minor thing to you and I but it is *not* so to a cop. While there are a few "thugs in blue", most of the shootings are "self defense by blue".
Brown was shot because he escalated the situation to a "high risk arrest" by going for the cop's gun.
it was never an arrest situation to begin with, it was just an a-hole cop bullying people on the street. sometimes people get tired of being bullied.
"At 11:53 a.m., a dispatcher reported a "stealing in progress" at the Ferguson Market and a brief description of the suspect, who was believed to have taken a packet of cigars. Officers were told to look for a black male wearing a white T-shirt, running toward the QuikTrip convenience store. Additional information was soon added: the man was wearing a red Cardinals hat, khaki shorts and yellow socks; a second man was with him. At noon, Wilson asked the officers searching for the robbery suspects if they needed assistance. An officer responded that the men had disappeared. Two minutes later, at 12:02 p.m. Wilson radioed in, "Put me on Canfield with two. And send me another car," a request for additional officers. Sources have told the newspaper that prior to making that call, Wilson claimed he told Brown and his friend Dorian Johnson to stop walking in the street. Wilson said it was after that that he recognized that Brown matched the robbery suspect's description, called for backup and stopped his SUV next to the two men."
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/fe...
The exception is a video, not the cop(s) in the video. The video is anecdotal, not statistical.
Um, he got shot more than once. More than twice. More than three times. Perhaps ONE of the six times he was shot, his hands were near the gun. Which says NOTHING about whether or not he was in the car.
Except for the fact that the bullet fired in the car tore off some skin tissue and left it in the car.
People who are compliant tend not to get shot.
"Comply or die." -The land of the free and the home of the brave
There is nothing brave about a criminal fighting a cop, its just an example of stupidity. They rarely get away with it, maybe they delay the arrest at the price of more charges and longer incarceration. Smart criminals comply, thereby avoiding injury and getting out of jail sooner.
Again, exceptions don't prove the rule. You have an odd definition of "exceptions", when I specifically included both the bad cops and the rest of their departments.
Not really. The exception I referred in both my posts was a video showing bad behavior by police. A video is what we call anecdotal, not statistical. The number of police is a single video is irrelevant.
Why, in that first video I linked, you don't get to see the context - That the guy had just run over a spike mat, lost control of the vehicle, and almost hit a cop. Clearly that missing details justifies half a dozen armed thugs beating the shit out of an unconscious guy lying bleeding on the side of the highway
You have an odd definition in "context". When a spiked mat is layed out they are generally dealing with a fleeing suspect who is endangering civilians in some manner, i.e. high speed chase. Getting dragged out of the car, forcibly put on the ground and handcuffed is a pretty reasonable response. Also the odds are fair in such incidents that the suspect was armed when things started. That said, there is no excuse for beating a suspect.
And that is why police hate hate hate mandatory camera policies ...
Actually in that department in California where the long term test has been going on the officers like the cameras.
Police who are overly aggressive and verbally abusive tend to provoke ordinary citizens with a sense of dignity and self respect. When citizens reply verbally in kind to unfair and abusive treatment from the police ...
Actually by doing so the citizen is escalating the situation too. As the Mayor of NY told is son, just shut up and comply and things can get sorted out at the police station. Ie file a report against the officer. Escalating things at the scene is a dumb thing to do.
Sorry, coroners reports say there was gun powder residue on Brown's hand. You are severely misinformed.
All that means was that his hand was within a few feet of the gun when it went off. He could have been defending himself, hiding his body or grabbing for the gun. But there is no proof of one over the other.
Except for the bullet hole in the police car telling us Brown's hand was deep inside the car and that the cop was sitting down.
Again, exceptions don't prove the rule.
And bystander videos do not exactly tell the whole story. The cops on the scene may see or have seen many things that the bystander never did, or the bystander failed to record. That is why police body cams are so much more useful. We get to see a far more complete portrayal of events.
We have no evidence that Brown was trying to take Wilson's gun, only the word of a cop who's been caught lying before. Cops know that "he was going for my gun" are magic words to justify themselves when they commit murders.
Sorry, coroners reports say there was gun powder residue on Brown's hand. You are severely misinformed.
And of course it's irrevelvant whether Brown tried to get control of Wilson's gun earlier in the confrontation. Brown was not trying to do so when he was murdered, he was (according to the majority of witness testimony) attempting to surender.
You have progressed from severely misinformed to absolutely clueless. Minutes earlier he went for the cops gun, that is highly relevant and it absolutely controls everything that followed. It escalates the situation to "high risk". As "high risk" he is more likely to be pursued than to be left to flee. As "high risk" the officer is consider by training and law to be in danger and justified in not allowing the suspect to get close to him.
Regarding witnesses, many have proven to be lying. Seriously, we have one lady changing her story once the feds showed up and said she didn't really see it, she just repeated what her boyfriend told her had happened because she wanted her boyfriend's story to get out there. Witnesses had claimed he was shot in the back, proven false. Witnesses had said he had his hands up, proven false, a bullet grazed his arm indicating otherwise. Seriously, go read the released testimony regarding the evidence rather than rely on what some guy on the internet told you because your "facts" are way off from reality. There is a problem with cops and the communities they police and some cops are bad but in **this** one particular case these factors are not present. People foolishly tried to use this case to highlight these legit problems before the facts were in and now they are having a hard time coming to terms with the facts, that they picked the absolute wrong case to highlight the issues.
You are woefully ignorant of police. An MRAP does not make the average cop think he is in danger. It makes the average copy think he is safer because other cops are here and we have a whole lot of intimidation with us. MRAPs are not used for a lone cop on patrol, its used for groups of cops in special situations.
Selection against intelligence, a bogus claim. The two guys I went to high school with who became cops were taking all the college prep math and science classes and doing quite well, trig, pre-calc, chem, physics, etc.
Speaking of groups of cops. One of the most effective ways to reduce their fear is to not send them out alone. When a partner is present a cop is far more likely to use a less-than-lethal weapon like a taser or baton than his gun.
Exceptions don't prove the rule. One can always find a video to represent whatever behavior your political agenda wants to promote.
The fact remains that when cops use deadly force it is almost always out of fear.
Cameras are only a partial solution. While they tend to keep **both** sides honest and calm, they don't really change the fact that if the cop is in danger he will react with deadly force out of fear. Another part of the solution is to not send cops out alone, always have them go out in pairs.
If a cop is alone and fears a person may try to take his gun he will not let that person get close enough for a wrestling match. He will shoot.
If a cop is not alone he is far more likely to use a less-than-lethal weapon such as a taser or baton since his partner will have a lethal weapon at the ready should the person get ahold of the cop's gun.
Cops are paranoid about losing control of their gun, according to the FBI about 10% of those cops shot are shot with their own gun. Having a partner greatly helps reduce this fear.
Brown was shot because he escalated the situation to a "high risk arrest" by going for the cop's gun. Period. That is the single factor that dominated all that followed. According to the FBI 10% of the cops who get shot are shot with their own gun after losing control of it. So go for an cop's gun and the rules of engagement radically change. You will not be allowed to get close enough for a wrestling match. Once you go for the gun your not just some guy who stole some cigarettes and shoved a store clerk. You are according to police training and the law a lethal threat if you try to get close rather than comply and get on the ground.
I really don't care about violence against police, but if this bullet points helps convince PD's to adopt cameras then super!
What an ignorant statement you offer. Violence against police is why police react so forcefully. According to the FBI nearly 10% of police officers who get shot are shot with their own gun. That is why unarmed people who try to get into a wrestling match with cops get shot, because the cops are very afraid of losing control of their own gun.
People who are compliant tend not to get shot. People who react violently are far more likely to get shot. So if you actually care about people getting shot you should care about violence against police.
Thinking anyone is envy of big Russian territories boosts the Russian self-esteem, but it is a lie. Rarely anyone thinks what will China actually do after it had sucessfully invaded Siberia.
Harvest the resources of the region. Siberia is quite rich in minerals, oil and natural gas, timber and fisheries. And technology is making "harvesting" more and more practical in hostile environments.
You might also notice that China is going to great lengths to secure resources around the world.
They mangage/manipulate their currency so that there is effectively a huge discount to all products and services in China.
That's a myth as pointed out in my summary ... Currently, the black market rate is the same as the official rate. If it is really undervalued, I would think the black market would reflect that.
Sorry, your hypothesis is simply mistaken.
The US Treasury department says the RMB is significantly undervalued and that this is primarily due to government intervention. That the value is *not* a market determined rate. However they then play the political game and say this is not "manipulation". Note I used "mangage/manipulate" to reflect this political game of words. The simple truth remains, the rate is government engineered not market determined.
Economists outside of government and those in business and finance tend to refer to the rate as manipulated. Tend to quantify that undervaluation in the 10% range, giving every product and service an instant 10% discount just by purchasing in China. Again, this 10% is purely from the currency manipulation; externalization of environmental and other costs, lower labor costs, etc are *not* included in this 10%.
By what terminology would refer to the process I described in my first post?