Why don't you work on fixing your democracy, instead of trying to cripple 911? It sounds like your priorities are entirely messed up.
I neither control democracy nor 911 service. If I had my way 911 service would be better. But local and state government serves the public less and less every year. The prefer to serve themselves. And voters have made themselves irrelevant by voting based on their race and their shallow self image rather than voting for their practical interests.
Sounds like you live in a functioning democracy. I live in a one-party state where the media/government union party uses racial identity politics and government union money to ensure they will always control the state.
Whether that's correct or not (I'll say yes, it's correct but it's only ~25% of the story) the solution is no pensions for new hires and no pension increases (or any other action that might result in a pension increase) for existing workers. Contribute to a 401k and buy life insurance like everyone else.
And if you aren't satisfied with your CEO performance, you stop buying his product. If you aren't satisfied with your government performance, then fuck you, pay your taxes anyway.
You have that wrong. It's just take someone else's money. Spend it on government worker pensions. Then tell people it clearly wasn't enough to fix the problem (you didn't use it for) and you need to take more. Then repeat the cycle again and again and again.
after the 2008 housing collapse and recession, most states just redirected the 911 fee to the general fund
General fund, a.k.a. government worker pensions — money spent providing zero government services to anyone: no lives saves, no schoolchildren taught, no crimes investigated, no roads built or repaired, nothing except fat monthly checks to non-workers.
The number of officers making mistakes is a tiny fraction of 1%, and most of those officers making mistakes don't do it often. Yes there are bad apples out there, but the overwhelming majority of officers are not. And I would not say it is "the norm".
The norm seems to be the "good" officers covering for and protecting the bad ones. And the norm seems to be for police to use violence whenever rather than trying to avoid bringing violence into otherwise non-violent encounters.
The norm doesn't seem to put the protection of life first. And serving the public seems to rank lower than milking the public for traffic fines.
SWAT teams consists of humans - humans make mistakes. Yes even fatal ones.
... they were sent in expecting a situation where a moments hesitation to shoot to kill could have killed a lot of people!
Reflect upon that for a second.
Upon reflection, SWAT teams are too dangerous to innocents and far too unaccountable for their mistakes to be allowed to continue to exist. It's too bad, because there are genuine situations where SWAT tactics could protect the public. But if SWAT officers are going to shoot before they learn what's happening, and others are going to defend that, then we can't have SWAT teams.
If police would go back to protecting life and serving the public, these incidents would be a lot less common.
Ridiculous! Did you know that the amount of people regularly carrying loaded guns in the US is larger than that in the EU?
That's an argument for US police being more careful not to murder innocents, not less careful.
Legal US carry permit holders have a lot lower rate of killing innocents than police killing innocents. I'd be a lot more comfortable in a tense situation with a legal carry permit holder than a police officer. If a carry permit holder makes a mistake and shoots me, he actually faces some consequences.
He took a life because he was manipulated by a psychopath.
He took a life because he opened fire on someone without assessing the situation. No one else assessed the situation either. They just decided to shoot first and find out what's going on later. They're a menace to society and need to be treated like anyone else who'd go in shooting based on little more than rumors.
He did everything right, he took a shot at someone who every indication...
No verified reports. No visible weapon or any other indication of danger. Just a story he heard second or third hand.
You are in fact a shitbag for not only not seeing this, but commenting on it with some obscene sense of moral righteousness, you aren't.
I want the police to stop murdering innocent people because they can't be bothered to learn what's going on before opening fire on whoever is in front of them. If that's too much to ask of the police, then society should eliminate the police entirely and replace them with an organization dedicated to protecting life and serving the public.
That’s absolutely unacceptable. The police are not allowed to exist as a murder squad for anyone who can tell a story to a 911 operator.
They aren't, that's why the shitbag who called them is going to jail. Really he should be getting execution, but the system is slow to adjust to changing dynamics.
The officer who pulled the trigger needs to face similar consequences. And everyone else in the chain of command of that department should lose their jobs, unless they can truthfully testify that the trigger man was acting wrongfully against procedure.
The police were the danger to the public in this case. The caller just pointed the way.
Except for the part where he went in expecting a hostage situation and the presumed hostage-taker presented a clear headshot. He's not responsible for that, the guy who made the call is.
That’s absolutely unacceptable. The police are not allowed to exist as a murder squad for anyone who can tell a story to a 911 operator.
As a result, the police aren't trained for fake hostage situations
Training isn't the point. If police are trained to be a murder squad for 911 storytellers, then the training officers and the higher-ups who approved that training are also guilty and should also face trial and jail time upon conviction.
And Kansas should disband all police forces where this it true, to replace them with a corps dedicated to protecting and serving the public rather than on-demand mayhem.
Being extra pathetic isn't a reason to shift the blame to someone else.
He's a murderer AND the police are also guilty of murder (or at least manslaughter). AND the training officers and higher-ups are probably guilty of negligence or some other gross failure in their duty.
There's no "police forces played a role" unless you consider being the trigger man in a murder "playing a role".
US police are a clear and present danger. You keep to yourself and stay out of bad neighborhoods, you're mostly safe from criminals. But the police stalk us all on the highways everyday — and they could decide to be "in fear for their lives" and kill anyone at any time.
In this time of NSA snooping and privacy concerns, its amazing to see so many people siding with police raiding people and seizing documents by the millions to fish for evidence.
What was Uber's great crime again? Giving people car rides for money? What kind of person thinks heavy-handed government raids to interfere with car rides are legitimate and just?
Which is excellent. Someone finally beat the corrupt self-dealing government insiders at their own game. Cheers to Uber. Most of the world is now free to give others car ride for money. Uber won that freedom for us all.
I have a friend who has 30 years experience who hasn't even gotten one call back for an interview. With 7 years til retirement, he's too old. 7 years is longer than most young people will stay at a job these days.
What does that have to do with entry level fast food jobs?
Yeah, but unemployment is at 4% and expected to fall even lower. And there are help wanted signs up all over. And economists are worried about labor shortages as baby boomers age out of the workforce with fewer people to replace them.
Funny, both me and my friend worked at companies where we were told to ignore risk. Why would intel be different?
Because all companies are not identical? Do you think everything you and your (imaginary?) friend have in common is also common to every company?
Also, what do you mean by "risk"? Do you think it's reasonable (or even possible) to eliminate all risk of a security breach? When did anyone accomplish that?
Why are you installing the slowdown patch on your Oracle server? It's a dedicated box only for Oracle, not a box for web browsing or running untrusted code. You don't need the extra security.
Slashdot Mirror
Why don't you work on fixing your democracy, instead of trying to cripple 911? It sounds like your priorities are entirely messed up.
I neither control democracy nor 911 service. If I had my way 911 service would be better. But local and state government serves the public less and less every year. The prefer to serve themselves. And voters have made themselves irrelevant by voting based on their race and their shallow self image rather than voting for their practical interests.
Civil servants make less than the private sector
False
Sounds like you live in a functioning democracy. I live in a one-party state where the media/government union party uses racial identity politics and government union money to ensure they will always control the state.
That’s a good scheme for existing pensions. Pensions for future workers should be made illegal nationwide.
Whether that's correct or not (I'll say yes, it's correct but it's only ~25% of the story) the solution is no pensions for new hires and no pension increases (or any other action that might result in a pension increase) for existing workers. Contribute to a 401k and buy life insurance like everyone else.
And if you aren't satisfied with your CEO performance, you stop buying his product. If you aren't satisfied with your government performance, then fuck you, pay your taxes anyway.
Perhaps a new phone number that's easier to remember...like 0118-999-88199-9119-725....3?
Phone number? Are you 75 years old? The "phone number" would be Siri, Call Uber EMT. I broke my ankle.
You have that wrong. It's just take someone else's money. Spend it on government worker pensions. Then tell people it clearly wasn't enough to fix the problem (you didn't use it for) and you need to take more. Then repeat the cycle again and again and again.
Launch a new service Uber EMT. They could get there faster. And there would be less chance the cops would show up with them to shoot your dogs.
after the 2008 housing collapse and recession, most states just redirected the 911 fee to the general fund
General fund, a.k.a. government worker pensions — money spent providing zero government services to anyone: no lives saves, no schoolchildren taught, no crimes investigated, no roads built or repaired, nothing except fat monthly checks to non-workers.
Government workers get paid regardless of whether their jobs get done.
911 wants to help, but when they don't, they face zero consequences.
The number of officers making mistakes is a tiny fraction of 1%, and most of those officers making mistakes don't do it often. Yes there are bad apples out there, but the overwhelming majority of officers are not. And I would not say it is "the norm".
The norm seems to be the "good" officers covering for and protecting the bad ones. And the norm seems to be for police to use violence whenever rather than trying to avoid bringing violence into otherwise non-violent encounters.
The norm doesn't seem to put the protection of life first. And serving the public seems to rank lower than milking the public for traffic fines.
SWAT teams consists of humans - humans make mistakes. Yes even fatal ones.
... they were sent in expecting a situation where a moments hesitation to shoot to kill could have killed a lot of people!
Reflect upon that for a second.
Upon reflection, SWAT teams are too dangerous to innocents and far too unaccountable for their mistakes to be allowed to continue to exist. It's too bad, because there are genuine situations where SWAT tactics could protect the public. But if SWAT officers are going to shoot before they learn what's happening, and others are going to defend that, then we can't have SWAT teams.
If police would go back to protecting life and serving the public, these incidents would be a lot less common.
Ridiculous! Did you know that the amount of people regularly carrying loaded guns in the US is larger than that in the EU?
That's an argument for US police being more careful not to murder innocents, not less careful.
Legal US carry permit holders have a lot lower rate of killing innocents than police killing innocents. I'd be a lot more comfortable in a tense situation with a legal carry permit holder than a police officer. If a carry permit holder makes a mistake and shoots me, he actually faces some consequences.
He took a life because he was manipulated by a psychopath.
He took a life because he opened fire on someone without assessing the situation. No one else assessed the situation either. They just decided to shoot first and find out what's going on later. They're a menace to society and need to be treated like anyone else who'd go in shooting based on little more than rumors.
He did everything right, he took a shot at someone who every indication...
No verified reports. No visible weapon or any other indication of danger. Just a story he heard second or third hand.
You are in fact a shitbag for not only not seeing this, but commenting on it with some obscene sense of moral righteousness, you aren't.
I want the police to stop murdering innocent people because they can't be bothered to learn what's going on before opening fire on whoever is in front of them. If that's too much to ask of the police, then society should eliminate the police entirely and replace them with an organization dedicated to protecting life and serving the public.
Stop murdering people.
That’s absolutely unacceptable. The police are not allowed to exist as a murder squad for anyone who can tell a story to a 911 operator.
They aren't, that's why the shitbag who called them is going to jail. Really he should be getting execution, but the system is slow to adjust to changing dynamics.
The officer who pulled the trigger needs to face similar consequences. And everyone else in the chain of command of that department should lose their jobs, unless they can truthfully testify that the trigger man was acting wrongfully against procedure.
The police were the danger to the public in this case. The caller just pointed the way.
Except for the part where he went in expecting a hostage situation and the presumed hostage-taker presented a clear headshot. He's not responsible for that, the guy who made the call is.
That’s absolutely unacceptable. The police are not allowed to exist as a murder squad for anyone who can tell a story to a 911 operator.
As a result, the police aren't trained for fake hostage situations
Training isn't the point. If police are trained to be a murder squad for 911 storytellers, then the training officers and the higher-ups who approved that training are also guilty and should also face trial and jail time upon conviction.
And Kansas should disband all police forces where this it true, to replace them with a corps dedicated to protecting and serving the public rather than on-demand mayhem.
Being extra pathetic isn't a reason to shift the blame to someone else.
Blame is shared, not shifted.
He's a murderer AND the police are also guilty of murder (or at least manslaughter). AND the training officers and higher-ups are probably guilty of negligence or some other gross failure in their duty.
There's no "police forces played a role" unless you consider being the trigger man in a murder "playing a role".
US police are a clear and present danger. You keep to yourself and stay out of bad neighborhoods, you're mostly safe from criminals. But the police stalk us all on the highways everyday — and they could decide to be "in fear for their lives" and kill anyone at any time.
You know "I made up a science fiction story" isn't really an argument, right?
In this time of NSA snooping and privacy concerns, its amazing to see so many people siding with police raiding people and seizing documents by the millions to fish for evidence.
What was Uber's great crime again? Giving people car rides for money? What kind of person thinks heavy-handed government raids to interfere with car rides are legitimate and just?
Which is excellent. Someone finally beat the corrupt self-dealing government insiders at their own game. Cheers to Uber. Most of the world is now free to give others car ride for money. Uber won that freedom for us all.
I have a friend who has 30 years experience who hasn't even gotten one call back for an interview. With 7 years til retirement, he's too old. 7 years is longer than most young people will stay at a job these days.
What does that have to do with entry level fast food jobs?
Yeah, but unemployment is at 4% and expected to fall even lower. And there are help wanted signs up all over. And economists are worried about labor shortages as baby boomers age out of the workforce with fewer people to replace them.
Funny, both me and my friend worked at companies where we were told to ignore risk. Why would intel be different?
Because all companies are not identical? Do you think everything you and your (imaginary?) friend have in common is also common to every company?
Also, what do you mean by "risk"? Do you think it's reasonable (or even possible) to eliminate all risk of a security breach? When did anyone accomplish that?
Why are you installing the slowdown patch on your Oracle server? It's a dedicated box only for Oracle, not a box for web browsing or running untrusted code. You don't need the extra security.