The criminals that pass in and out so quickly would barely fit the definition of criminal. Do you realize all the trivial things that have sentences up to 2 1/2 years? I'm guessing you don't. If anything our sentences tend to be too long. And states with the 3 strikes rule just encourage fights to the death at the third crime and lifers with trivial crimes under their belt.
The fact is that many judges are hanging judges who like max sentencing and consider themselves to be the wrath of god. Many jurors and judges consider anyone accused to be guilty. Where there is smoke there is fire. The judges are friends with the cops and never doubt the truth of their testimony for an instant. Jurors often feel the seem. Police testimony is granted far more weight than civilian testimony. People who are intelligent and can think critically and logically and be truly objective tend to avoid jury duty. It is for reasons like this that we have such a high percentage of innocent people behind bars.
Do you have any statistics to back up your 'being arrested 20 times' idea? You seem to think our justice system is too lenient. It's true that we don't simply shoot or dismember petty thieves, but most other countries don't either. With a few rare exceptions we have the harshest justice system on the planet, which is reflected by the largest prison population on the planet both as a percentage and as a total number. Even exceeding China.
The fact is that 'real' criminals are not all that dissuaded by prison. It doesn't motivate them to change their behavior. For many reasons. Partly because they lack intelligence. Partly because they simply cannot stand the idea of being a wage slave. The lures of whatever crime they are attracted to is just too great. Putting them in prison just stops them from engaging in their preferred behavior for as long as they are there.
It is people like you who believe sentencing is still too short that are the reason why such a high percentage of our population is living in subhuman conditions behind bars. And you want to make the sentencing longer. It wouldn't surprise me if a lot of Republicans and other enthusiastic punishers supported the death penalty for even minor crimes. That is not a civilized or just society.
You are missing the point I think. The point is that if anyone does start a lunar colony it won't be the US. I think this is the director's real point as well. So if it's going to happen at all it has to be some other government that has money to spend on such things. And who else but the Chinese? If the Chinese don't do it then no one will.
As far as I can tell. At least that's what I would do if I had the cash and believed in this bullshit. Surely Microsoft can't be foolish enough to think it can compete with Apple in the hardware arena. Maybe they are thinking phones.
What's stopping you from selling your Ipad and buying a real computer that is designed to do real work? Does your Ipad have dual 30" screens? Does your Ipad have a 40 TB RAID array? Or how about 64 Gigs of RAM? Does your Ipad have the processing power of triple AMD HD7970s not just in terms of graphics, but also in terms of GPGPU work? Can your Ipad compete with the processing power of the latest Intel hexacore or octocore CPU?
As a general purpose computer the Ipad just sucks. Can it compete with a netbook? Sure. Can it compete with a real computer? No. It's just an ultraportable device with all the compromises that entails. If you're a geek, it's a nice toy, but it won't ever replace a desktop computer or really even a laptop.
I'm trying to figure out why you think of the Ipad as the future or as any sort of progress. To me, it seems like just a passing fad. Most definitely not the future. Powerful CPUs and GPUs and other coprocessors will always need cooling. Data storage will always take up space. Keyboards and mice may not be the future, but that doesn't mean touchscreens will. After all they are not even new technology. Larger computers will always have an advantage. In fact whatever replaces the current electrical/CPU model might be even larger than current desktop PCs. Computers of the future might even end up looking like a HAL 9000.
The ones who died in 9/11 are dead. How can you help a dead person exactly? By devaluing the word "terrorism" until it has no real meaning at all? Or until it just means anyone the government doesn't like?
Where are these book advertisements? The only time I've seen anything like that is on the inside back covers of paperback novels and even then it's rare.
All it takes is one person with a scanner or one or two 8-10 megapixel cameras and some wood or aluminum to make that happen. I do my part and plan to 'publish' as many $200+ textbooks as I can in ebook format. If ebook textbooks only cost a fraction of the paper version (as they should) I wouldn't bother.
I bet there is a major generation gap when it comes to ebooks. Somehow I imagine that the facebook generation sees them as pretty normal. I pretty much hate the things, and I hate reading on an LCD screen and the e-ink devices are too small and too expensive and way, way too unreliable and don't allow for color printing.
I would never, ever buy an ebook at current prices. To be fair, I have noticed that some $180 textbooks have $120 ebooks available. Of course in some cases you can buy a $20 paper version from a seller in India, but that kind of discount is moving in the right direction. When they start selling the mobi/epub version for around 10-20% of the paper book price then I would start buying them. Although I still think they should just be offered free of charge or with a +10% surcharge along with the paper version.
If I can't find an ebook on torrent/p2p I buy a paper copy, scan it into an ebook, and then resell the paper copy for 70% - 80% of the original price. Then with just a few hours work I have a nicely scanned DRM-free ebook and a warm-fuzzy feeling for sticking an icepick in the eyes of those rich and greedy publishers, and my final cost (ignoring my time) is only 20-30% of the cost of the paper book. That's probably the kind of pricing that the publishers should aim for. If the paperback costs $10 the ebook should cost no more than $3.
You do realize that those people you want to see brutalized and tortured in prison regardless of what their crime was are eventually going to get out of prison and be back on the street. With you. Are you sure you want that? Think about it for a second. I already know you have no empathy, but how's your sense of self-preservation? A society of enthusiastic torturers is a society with some seriously bad karma.
The founders never wanted a democracy. What makes you think they did? They always thought of their system as a constitutionally limited republic. Democracy was chosen to select politicians simply because they couldn't think of a better system. The constitution was supposed to protect the people from tyranny. Not the voting process. A system in which only white male land owners are allowed to vote and which even then uses that vote as a mere suggestion isn't much of a 'democracy'. It's quite far from majority rule.
Just don't complain when we pass you on the right, cut in front of you and reverse tailgate you until we are both going under the speed limit at which time we are both breaking the law until you get in the right lane where you belong.
I believe my state does have a law that when a certain number of cars are behind you you must pull over to the road shoulder and come to a full stop to let them pass you. Of course that is the polite and civilized thing to do anyway.
Pepper spray is almost never the minimum force necessary. The minimum amount of force is no force. Just discussion or warnings. Then would come grabbing the person's arms and handcuffing them. That's the minimum force. Chemical and electrical weapons were originally intended to replace firearms. That is, for when lethal force would otherwise be warranted. Of course none of this is warranted when the protesters have the right to be doing what they are doing as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. In such a case their only job is to make sure that no violence is used and only then against the specific person who was violent. One violent person is not a license to take down the whole crowd of people.
Incidentally, even if the US armed forces were called in civilians could fight back if better organized. If we all had firearms and could equal or exceed their numbers we might prevail. Well at least until the government started bombing or even nuking its own cities and towns. I'm not sure the entire US Air Force would be comfortable with bombing their own cities though. At some point you would get mass defections from the military and a civil war. The boot lickers vs. the freedom fighters.
Have you actually met a real police officer in the US? It sounds like you haven't. They have no conscience whatsoever. They are bullies. They took the job they have because they can beat people up without getting in trouble for it. When you are attuned to that kind of thing you can see it as soon as you meet them. They are the kinds of people who watch those stupid, unrealistic, violent movies and imagine they were the guy shooting and beating people up. That's their motivation. They want to be that badass. Any meeting you have with them as a civilian is a potential opportunity for them to feel that power that they crave so much. It's also a way to express their anger at whatever it is they are angry at. That's another cop characteristic: anger. The only people they care about defending are the other cops. They protect and serve only themselves.
And bootlickers like you seem to think it is okay for the police to start shooting into a crowd because a few unidentified people are throwing rocks at their riot shields. Well it's not okay. That's either murder or attempted murder. A serious crime. Police are supposed to be able to handle those situations without turning into death squads.
Actually you can recognize the cops because they would be the ones with body armor and firearms and stomping on people's heads before spraying chemical weapons in their eyes and using electric torture compliance devices on them, all with a huge stupid grin on their face. Those would be the cops.
The British had magnetrons and the Germans had klystrons. Klystrons had and still have much better frequency stability. Which is why the Germans (and presumably the Japanese) used them. Magnetrons were more compact and lighter and easier to use at higher power. The allies made due with the "inferior" magnetron frequency drift by synchronizing the receiver with the transmitter in a clever way. In the long run klystrons were seen as superior technology. The problem is the Germans just didn't have it figured out well enough at the time. The Germans, as always, loved precision and couldn't bear the thought of using the more practical magnetron technology. A decision they paid dearly for.
Why do you respect them for putting on a uniform? That's pretty strange. You respect someone for wearing a certain style of clothing? Or do you respect it as a license to kick the shit out of anyone who annoys them without any consequences?
The sad truth is that, like most bullies, the police are cowards through and through. That's why they always use overwhelming force against unarmed foes. They storm someone's house in a team of 30 wearing state of the art body armor and ballistic helmets and assault rifles against some guy sleeping in his bedroom. They aren't brave men. They are just pathetic cowardly bullies whose sole aim in life is and always was to beat up the weaker kids who don't even try to fight back. That's the beauty of being a cop. They never face even odds. The odds are always stacked 1000:1 in their favor. Police are the most pathetic human beings in any society. They have the personality of a violent criminal without the courage of one to accept the risks.
Actually it is unprovoked in a sense. Physically unprovoked. Civilized human beings do not respond with violence to mere verbal taunts. Anyone who does so should not be wearing a police uniform. It is no different from a civilian responding with violence. If someone calls me a name and then I respond with my fists that is assault and battery or worse. I could easily go to jail for years for doing such a thing. And rightfully so. Whether I was baited or not is quite irrelevant. Those police should be in prison, not walking around with guns and nonlethal torture devices.
The fact is that most people around the world believe that WWII era Germans in general were some of the most pure evil mass murderers ever to walk the earth and that belief seems well founded to me. Pretty much everyone who was a member of the Nazi party can be held responsible for the gigadeathcrimes that took place during the war. The rest of the world is grateful though for creating such perfect opponents in video games. No one feels bad about killing Nazis. Although I must admit I enjoy killing cops more than Nazis. Either way they pretty much define pure evil. That (in)human bloodlust, the craving to snuff out as many lives as possible combined with ethnic cleansing.
The guy from McMaster appears to be claiming that you can transmit information via some kind of longitudinal electrical 'wave' with virtually no power in the transmitter. That is very strange. It seems to defy basic logic and cause and effect and the TAINSTAFL principle. Yes, you still have some level of conservation of energy because the receiver uses the additional power, but it just doesn't seem possible. A macro scale analogy would be something like shooting a bullet from a gun without requiring any energy from the gun. It would be the target that supplies the energy. All I can say is the guy had better be very sure that he is not using transverse EM waves without realizing it. His controls better be very reliable because that is quite an extraordinary claim.
Cops are occasionally charged with crimes but it's the rare exception and not the rule. All of the attorneys I've asked about it also strongly agree. Talk to a defense attorney some time and ask him about what he's seen cops get away with. Apparently district attorneys, as a rule, will simply not charge a cop with a crime in the first place.
In my case I was physically attacked by a cop and beaten pretty badly. In fact he seemed to be intent on actually killing me via strangulation. In order to make it look like he had a valid reason for all this he charged me with a whole list of crimes including assault and battery with a deadly weapon, although I had no weapon of any kind. And while I was lying on the ground in severe pain I heard the lunatic cop quickly make an agreement with the other cop about getting their stories straight (the one who I think saved my life actually by pulling the other cop off of me). The other cop agreed to the bullshit story without even the slightest hesitation. And they did this right in front of me. These guys have no fear of the law.
There were at least 10-15 other cops right nearby and all of them are backing up the out of control violent cop's story. The blue wall is quite real. Annoy or disrespect a cop in any way and you will find out for yourself.
Of course I want to sue the guy, but without a video of him beating me and without a single civilian witness I think it's pretty hopeless. I also have to go to trial and be found not guilty of all the contempt of cop charges before I can even think about suing.
I'm quite aware, that cops are prone to bending the rules, but it is up to the public to keep them in check and remind from time to time about the nessesity to follow the rules they protect.
Bending? You mean breaking I think. Neither the police themselves, nor the prosecutors, nor the judges hold police officers responsible for their actions. They can literally do anything they want including murder.
Since prosecutors aren't willing to charge them and judges aren't willing to find them guilty or sentence them, there is no way to stop their out of control behavior within the law. The only thing that might help would be secret citizen death squads. Whenever any cop is even accused of a crime they are assassinated. That might motivate some of them to behave a bit more like civilized human beings instead of animals.
So for deterring their bad behavior only death squads might have any chance of working. In terms of protecting the victims of the police thugs, requiring video recording of any contact with a suspect would certainly be a good start. And the remote footage would have to be stored out of the hands of law enforcement completely so that they can't just delete it every time it records police crimes.
Slashdot Mirror
The criminals that pass in and out so quickly would barely fit the definition of criminal. Do you realize all the trivial things that have sentences up to 2 1/2 years? I'm guessing you don't. If anything our sentences tend to be too long. And states with the 3 strikes rule just encourage fights to the death at the third crime and lifers with trivial crimes under their belt.
The fact is that many judges are hanging judges who like max sentencing and consider themselves to be the wrath of god. Many jurors and judges consider anyone accused to be guilty. Where there is smoke there is fire. The judges are friends with the cops and never doubt the truth of their testimony for an instant. Jurors often feel the seem. Police testimony is granted far more weight than civilian testimony. People who are intelligent and can think critically and logically and be truly objective tend to avoid jury duty. It is for reasons like this that we have such a high percentage of innocent people behind bars.
Do you have any statistics to back up your 'being arrested 20 times' idea? You seem to think our justice system is too lenient. It's true that we don't simply shoot or dismember petty thieves, but most other countries don't either. With a few rare exceptions we have the harshest justice system on the planet, which is reflected by the largest prison population on the planet both as a percentage and as a total number. Even exceeding China.
The fact is that 'real' criminals are not all that dissuaded by prison. It doesn't motivate them to change their behavior. For many reasons. Partly because they lack intelligence. Partly because they simply cannot stand the idea of being a wage slave. The lures of whatever crime they are attracted to is just too great. Putting them in prison just stops them from engaging in their preferred behavior for as long as they are there.
It is people like you who believe sentencing is still too short that are the reason why such a high percentage of our population is living in subhuman conditions behind bars. And you want to make the sentencing longer. It wouldn't surprise me if a lot of Republicans and other enthusiastic punishers supported the death penalty for even minor crimes. That is not a civilized or just society.
You are missing the point I think. The point is that if anyone does start a lunar colony it won't be the US. I think this is the director's real point as well. So if it's going to happen at all it has to be some other government that has money to spend on such things. And who else but the Chinese? If the Chinese don't do it then no one will.
As far as I can tell. At least that's what I would do if I had the cash and believed in this bullshit. Surely Microsoft can't be foolish enough to think it can compete with Apple in the hardware arena. Maybe they are thinking phones.
What's stopping you from selling your Ipad and buying a real computer that is designed to do real work? Does your Ipad have dual 30" screens? Does your Ipad have a 40 TB RAID array? Or how about 64 Gigs of RAM? Does your Ipad have the processing power of triple AMD HD7970s not just in terms of graphics, but also in terms of GPGPU work? Can your Ipad compete with the processing power of the latest Intel hexacore or octocore CPU?
As a general purpose computer the Ipad just sucks. Can it compete with a netbook? Sure. Can it compete with a real computer? No. It's just an ultraportable device with all the compromises that entails. If you're a geek, it's a nice toy, but it won't ever replace a desktop computer or really even a laptop.
I'm trying to figure out why you think of the Ipad as the future or as any sort of progress. To me, it seems like just a passing fad. Most definitely not the future. Powerful CPUs and GPUs and other coprocessors will always need cooling. Data storage will always take up space. Keyboards and mice may not be the future, but that doesn't mean touchscreens will. After all they are not even new technology. Larger computers will always have an advantage. In fact whatever replaces the current electrical/CPU model might be even larger than current desktop PCs. Computers of the future might even end up looking like a HAL 9000.
The ones who died in 9/11 are dead. How can you help a dead person exactly? By devaluing the word "terrorism" until it has no real meaning at all? Or until it just means anyone the government doesn't like?
Where are these book advertisements? The only time I've seen anything like that is on the inside back covers of paperback novels and even then it's rare.
All it takes is one person with a scanner or one or two 8-10 megapixel cameras and some wood or aluminum to make that happen. I do my part and plan to 'publish' as many $200+ textbooks as I can in ebook format. If ebook textbooks only cost a fraction of the paper version (as they should) I wouldn't bother.
I bet there is a major generation gap when it comes to ebooks. Somehow I imagine that the facebook generation sees them as pretty normal. I pretty much hate the things, and I hate reading on an LCD screen and the e-ink devices are too small and too expensive and way, way too unreliable and don't allow for color printing.
I would never, ever buy an ebook at current prices. To be fair, I have noticed that some $180 textbooks have $120 ebooks available. Of course in some cases you can buy a $20 paper version from a seller in India, but that kind of discount is moving in the right direction. When they start selling the mobi/epub version for around 10-20% of the paper book price then I would start buying them. Although I still think they should just be offered free of charge or with a +10% surcharge along with the paper version.
If I can't find an ebook on torrent/p2p I buy a paper copy, scan it into an ebook, and then resell the paper copy for 70% - 80% of the original price. Then with just a few hours work I have a nicely scanned DRM-free ebook and a warm-fuzzy feeling for sticking an icepick in the eyes of those rich and greedy publishers, and my final cost (ignoring my time) is only 20-30% of the cost of the paper book. That's probably the kind of pricing that the publishers should aim for. If the paperback costs $10 the ebook should cost no more than $3.
They hurt a lot of people
Who did they hurt? Or are you referring to the FBI?
You do realize that those people you want to see brutalized and tortured in prison regardless of what their crime was are eventually going to get out of prison and be back on the street. With you. Are you sure you want that? Think about it for a second. I already know you have no empathy, but how's your sense of self-preservation? A society of enthusiastic torturers is a society with some seriously bad karma.
Their antics were harmless. Show me a victim and then maybe you'll have a point. No victim = no crime.
The founders never wanted a democracy. What makes you think they did? They always thought of their system as a constitutionally limited republic. Democracy was chosen to select politicians simply because they couldn't think of a better system. The constitution was supposed to protect the people from tyranny. Not the voting process. A system in which only white male land owners are allowed to vote and which even then uses that vote as a mere suggestion isn't much of a 'democracy'. It's quite far from majority rule.
Both sound like excellent arguments to me and you haven't refuted them.
Just don't complain when we pass you on the right, cut in front of you and reverse tailgate you until we are both going under the speed limit at which time we are both breaking the law until you get in the right lane where you belong.
I believe my state does have a law that when a certain number of cars are behind you you must pull over to the road shoulder and come to a full stop to let them pass you. Of course that is the polite and civilized thing to do anyway.
Pepper spray is almost never the minimum force necessary. The minimum amount of force is no force. Just discussion or warnings. Then would come grabbing the person's arms and handcuffing them. That's the minimum force. Chemical and electrical weapons were originally intended to replace firearms. That is, for when lethal force would otherwise be warranted. Of course none of this is warranted when the protesters have the right to be doing what they are doing as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. In such a case their only job is to make sure that no violence is used and only then against the specific person who was violent. One violent person is not a license to take down the whole crowd of people.
Incidentally, even if the US armed forces were called in civilians could fight back if better organized. If we all had firearms and could equal or exceed their numbers we might prevail. Well at least until the government started bombing or even nuking its own cities and towns. I'm not sure the entire US Air Force would be comfortable with bombing their own cities though. At some point you would get mass defections from the military and a civil war. The boot lickers vs. the freedom fighters.
Have you actually met a real police officer in the US? It sounds like you haven't. They have no conscience whatsoever. They are bullies. They took the job they have because they can beat people up without getting in trouble for it. When you are attuned to that kind of thing you can see it as soon as you meet them. They are the kinds of people who watch those stupid, unrealistic, violent movies and imagine they were the guy shooting and beating people up. That's their motivation. They want to be that badass. Any meeting you have with them as a civilian is a potential opportunity for them to feel that power that they crave so much. It's also a way to express their anger at whatever it is they are angry at. That's another cop characteristic: anger. The only people they care about defending are the other cops. They protect and serve only themselves.
And bootlickers like you seem to think it is okay for the police to start shooting into a crowd because a few unidentified people are throwing rocks at their riot shields. Well it's not okay. That's either murder or attempted murder. A serious crime. Police are supposed to be able to handle those situations without turning into death squads.
Actually you can recognize the cops because they would be the ones with body armor and firearms and stomping on people's heads before spraying chemical weapons in their eyes and using electric torture compliance devices on them, all with a huge stupid grin on their face. Those would be the cops.
The British had magnetrons and the Germans had klystrons. Klystrons had and still have much better frequency stability. Which is why the Germans (and presumably the Japanese) used them. Magnetrons were more compact and lighter and easier to use at higher power. The allies made due with the "inferior" magnetron frequency drift by synchronizing the receiver with the transmitter in a clever way. In the long run klystrons were seen as superior technology. The problem is the Germans just didn't have it figured out well enough at the time. The Germans, as always, loved precision and couldn't bear the thought of using the more practical magnetron technology. A decision they paid dearly for.
Why do you respect them for putting on a uniform? That's pretty strange. You respect someone for wearing a certain style of clothing? Or do you respect it as a license to kick the shit out of anyone who annoys them without any consequences?
The sad truth is that, like most bullies, the police are cowards through and through. That's why they always use overwhelming force against unarmed foes. They storm someone's house in a team of 30 wearing state of the art body armor and ballistic helmets and assault rifles against some guy sleeping in his bedroom. They aren't brave men. They are just pathetic cowardly bullies whose sole aim in life is and always was to beat up the weaker kids who don't even try to fight back. That's the beauty of being a cop. They never face even odds. The odds are always stacked 1000:1 in their favor. Police are the most pathetic human beings in any society. They have the personality of a violent criminal without the courage of one to accept the risks.
Actually it is unprovoked in a sense. Physically unprovoked. Civilized human beings do not respond with violence to mere verbal taunts. Anyone who does so should not be wearing a police uniform. It is no different from a civilian responding with violence. If someone calls me a name and then I respond with my fists that is assault and battery or worse. I could easily go to jail for years for doing such a thing. And rightfully so. Whether I was baited or not is quite irrelevant. Those police should be in prison, not walking around with guns and nonlethal torture devices.
The fact is that most people around the world believe that WWII era Germans in general were some of the most pure evil mass murderers ever to walk the earth and that belief seems well founded to me. Pretty much everyone who was a member of the Nazi party can be held responsible for the gigadeathcrimes that took place during the war. The rest of the world is grateful though for creating such perfect opponents in video games. No one feels bad about killing Nazis. Although I must admit I enjoy killing cops more than Nazis. Either way they pretty much define pure evil. That (in)human bloodlust, the craving to snuff out as many lives as possible combined with ethnic cleansing.
The guy from McMaster appears to be claiming that you can transmit information via some kind of longitudinal electrical 'wave' with virtually no power in the transmitter. That is very strange. It seems to defy basic logic and cause and effect and the TAINSTAFL principle. Yes, you still have some level of conservation of energy because the receiver uses the additional power, but it just doesn't seem possible. A macro scale analogy would be something like shooting a bullet from a gun without requiring any energy from the gun. It would be the target that supplies the energy. All I can say is the guy had better be very sure that he is not using transverse EM waves without realizing it. His controls better be very reliable because that is quite an extraordinary claim.
Yes. Like preserving video evidence of their crimes. Without video evidence you will have no chance of fighting anything in court.
Cops are occasionally charged with crimes but it's the rare exception and not the rule. All of the attorneys I've asked about it also strongly agree. Talk to a defense attorney some time and ask him about what he's seen cops get away with. Apparently district attorneys, as a rule, will simply not charge a cop with a crime in the first place.
In my case I was physically attacked by a cop and beaten pretty badly. In fact he seemed to be intent on actually killing me via strangulation. In order to make it look like he had a valid reason for all this he charged me with a whole list of crimes including assault and battery with a deadly weapon, although I had no weapon of any kind. And while I was lying on the ground in severe pain I heard the lunatic cop quickly make an agreement with the other cop about getting their stories straight (the one who I think saved my life actually by pulling the other cop off of me). The other cop agreed to the bullshit story without even the slightest hesitation. And they did this right in front of me. These guys have no fear of the law.
There were at least 10-15 other cops right nearby and all of them are backing up the out of control violent cop's story. The blue wall is quite real. Annoy or disrespect a cop in any way and you will find out for yourself.
Of course I want to sue the guy, but without a video of him beating me and without a single civilian witness I think it's pretty hopeless. I also have to go to trial and be found not guilty of all the contempt of cop charges before I can even think about suing.
I'm quite aware, that cops are prone to bending the rules, but it is up to the public to keep them in check and remind from time to time about the nessesity to follow the rules they protect.
Bending? You mean breaking I think. Neither the police themselves, nor the prosecutors, nor the judges hold police officers responsible for their actions. They can literally do anything they want including murder.
Since prosecutors aren't willing to charge them and judges aren't willing to find them guilty or sentence them, there is no way to stop their out of control behavior within the law. The only thing that might help would be secret citizen death squads. Whenever any cop is even accused of a crime they are assassinated. That might motivate some of them to behave a bit more like civilized human beings instead of animals.
So for deterring their bad behavior only death squads might have any chance of working. In terms of protecting the victims of the police thugs, requiring video recording of any contact with a suspect would certainly be a good start. And the remote footage would have to be stored out of the hands of law enforcement completely so that they can't just delete it every time it records police crimes.