[Agent Steel]

As a society we need to have more compassion and respect for lawbreakers and criminals. People who break the law are not thugs, they're not monsters, they are just normal, regular people. Much of the time they are driven to break the law due to circumstances in their lives that they have had no choice over. We must put ourselves in their shoes and try to imagine their struggle.

Police officers have a slogan "to protect and to serve". In what way are they protecting and serving people who break the law? The slogan is patently false for many of us. As a lawbreaker myself, the police have done absolutely nothing to protect or serve MY interests. They have inflicted harm upon me and others like me.

We tend to condemn criminals on a moral level and I'm not sure why. Many laws are morally unjust and ought to be broken. In fact, I believe Thomas Jefferson himself stated that it is our duty to break certain laws if they are oppressive. And in fact this was the entire foundation of America was it not? To dissent and to rebel? I'm sorry I thought this was America.

[Rancid]

I generally agree.

One of problems with the police is that they see themselves as a force for punishment. "Catching the bad guys" is the mentality, and it's the wrong mentality to have. First of all, all people are afforded due process, so for the police to assume that they are always "catching bad guys" presupposes some sort of guilt. Basically, police forces spiritually violate the constitution (and often actually violate it).

Their attitude should be to be a part of communities, and to actually help in the community. Cops should be helping people with their car break downs more than they should be pulling over people to give speeding tickets. In fact, speeding tickets can be given through mail and without stopping people. Cops can just record the speeder, and mail the ticket along with a link to the copy of the video in case they want to fight the speeding ticket. etc etc.

The other problem is that most police departments focus on raiding/swat/ takedowns. The people that get promoted are the people the train and certify and participate in raiding. THis creates a mentality that's much more about force than peace.

Ultimately, police force culture needs to change.

[Patrickov]

I am interested to know exactly what law the OP had broken, or the OP decides oppressive and should be broken.

[Agent Steel]

I am interested to know exactly what law the OP had broken, or the OP decides oppressive and should be broken.

It doesn't matter really, it's not relevant. The point is that you cannot possibly expect me to want to be friends or respect a group that has inflicted harm upon me. We are told to respect the police. Why? Would you respect a person who arrested you and put you in jail? That would be insane. Yes I am a lawbreaker, but I am not an evil person. I deserve to be treated with dignity and respect.

Again, how in the hell are they "protecting and serving" me by placing me under arrest?

[Robert Urbanek]

It doesn't matter really, it's not relevant. The point is that you cannot possibly expect me to want to be friends or respect a group that has inflicted harm upon me. We are told to respect the police. Why? Would you respect a person who arrested you and put you in jail? That would be insane. Yes I am a lawbreaker, but I am not an evil person. I deserve to be treated with dignity and respect.

Again, how in the hell are they "protecting and serving" me by placing me under arrest?

They are not "protecting and serving" you; they are protecting and serving the victims of your crimes.

[Unthinking Majority]

It doesn't matter really, it's not relevant.

Of course it's relevant. You don't get to rape people or break into their homes and steal their shit or whatever else because you feel "oppressed". You're just anti-social. If you need to steal bread to feed yourself ok maybe, but i don't think that's what you're doing. You probably won't say what you've done because it will make you look like a punk-ass.

The point is that you cannot possibly expect me to want to be friends or respect a group that has inflicted harm upon me.

Why should we respect you for inflicting harm on other people and society? What makes you so special that you think you can break the social contract while also accruing all the benefits. You're sound like an entitled fool. This is like dodging your taxes because oppression, but then driving on roads that everyone else pays for except you. You are not special.

We are told to respect the police. Why? Would you respect a person who arrested you and put you in jail? That would be insane. Yes I am a lawbreaker, but I am not an evil person. I deserve to be treated with dignity and respect.

Again, how in the hell are they "protecting and serving" me by placing me under arrest?

They aren't there to protect you. They're there to protect us from you.

They're serving the public by protecting us from the likes of criminals like yourself. If you want a lawless country, you will find a shithole society.

You want to be treated with respect, but you won't respect others by respecting their physical safety or private property or whatever it is that you're doing criminally. Respect is a 2-way street.

If a cop started beating you for no reasons he would be committing a crime, and you'd be the first to complain. The cops do a very valuable service, the only time they don't is when they break the law themselves. If you want people to feel bad for criminals, then will you feel bad for crooked cops? No. Because you're entitled. You want the right to commit crimes but don't want it done to you. Give me a fucking break. You're just an entitled punk. Prove me wrong.

[Godstud]

Cops should be helping people with their car break downs more than they should be pulling over people to give speeding tickets. In fact, speeding tickets can be given through mail and without stopping people. Cops can just record the speeder, and mail the ticket along with a link to the copy of the video in case they want to fight the speeding ticket. etc etc.

I got a speeding ticket here in Thailand a few months ago. I argued that I wasn't going 122 kph in a 90 kph zone.

He then got his phone out, linked it to the speed cam that took the picture and showed me it. Argument over. I walked across the street to the station and paid my $15 USD ticket.

I am perfectly fine with getting a photoradar ticket in the mail, instead of police pulling me over.

Interesting note: You can race by a police car here, and they will not give chase.

They should train bylaw enforcement agents to handle traffic problems, and leave the other policing to trained individuals. You don't need a gun to issue a ticket, and you can get more use out of your police if they aren't sitting at a radar trap all day. Your meter maid can be trained to use a radar gun.



Police are not protecting nor serving even the victims of crimes. You are not any safer from a home invasion if you have 20,000 instead of only 5,000 police in your city.

Assuming that the person they are arresting isn't a victim is also a poor assumption, as many become victims, as police often charge people with resisting arrest even when there is no other charge. Resisting unlawful arrest should be a right.



Earlier this week in a San Francisco courthouse, a deputy public defender named Jami Tillotson challenged police who were trying to take pictures of her client, and the police handcuffed her and took her away. The public defender's office angrily accused the officer of intimidation, but what caught our attention was the reason for her arrest.

A video of the incident shows the plainclothes policeman telling her, "If you continue with this, I will arrest you for resisting arrest."

She was detained, and San Francisco police say they're now investigating her for a possible charge under a state law that includes resisting arrest, as well as obstructing justice.

The case raises the question: How can you be arrested for resisting arrest? Isn't that like being fired for refusing to be fired?

David L. Carter, a criminology professor and former police officer, says in most cases, it's an aggravating offense. But when resisting arrest is the only charge, as it is in the San Francisco case, Carter is puzzled.

"I question the legitimacy of that," Carter says. "You've got to have the arrest to have the resisting arrest!"

In New York, criminal defense lawyer and former prosecutor Nathaniel Burney believes the plainclothes policeman misspoke. "I think what he meant was 'obstruction of justice,' " he says. "Society has an interest in the police doing their job and catching criminals ... and you're not allowed to stop them from doing their jobs."

But critics of the police say both of these charges — obstruction of justice and resisting arrest — can be abused by police to justify groundless arrests. Burney says these charges sometimes are invoked by police who are trying to maintain their status as, as he puts it, "Boss Dog."
https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way ... s-possible

[Unthinking Majority]

We tend to condemn criminals on a moral level and I'm not sure why. Many laws are morally unjust and ought to be broken. In fact, I believe Thomas Jefferson himself stated that it is our duty to break certain laws if they are oppressive. And in fact this was the entire foundation of America was it not? To dissent and to rebel? I'm sorry I thought this was America.

Name the laws you think should be broken, which laws are oppressive. Put up or shut up, otherwise stop crying.

[XogGyux]

This is a rather complex topic. I don't have a soft heart for criminals, but I do believe in reforming one's character and giving people oportunities.
In your first sentence of the OP you say:

As a society we need to have more compassion and respect for lawbreakers and criminals.

This is not something that I agree with, not in its entirety.
For the most part, respect is earned. A general member of society starts with baseline "human decency" kind of respect to begin with but anything above that should be earned. In practice, anyone that commits a crime, and thus breaks the contract with society, essentially cannot have much more than baseline.

"They are not monsters" except the ones that are. You won't see me feeling much pity for the rapist, the premeditated murderer, the domestic abuser, the guy that kills a teenager on his drunken driving or people who are given positions of power/trust and end up embezzling/stealing from society.

On the other hand. There are plenty of "crimes" which shouldn't be crimes. Especially those surrounding drug consumption/possession. Probably all crimes should be individually assessed and approved on a 10-20 years basis to avoid non-sensical "crimes" and to promote debate.

I think there should be a path for rehabilitation for most/all crimes. A path that includes hard work, but that it is rewarded with reasonable chances of reducing sentences, and monetary benefits so that when these people get out of jail, they don't end up in a no-work/no money that leads to crime spiral as a way of life.
I think for most non-violent offenses there should be a path that leads to the removal of records so that you don't have to carry a mistake for the rest of your life.

For-profit prisons should not exist at all. For-profit "businesses" which directly deal with the well being of society should not exist period. That means jails, firefighters, police, healthcare, education, public roads/public transport, clean water, electrical infrastructure. Anything else, fair game, go bite and pull each other's hair in the open market, but when you deal with a human's being well being and you have an incentive to not do something helpful (healthcare) or do something harmful (put people in jail) for profit... then we have a serious problem.

[XogGyux]

Name the laws you think should be broken, which laws are oppressive. Put up or shut up, otherwise stop crying.

That's not that hard as you might think. Cocaine possession is illegal.
Meanwhile not only you can buy alcohol everywhere, but we also have actual lawmakers crying that the places that sell alcohol were closed for a bit during a global pandemic.
Alcohol is by far more dangerous to the user and those around them, by far more costly to society and just as addictive if not more.

[Godstud]

US society makes it so that a person who commits a crime, is stigmatized with said crime for the remainder of their life, and find getting a good job, thereafter, as nigh impossible. This actually promotes re-offense of crimes and sets up many to be career criminals, or makes then end up in prison more(good for the US prison system but not for citizens).

Legalizing, or at least decriminalizing drugs would go a long ways towards helping this.

[Unthinking Majority]

That's not that hard as you might think. Cocaine possession is illegal.
Meanwhile not only you can buy alcohol everywhere, but we also have actual lawmakers crying that the places that sell alcohol were closed for a bit during a global pandemic.
Alcohol is by far more dangerous to the user and those around them, by far more costly to society and just as addictive if not more.

Yes, cocaine possession is a victimless crime. It shouldn't be illegal, since that has caused more harm than good. Making cocaine illegal was a noble pursuit since there are no benefits to its use, but the war on drugs has been disasterous. Maybe the OP snorts the white stuff? lol.

[XogGyux]

Yes, cocaine possession is a victimless crime. It shouldn't be illegal, since that has caused more harm than good. Making cocaine illegal was a noble pursuit since there are no benefits to its use, but the war on drugs has been disasterous. Maybe the OP snorts the white stuff? lol.

I wouldn't call it victimless, the user is a victim, and as long as it is illegal there is a long chain of dealers/producers/traffickers that themselves are part of an extensive network with many victims. The "network" part is actually created by our laws, just in the same way mobsters and speakeasies were created by prohibition.
I am skeptical about the "noble pursuit" argument as well. There is no benefit for alcohol use either other than recreational, from time to time you see an article that says that a minuscule amount of etoh might have some specific health advantage on very limited variables but you won't be seeing many doctors prescribing the stuff anytime soon (in the past it was actually prescribed).
Alcohol, heroine, crack, meth, etc. That makes a big portion of the crimes.
Now, making an argument for the full legalization and creation of vast industries for these products the same way that alcohol and tobacco (and soon marijuana) enjoys is definitely not a palatable and/or popular point. But from a practical point of view, I do believe it is the most reasonable.
The irony, I don't drink alcohol, smoke or use any "recreational" drug at all. Caffeine in sodas, that stuff will kill me. I don't have any blanket moral objection to any of them either.

[Unthinking Majority]

I wouldn't call it victimless, the user is a victim,

Nobody who willfully does cocaine is a victim. Anyone who tries that stuff even once knowing the harm it can cause is an absolute moron and deserves their fate.

and as long as it is illegal there is a long chain of dealers/producers/traffickers that themselves are part of an extensive network with many victims. The "network" part is actually created by our laws, just in the same way mobsters and speakeasies were created by prohibition.

People with small possession are fine, the dealers are the ones who should go to jail. IMO decriminalize it and allow it to be sold to get rid of the dealers and the violence drug trade.

[Godstud]

Doing drugs is a choice. You are not a victim. I can agree with that.

Addiction, however, is a different story, and many people who want to stop, cannot. Helping those people would be better than enforcing unenforceable drug laws.

I saw a study on US jails(damned if I can find it, now) and they found that 49% of the people in jail were there for simple possession of drugs, and not for dealing or trafficking.

IMO decriminalize it and allow it to be sold to get rid of the dealers and the violence drug trade.

QFT.

[XogGyux]

Nobody who willfully does cocaine is a victim.

Doing drugs is a choice. You are not a victim. I can agree with that.

Gentleman, it is more complicated than a simple black and white, you do drugs thats your fault kind of approach.
They are victim to society, peer pressure, their biology/physiology, circumstances, etc.
Nobody recognizes the guy that only drinks 6oz wine 3x per week as doing something wrong and/or harmful but most of us can agree that the guy that drinks a sixpack a day daily 365d/year has a problem brewing (pun intended ). Where to draw the line?
Plenty of people were started on opioids just the same as alcohol in a "responsible way" (aka just drink a 1, maybe 2 drink on special occasions, only take 1 Percocet a day for really really bad back pain) and snowballs out of control.
I doubt there is many people that tried any drug in which their first thought prior to taking the drug was "I just want to use drugs/alcohol and abuse it really badly and become a junkie and ruin my life". It is always been a combination of "a bit of fun" "a couple of times recreational" etc that gets out of control based on social circumstances.
Then there is a layer of stigma. I bet the first thoughts that come to mind for an alcoholic vs a cocaine addict tends to side emphatically on the side of the alcoholic. I know it was like that for me and I know it is like that for most people I interact with. I don't see any major distinction for any of those and beware of taking offense to this, chances are like most adults you guys enjoy the occasional alcoholic beverage and might presume I am impacting some judgment upon you, rest assured this is not the case. Pleasure can come in anyways, shapes or form and it is my position that so long people don't hurt other people, they can do with their lives whatever they wish.

I saw a study on US jails(damned if I can find it, now) and they found that 49% of the people in jail were there for simple possession of drugs, and not for dealing or trafficking.

I believe the US collects that data:
https://www.bop.gov/about/statistics/st ... fenses.jsp

People with small possession are fine, the dealers are the ones who should go to jail. IMO decriminalize it and allow it to be sold to get rid of the dealers and the violence drug trade.

I agree with you. Sometimes you need to weight the benefit vs harm of things. Sometimes that is not enough and you also need to evaluate if it is something that it is reasonably enforced and if the enforcement creates more problem than it solves. In this case, I believe it creates more problems than it solves and resources should be aimed at educating the population and rehabilitation efforts. Taxation of potentially emerging industries might cover a good chunk of this.

[Patrickov]

It doesn't matter really, it's not relevant.

It is. There are laws which are oppressive, but there are also others which are not. Your set of breakable laws doesn't necessarily match mine.

[Agent Steel]

Of course it's relevant. You don't get to rape people or break into their homes and steal their shit or whatever else because you feel "oppressed". You're just anti-social. If you need to steal bread to feed yourself ok maybe, but i don't think that's what you're doing. You probably won't say what you've done because it will make you look like a punk-ass.


Why should we respect you for inflicting harm on other people and society? What makes you so special that you think you can break the social contract while also accruing all the benefits. You're sound like an entitled fool. This is like dodging your taxes because oppression, but then driving on roads that everyone else pays for except you. You are not special.


They aren't there to protect you. They're there to protect us from you.

They're serving the public by protecting us from the likes of criminals like yourself. If you want a lawless country, you will find a shithole society.

You want to be treated with respect, but you won't respect others by respecting their physical safety or private property or whatever it is that you're doing criminally. Respect is a 2-way street.

If a cop started beating you for no reasons he would be committing a crime, and you'd be the first to complain. The cops do a very valuable service, the only time they don't is when they break the law themselves. If you want people to feel bad for criminals, then will you feel bad for crooked cops? No. Because you're entitled. You want the right to commit crimes but don't want it done to you. Give me a fucking break. You're just an entitled punk. Prove me wrong.

You completely missed my entire point.

Again I will ask the question...how are the police protecting and serving my interests? Why should I respect them if they're out to arrest me and ruin my life? You can't answer the question can you?

Respect is indeed a 2 way street. You demand that I respect the police and yet you advocate that they should arrest me and put me in jail. Seriously? If they want my respect they need to start giving it, instead of acting entitled.

[Unthinking Majority]

You completely missed my entire point.

Again I will ask the question...how are the police protecting and serving my interests? Why should I respect them if they're out to arrest me and ruin my life? You can't answer the question can you?

Respect is indeed a 2 way street. You demand that I respect the police and yet you advocate that they should arrest me and put me in jail. Seriously? If they want my respect they need to start giving it, instead of acting entitled.

Again, they aren't there to protect you. They're there to protect us from you. They're serving the public by protecting us from the likes of criminals like yourself.

If you know you've broken the law and people with guns and clubs are coming for you to commit violence on you by arresting you and throwing you in a cell then they are now your enemy. You won't be able to fight them and win in a confrontation so run and hide, which many criminals do.

This should answer your question.

Criminals however do have legal rights. Habeas corpus, right to a lawyer, right to not incriminate yourself when questioned, and other due process rights.

[Godstud]

Again, they aren't there to protect you. They're there to protect us from you. They're serving the public by protecting us from the likes of criminals like yourself.

Police are not even doing that. Police are there to enforce the rules of the elite and the state. They are not there to either serve nor protect the public.

If you know you've broken the law and people with guns and clubs are coming for you to commit violence on you by arresting you and throwing you in a cell then they are now your enemy.

No, you only have to appear as if you have done so, for them to attack and imprison you. In fact, the recent protests are evidence that the police can pretty much do what they want, and commit violence against you, with little to no provocation, and receive the blessings of the state.

Criminals however do have legal rights. Habeas corpus, right to a lawyer, right to not incriminate yourself when questioned, and other due process rights.

These rights are not guaranteed, and in practice are often abridged by police officers. See George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, etc.

Respect is indeed a 2 way street. You demand that I respect the police and yet you advocate that they should arrest me and put me in jail. Seriously? If they want my respect they need to start giving it, instead of acting entitled.

You are not wrong. I see no reason to respect police. Fear police, yes.