thoughts on police and black men dying - Page 3 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Crime and prevention thereof. Loopholes, grey areas and the letter of the law.
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#15167133
Pants-of-dog wrote:Is that what you wrote? Silly me.



Yes, they are all employed by the same city. That is not important. What is important is that this civilian oversight group is not employed by the police.

And yes, the bodycams are needed in order to collect data since the police are often not required to do so.



There is something wrong with the police in America. They have been trained to shoot if they perceive ANY threat of danger (no matter how small) to themselves. The purpose of the training is to make sure the cops make it home safely at the end of every shift.

Cops in other nations have much more patience. It could very well be that there is less danger in other countries. IN America everybody is armed. Cops assume any encounter has to do with armed people. This is not about racism; this is about very poor training.
Last edited by Julian658 on 16 Apr 2021 18:20, edited 1 time in total.
#15167136
Pants-of-dog wrote:Yes, they are all employed by the same city. That is not important. What is important is that this civilian oversight group is not employed by the police.

And yes, the bodycams are needed in order to collect data since the police are often not required to do so.


How is that not important when the city is often held liable for what cops do?
#15167138
Julian658 wrote:There is something wrong with the police in America. They have been trained to shoot if they perceive ANY threat of danger (no matter how small) to themselves. The purpose of the training is to make cops make it home safely at the end of every shift.

Cops in other nations have much more patience. It could very well be that there is less danger in other countries. IN America everybody is armed. Cops assume any encounter has to do with armed people. This is not about racism; this is about very poor training.

Agree. Sometimes it is about racism though. I think in a lot of cases i think it's about people just abusing power and being jerks.

You can train someone as much as you want but if you don't enforce the breaking of policy/law/training then you'll always have abuse because you'll always have jerks and idiots. The danger is in people assuming racism in EVERY violent encounter with POC, if you over-react then cops will just stop doing their jobs, which is counter productive. It's a fine line to balance.
#15167139
With respect to training. Cops need to follow the athlete model for training. That is, you spend 90%+ of your time training, and only like 10% of your time doing the actual job. However, I guess this is not feasible from a funding perspective. Then again, some police departments can afford to buy tanks apparently. Maybe they do have the money.
#15167143
wat0n wrote:How is that not important when the city is often held liable for what cops do?


How is it important?

Because of my reading comprehension issues that you think I have, please be clear. Thanks.
#15167144
Pants-of-dog wrote:How is it important?

Because of my reading comprehension issues that you think I have, please be clear. Thanks.


They are city employees, aren't they? I think it's important cities aren't covering these things up.
#15167145
wat0n wrote:They are city employees, aren't they? I think it's important cities aren't covering these things up.


Yes, lots of people are employed by the city.

Your argument, unless this is my reading comprehension issues again, would imply that people like garbage collectors have an incentive to cover up police brutality and killings because they are also employed by the city.
#15167146
Pants-of-dog wrote:Yes, lots of people are employed by the city.

Your argument, unless this is my reading comprehension issues again, would imply that people like garbage collectors have an incentive to cover up police brutality and killings because they are also employed by the city.


No, only that the employer has an incentive to do so, e.g. by making the civilian oversight a rubberstamp for whatever cops do. Isn't the latter, in fact, a big claim made by those alleging systemic racism?
#15167148
wat0n wrote:No, only that the employer has an incentive to do so, e.g. by making the civilian oversight a rubberstamp for whatever cops do. Isn't the latter, in fact, a big claim made by those alleging systemic racism?


So you are arguing that civilian oversight groups must be funded by another level of government?

Sure.

Note that in the case of the killing of young Mr. Toledo, the city’s incentive to hide this brutal killing did not stop the civilian oversight group from releasing the video.
#15167150
Pants-of-dog wrote:So you are arguing that civilian oversight groups must be funded by another level of government?

Sure.


Preferably, yes, at least if the city has a history of covering these incidents up. I recall you also made a similar claim about e.g. DAs in the past and how they have an incentive for covering police violence up because they work with the police. But they are at least more autonomous from cities since they are usually elected officials, and their employment doesn't really depend on the city in that regard (and funding comes from the states, I think).

Pants-of-dog wrote:Note that in the case of the killing of young Mr. Toledo, the city’s incentive to hide this brutal killing did not stop the civilian oversight group from releasing the video.


Indeed, it did not. Which is great, and speaks well about the city in this regard.
#15167153
wat0n wrote:Preferably, yes, at least if the city has a history of covering these incidents up. I recall you also made a similar claim about e.g. DAs in the past and how they have an incentive for covering police violence up because they work with the police. But they are at least more autonomous from cities since they are usually elected officials, and their employment doesn't really depend on the city in that regard (and funding comes from the states, I think).


This seems like an entirely theoretical comparison between civilian oversight groups and DAs.

From a more empirical and verifiable perspective, we see that DAs have a longstanding history of not charging police while these civilian oversight groups do not.

Indeed, it did not. Which is great, and speaks well about the city in this regard.


It also provides a point of evidence against the idea that the city can successfully use funding to gag these sorts of groups.
#15167159
Pants-of-dog wrote:This seems like an entirely theoretical comparison between civilian oversight groups and DAs.

From a more empirical and verifiable perspective, we see that DAs have a longstanding history of not charging police while these civilian oversight groups do not.


And a rich history of charging them and having the case stopped by grand juries as well. I wouldn't say not pursuing a case the prosecutor believes has little chance to succeed is a bad thing - it releases resources for cases whose prosecution is more likely to succeed.

But I think one should be able to request a writ of mandamus before a court if there is a suspicion that a prosecutor is not performing the job out of political pressure, as West Virginia does. That would add some checks to prosecutorial power at this level at least - I recall I mentioned it in the original GF thread.

Of course, the above would be much easier to justify now that video evidence is often available and is yet another reason why bodycams are good. But even beyond the issue of policing, I think one should be able to do the same if e.g. a DA is suspected of refusing to prosecute a local corruption case, for example.

Pants-of-dog wrote:It also provides a point of evidence against the idea that the city can successfully use funding to gag these sorts of groups.


I'm guessing it could, actually, it all depends on the political environment. Right?
#15167166
wat0n wrote:And a rich history of charging them and having the case stopped by grand juries as well. I wouldn't say not pursuing a case the prosecutor believes has little chance to succeed is a bad thing - it releases resources for cases whose prosecution is more likely to succeed.


No, not really.

But I think one should be able to request a writ of mandamus before a court if there is a suspicion that a prosecutor is not performing the job out of political pressure, as West Virginia does. That would add some checks to prosecutorial power at this level at least - I recall I mentioned it in the original GF thread.


Sure.

I think we need to do this and far, far more to prevent these hundreds of deaths each year.

Of course, the above would be much easier to justify now that video evidence is often available and is yet another reason why bodycams are good. But even beyond the issue of policing, I think one should be able to do the same if e.g. a DA is suspected of refusing to prosecute a local corruption case, for example.


I am really interested in discussing DAs insofar as it helps to reduce police brutality and killings.

I'm guessing it could, actually, it all depends on the political environment. Right?


How so?
#15167168
Pants-of-dog wrote:No, not really.


There were plenty of cases that ended at the grand jury stage.

Pants-of-dog wrote:Sure.

I think we need to do this and far, far more to prevent these hundreds of deaths each year.


Pants-of-dog wrote:I am really interested in discussing DAs insofar as it helps to reduce police brutality and killings.


Their importance goes beyond that.

Pants-of-dog wrote:How so?


Wasn't that even common a century ago with regards to lynchings for instance? We live under a very different political climate, but that it influences city behavior should be quite clear.

The idea of adding some checks and balances is to avoid abuse in that regard.
#15167174
wat0n wrote:There were plenty of cases that ended at the grand jury stage.


Maybe.

But this contradicts the claim that the DAs were trying to hold the police accountable. This, instead, explains why the DAs did not hold police accountable on some occasions, as opposed to other reasons why DAs did not prosecute.

Their importance goes beyond that.


Yes, the importance of these many other measures I support do go beyond merely holding DAs more accountable to those who can afford to take them to court. That is why I support them.

Wasn't that even common a century ago with regards to lynchings for instance? We live under a very different political climate, but that it influences city behavior should be quite clear.

The idea of adding some checks and balances is to avoid abuse in that regard.


Sorry, but with my reading comprehension issues, this makes no sense.

Can you clarify?
#15167179
Unthinking Majority wrote:Agree. Sometimes it is about racism though. I think in a lot of cases i think it's about people just abusing power and being jerks.

You can train someone as much as you want but if you don't enforce the breaking of policy/law/training then you'll always have abuse because you'll always have jerks and idiots. The danger is in people assuming racism in EVERY violent encounter with POC, if you over-react then cops will just stop doing their jobs, which is counter productive. It's a fine line to balance.


I know cops in America. They are trained to survive every shift. They are also instructed to discharge the weapon until the subject is 100% disabled. There are plenty of jerks in the police force as the only requirement is not to have a criminal record. It is possible to be a jerk without a record. The cops are also shown videos where cops are killed because they were not careful---meaning using your weapon at any perception of a threat. ON top of that America is a violent nation and hence cops are hardened by the exposure to constant crime.

I know for a fact some cops in major cities are starting to look the other way in the face of crime to avoid racial confrontations. I believe this has spiked the murder rate in many cities this year.
#15167183
Rancid wrote:With respect to training. Cops need to follow the athlete model for training. That is, you spend 90%+ of your time training, and only like 10% of your time doing the actual job. However, I guess this is not feasible from a funding perspective. Then again, some police departments can afford to buy tanks apparently. Maybe they do have the money.



The cops I know work a lot. Double shifts are not uncommon. Many cops work for black chiefs of police and mayor. The blacks chiefs have done little to bring down violence as I suspect they are hardened by excess crime. Lastly, the union has immense power and protects the cops at all times.
Last edited by Julian658 on 16 Apr 2021 21:16, edited 1 time in total.
#15167185
Pants-of-dog wrote:Maybe.

But this contradicts the claim that the DAs were trying to hold the police accountable. This, instead, explains why the DAs did not hold police accountable on some occasions, as opposed to other reasons why DAs did not prosecute.


Maybe, it depends on whether the DAs who didn't indict made that decision because they believed they had little chance of success before a grand jury.

Pants-of-dog wrote:Sorry, but with my reading comprehension issues, this makes no sense.

Can you clarify?


What part of that is unclear?
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 7
Israel-Palestinian War 2023

... rape ... You have mentionned "rape&quo[…]

The importance of out-breeding

DOG BREEDING https://external-content.[…]

Who needs a wall? We have all those land mines ju[…]

Puffer Fish, as a senior (and olde) member of this[…]