thoughts on police and black men dying - 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.
#15166524
US House Representative Tlaib wrote on Twitter:
"I am done with those who condone government funded murder. No more policing, incarceration, and militarization. It can't be reformed."

So what exactly is it that people like Tlaib want?

Humans are not perfect. When you send out people to use physical force against other people to enforce laws, sometimes bad things are going to happen. That is almost an inevitability.

All the more so when physical force is used to try to restrain and control a person who is physically resisting, all sorts of things can go wrong.

Throw in the suspect being a big strong man who is not easy to restrain, and acting irrationally because they are under the influence of drugs.

Sometimes police have to get involved.

But maybe we should be more careful what all our laws are, to minimize the chances of police becoming involved. When you pass a law telling the police to arrest someone, guess what, the police are going to try to do it.
The Libertarian position may have a good point here.

Now, the question is, who are all these people passing unnecessary laws?
Which side do they come from? Are we going to examine them, or only blame the police?

Government is not perfect. Some people seem to have a mentality that it is, or can be. If you want government to do something, you should really not be surprised when sometimes they get it very wrong.
This fundamental fact probably goes a long way in explaining the difference between Progressive and Conservative perspectives on this type of issue.
#15166534
"No more policing, incarceration, and militarization. It can't be reformed."

A person who says such an ignorant statement isn't qualified to be a government official because they are clueless on how the basics of society functions, which is the crux of her job. How does one adequately represent her constituents if you don't understand these basics? She needs to take a course on game theory or something.

If she has better ideas on how to keep the wolves of society at bay we're all ears. My assumption is that she thinks the wolves will somehow disappear without policing, incarceration, and militarization, which is insane. The scary thing is that she isn't alone:

#15166536
Unthinking Majority wrote:"No more policing, incarceration, and militarization. It can't be reformed."

A person who says such an ignorant statement isn't qualified to be a government official because they are clueless on how the basics of society functions, which is the crux of her job. How does one adequately represent her constituents if you don't understand these basics? She needs to take a course on game theory or something.

If she has better ideas on how to keep the wolves of society at bay we're all ears. My assumption is that she thinks the wolves will somehow disappear without policing, incarceration, and militarization, which is insane. The scary thing is that she isn't alone:



Indeed.
#15166649
The suggestion for better training assumes a benevolence in the same vein that assumes men sexually harassing women lack the knowledge to not harass women rather than willfully do not empathize with women as people and thus feel okay harassing them.
Similarly, are people getting killed by police because of the laws? Because law is just whats on paper to the extent we try and put it i to practice and in many cases when someone has been killed it is for some petty shit. Counter fit bills, selling cigarettes, some traffic minor violation. The law doesn’t cause cops to shoot people.

And again there is an assumed benevolence here that people are sinply making mistakes but this doesn't Account for why the US is the worst in having cops kill people. It seems a big stretch to explain this as simply human error across the board.

And indeed violence as a means of regulating society is never going away. If i decide to just take shit from the store without paying, police are gonna be called to stopped me. But to take one tweet like that an infer the extreme that they don’t imagine society without such regulation of some sort seems to assume the worst interpretation as to see only the absurd. Perhaps not the best to take word bites as the basis of w comprehensive view.
#15166657
Puffer Fish wrote:US House Representative Tlaib wrote on Twitter:
"I am done with those who condone government funded murder. No more policing, incarceration, and militarization. It can't be reformed."

So what exactly is it that people like Tlaib want?


Abolition of police forces, and abolition of prisons.

Humans are not perfect. When you send out people to use physical force against other people to enforce laws, sometimes bad things are going to happen. That is almost an inevitability.

All the more so when physical force is used to try to restrain and control a person who is physically resisting, all sorts of things can go wrong.

Throw in the suspect being a big strong man who is not easy to restrain, and acting irrationally because they are under the influence of drugs.


Mr, Floyd’s killer spent those nine minutes killing Mr. Floyd with his sunglasses on the top of his head.

You may never have been in a physical altercation or owned sunglasses, but I find mine slip off my head quite easily, and to have them rest on the top of my head for nine minutes would require a lack of any force on me.

Sometimes police have to get involved.

But maybe we should be more careful what all our laws are, to minimize the chances of police becoming involved. When you pass a law telling the police to arrest someone, guess what, the police are going to try to do it.
The Libertarian position may have a good point here.

Now, the question is, who are all these people passing unnecessary laws?
Which side do they come from? Are we going to examine them, or only blame the police?

Government is not perfect. Some people seem to have a mentality that it is, or can be. If you want government to do something, you should really not be surprised when sometimes they get it very wrong.
This fundamental fact probably goes a long way in explaining the difference between Progressive and Conservative perspectives on this type of issue.


Mr. Floyd was killed for unknowingly passing a counterfeit bill. That is not illegal.

So, what unnecessary law led to his death?
#15166853
Puffer Fish wrote:When you send out people to use physical force against other people to enforce laws, sometimes bad things are going to happen. That is almost an inevitability.

When you break down statistics, blacks tend to be almost twice as likely as others to resist arrest.

Puffer Fish wrote:The Libertarian position may have a good point here.

That's not a wholly bad point. The reason for drug laws is that drugs are a commonality in crimes against the person or the property of persons. Drug addicts are far more likely to be caught breaking and entering, mugging, etc. than non-addicts. So it was thought that making drugs illegal would catch them in lieu of other crimes they were likely to commit later. One problem is that the law does not provide for mandatory drug counseling when incarcerating drug addicted people. It's shamefully stupid.

Puffer Fish wrote:Now, the question is, who are all these people passing unnecessary laws?

Mostly Democrats. If you look at the legislative history, they weren't completely mindless about it. However, they were passed in mid-to-late 20th Century when not as much was known about the effects of drugs on the brain, etc.

Wellsy wrote:Because law is just whats on paper to the extent we try and put it i to practice and in many cases when someone has been killed it is for some petty shit. Counter fit bills, selling cigarettes, some traffic minor violation.

Government will see counterfeit bills as an extremely serious matter. Policing counterfeit currency is the primary function of the United States Secret Service, for example. Prior to the income tax, excise taxes were the primary income source for the government--and they are still a significant source. So selling untaxed cigarettes is something a government is going to consider a significant crime. Minor traffic violations are how the government liquidates the 4th Amendment.

Wellsy wrote:And again there is an assumed benevolence here that people are sinply making mistakes but this doesn't Account for why the US is the worst in having cops kill people.

This statement is completely and totally wrong. The US isn't even close to the worst in police officers killing people. It's not even in the top ten on a per capita basis. The municipal police in the city of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil kill 35 times more people per year than all the police in the United States combined, for example. One city in Brazil is worse than our entire country. 3/4 of their victims are black men. In other words, you get a George Floyd incident three times a day in Rio, on average.

There is a rather more bizarre phenomenon of people who aren't US citizens virtually obsessed with the domestic politics of the United States who are not similarly obsessed with the domestic politics of other countries. Global multinational media empires are significantly to blame for this due to their marked obsession with the United States. That is why someone as intelligent as yourself can make such a statement assuming it is true when in actual fact it is wildly off base. It's why nobody would think to disagree with the assertion either, because the masses are none-the-wiser as they get much of their information from an absurly biased media that has almost no sense of proportionality or dedication to providing a balanced truthful view of the world.

Wellsy wrote:If i decide to just take shit from the store without paying, police are gonna be called to stopped me.

In many places, this is true. In San Francisco and many places in California, it is not. Police do not make arrests for shoplifting. They will only issue citations. People can simply fail to appear, because the district attorney doesn't prosecute non-violent misdemeanors in most cases anyway. That's why so many stores are shutting down in San Francisco. This type of policy creates other problems, like "food deserts" which supposedly affect minority communities.

Puffer Fish wrote:Government is not perfect. Some people seem to have a mentality that it is, or can be.

Government is a claimed monopoly on the use of violent force. That's why limited government is such an important concept, and why concepts like socialism are so dangerous whilst having such a simple child-like appeal to people.

Have a look at Nate Broady's video on how police are trained in the use of force. Nate was a police officer and later a prosecutor. He's a lawyer now.



Pants-of-dog wrote:Mr. Floyd was killed for unknowingly passing a counterfeit bill. That is not illegal.

We don't know whether Floyd was aware of the counterfeit nature of the bill. The store clerk was certainly aware of it. Uttering a counterfeit bill is a federal felony. It's a very serious crime. I'm surprised by the number of people who think it isn't.
#15166864
blackjack21 wrote:Government will see counterfeit bills as an extremely serious matter. Policing counterfeit currency is the primary function of the United States Secret Service, for example. Prior to the income tax, excise taxes were the primary income source for the government--and they are still a significant source. So selling untaxed cigarettes is something a government is going to consider a significant crime. Minor traffic violations are how the government liquidates the 4th Amendment.

Indeed it is a felony and can face some severe sentences, but on the other hand, it can be something that everyday people do unknowingly and not face any charges at all. So the emphasis of the worst-case scenario where say someone might be found to not only be trying to deceive people out of thousands of dollars and has a lot of counterfeit bills in their possession/at their home or whatever is different than your average joe going about their day. So it's not surprising that police can be called in regards to counterfeit money but it's also not unusual that they aren't as it's a nonissue many times when a counterfeit bill is identified and simply taken out of circulation.
And the same point applies to the untaxed cigarettes, yes the government does pursue many avenues of making sure it get its taxes but at the same time there is proportion and severity to the nature of the crime once again where there is a difference between mass sales of organized crime and some petty stuff. All of which have their sentencing and such but in the context we're discussing went a lot further with the death of the suspects. Nothing which anyone thinks to be in proportion to the crimes committed or a sense of danger to the police's own well being in securing their suspects.


This statement is completely and totally wrong. The US isn't even close to the worst in police officers killing people. It's not even in the top ten on a per capita basis. The municipal police in the city of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil kill 35 times more people per year than all the police in the United States combined, for example. One city in Brazil is worse than our entire country. 3/4 of their victims are black men. In other words, you get a George Floyd incident three times a day in Rio, on average.

There is a rather more bizarre phenomenon of people who aren't US citizens virtually obsessed with the domestic politics of the United States who are not similarly obsessed with the domestic politics of other countries. Global multinational media empires are significantly to blame for this due to their marked obsession with the United States. That is why someone as intelligent as yourself can make such a statement assuming it is true when in actual fact it is wildly off base. It's why nobody would think to disagree with the assertion either, because the masses are none-the-wiser as they get much of their information from an absurly biased media that has almost no sense of proportionality or dedication to providing a balanced truthful view of the world.

THink you're being a bit hyperbolic while technically true, so I'll state the better qualifier that the US is the worst among the top GED, developed, or wealthy nations. The idea being that this is the basis of a better comparison among 'apples to apples'.
If the US is increasingly shifting in comparison to the absolute worst in the world, then that in itself would be concerning. You can however contest this basis of comparison, but I think now having clarified it with a qualifier that better satisfies you, it's resolved.

I also happen to live in the USA and intend on becoming a US citizen.

In many places, this is true. In San Francisco and many places in California, it is not. Police do not make arrests for shoplifting. They will only issue citations. People can simply fail to appear, because the district attorney doesn't prosecute non-violent misdemeanors in most cases anyway. That's why so many stores are shutting down in San Francisco. This type of policy creates other problems, like "food deserts" which supposedly affect minority communities.

I'm no sure shoplifting, on the face of it, is explanatory of San Fran's food desert amidst issues like cost of living.
#15166884
Wellsy wrote:Indeed it is a felony and can face some severe sentences, but on the other hand, it can be something that everyday people do unknowingly and not face any charges at all.

That's true. In the Floyd case, he was told the bill was fake by the store clerk. Yet, probably due to drugs, he continued to insist on the clerk accepting the bill, prompting the clerk to call the police. Floyd could very easily have vacated the scene before the police arrived, but he didn't. In no way does that justify Chauvin's conduct, but it highlights that Floyd's intoxication, insistence, and continuing to loiter in the vicinity are ultimately why he encountered the police.

Wellsy wrote:And the same point applies to the untaxed cigarettes, yes the government does pursue many avenues of making sure it get its taxes but at the same time there is proportion and severity to the nature of the crime once again where there is a difference between mass sales of organized crime and some petty stuff.

Well, this is where you get people who are--as the Unabomber Ted Kaczynski would characterize them--"oversocialized" and say things like, "I say make marijuana legal and tax the hell out of it!", while assuming everyone will just obey a law. You only need to drive on an American highway to see the regard Americans give to speed limits. When you create a huge tax disparity like New York state and city do, it creates the incentive for a black market for tax avoidance on cigarettes to develop. The history of "moonshine" and NASCAR is another fine example. Once you are cheating a government of tax revenue, they will not treat it as a penny ante crime. These same people will "get tough" on people who break the law. Yet, they will also purport to be upset at scenarios like the Eric Garner death or the George Floyd death.

Wellsy wrote:All of which have their sentencing and such but in the context we're discussing went a lot further with the death of the suspects. Nothing which anyone thinks to be in proportion to the crimes committed or a sense of danger to the police's own well being in securing their suspects.

Yet, almost all of these cases occur when someone is resisting arrest. Sometimes, you'll get an officer who uses deadly force in another context that seems quite disproportionate. However, in most cases you're dealing with resisting arrest, which is also a crime.

Wellsy wrote:THink you're being a bit hyperbolic while technically true, so I'll state the better qualifier that the US is the worst among the top GED, developed, or wealthy nations.

Sure. However, Brazil is not the Congo. They manufacture airplanes. Embraer for example. Brazil has significant economic limitations, because it is a country covered largely by mountainous rain forests and jungles. If they didn't have running water, electricity, etc., I think you could let them off the hook in that sense. Yet, they are a modern society. Constitutionally, the US government faces an armed population. So our police need to be armed.

Wellsy wrote:The idea being that this is the basis of a better comparison among 'apples to apples'.

But it's not. There is no constitutional right to keep and bear arms in most advanced European or Asian countries. The US is a very heavily armed society precisely so that the government is afraid of the citizenry. So American police will necessarily be carrying firearms.

Yet, in both the Eric Garner case and the George Floyd case, the suspects died without the use of a deadly weapon. Garner was obese and asthmatic. Floyd had pleural thickening due to long-term fentanyl use. Whatever the courts might say, these men's health issues were clearly a contributory factor in their deaths. Assuming Floyd didn't ingest a bunch of drugs pre-arrest, neither he nor Garner would have died if they hadn't resisted arrest. Alternatively, government could simply not enforce the law.

Wellsy wrote:If the US is increasingly shifting in comparison to the absolute worst in the world, then that in itself would be concerning. You can however contest this basis of comparison, but I think now having clarified it with a qualifier that better satisfies you, it's resolved.

I'm not convinced that being a wealthy country establishes moral superiority or that being a poor country excuses abusive behavior by authorities. China has the second largest economy on Earth, and routinely violates human rights. It is conducting an ongoing genocide, but people ignore it because they want their iPhones. Brazil is the 13th largest economy in the world. Congo is similarly a country of rain forests and jungles, but its economy isn't even in the top 100. So that morphological comparison makes some sense. That's why I say the obsession with the US is a bit bizarre and something of a media creation.

Wellsy wrote:I'm no sure shoplifting, on the face of it, is explanatory of San Fran's food desert amidst issues like cost of living.

Food deserts are largely defined as a "lack of access" to healthy foods. There isn't a grocery chain anywhere that would forego a market opportunity to sell more goods to a customer base. Yet, it gets blamed on institutional racism.

Redlining and Racism – the Real Roots of Food Deserts in our Communities

Why are Walgreens and CVS shutting so many stores in San Francisco? It's because of shoplifting. They cannot turn a profit. Grocery stores run on razor thin margins. They cannot afford massive shrinkage. So how do stores remain open in that scenario? They raise their prices. Who is hurt the most by this? Poor people--often disproportionately minorities. You think I'm making this up.



This isn't a one-off. It's what it's like in San Francisco. So this will drive more people to online shopping, where shoplifting isn't an issue. Eventually, I think it will also cause a move to vending machines as is the case in Japan. No doubt, vending machines will be considered racist in the not too distant future.

For example, you don't need a Ralph Lauren Polo. It's a luxury item. Yet, if I want to buy a Polo near my house? I have to ask the clerk to unlock them, because they have steel cables running through the shirts to prevent shoplifting. It's literally like living in a third world country in certain aspects of life in California now.
#15166897
blackjack21 wrote:Why are Walgreens and CVS shutting so many stores in San Francisco? It's because of shoplifting. They cannot turn a profit. Grocery stores run on razor thin margins. They cannot afford massive shrinkage. So how do stores remain open in that scenario? They raise their prices. Who is hurt the most by this? Poor people--often disproportionately minorities. You think I'm making this up.





I was recently in a shopping mall and saw a customer calmly walking away with merchandise. I looked at the clerk and he nodded at me and shrugged his shoulder. Later on when my wife was at the register paying he calmly said: "thanks for paying, many don't". I don't blame the guy for not trying to stop the shoplifters. I think the shoplifters feel empowered by the BLM movement.
#15166900
If I was working a minimum wage job in a supermarket in the USA, I would not call the cops on a shoplifter. The risk of having the shoplifter killed is too high for just a few dollars of food.
#15166904
Pants-of-dog wrote:If I was working a minimum wage job in a supermarket in the USA, I would not call the cops on a shoplifter. The risk of having the shoplifter killed is too high for just a few dollars of food.


I hear you POD. I would not call either. I would not want to risk my life in an altercation with people I do not know. Or worse being labeled racist for calling the cops.

Do you think the looting and shoplifting is justified?
Is our society becoming more dysfunctional by the minute? A few years ago shoplifters were very careful, discrete, and crafty, now they don't hide it. It is all in the open knowing quite well the store clerks will not stop them.

What is the solution?
#15166915
@Julian658

Well, I do not think this shoplifting is actually a problem. It seems more like something you decided to get scared about.

The actual topic, of cops killing innocent people, seems more like a real problem.
#15166917
Pants-of-dog wrote:If I was working a minimum wage job in a supermarket in the USA, I would not call the cops on a shoplifter.

Minimum wage? Supermarkets are either unionized or employee-owned in California. Nationally, Safeway pays an average wage of nearly $14 per hour. Clerks make about $27 per hour. Losing inventory means you will eventually lose your job. Some people like to live in homes or apartments and feed their families. Pharmacists make around $75 an hour. So with Walgreens and CVS closing so many locations, there are high paying jobs lost too.

Julian658 wrote:I was recently in a shopping mall and saw a customer calmly walking away with merchandise. I looked at the clerk and he nodded at me and shrugged his shoulder. Later on when my wife was at the register paying he calmly said: "thanks for paying, many don't". I don't blame the guy for not trying to stop the shoplifters. I think the shoplifters feel empowered by the BLM movement.

Yes. That's common in California now. It's why I'm probably moving out of here soon. Porch pirates are a problem too. The people most hurt by this will be honest, law abiding poor people. People who purport to be on the side of the poor have a very bizarre way of showing it.

Julian658 wrote:I would not want to risk my life in an altercation with people I do not know.

This is what cops do literally every day.
#15166921
Pants-of-dog wrote:Pizza delivery people have a more dangerous job than cops.

Let me know when we give pizza delivery guys a free pass when they kill someone.


POD punches all the holes in the left wing IBM card. Hence his responses are easy to predict.
#15166924
....and yet no one can refute them.

If cops are justified to use lethal force against black people because their jobs are dangerous, then loggers, construction workers, sex workers, et cetera, should also be allowed to kill black people with impunity since their jobs are even more dangerous.
#15166929
wat0n wrote:Are there any sources for this? :eh:


https://www.ishn.com/articles/112748-to ... ted-states

    AdvisorSmith studied the most dangerous jobs in the United States based on data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries. They studied professions with minimum employment of 50,000 workers to find the 25 most dangerous jobs among 263 total professions in the study. The fatality rate was normalized by adjusting the number of fatalities by employment in each profession.

    On-the-job deaths have been rising in recent years, rising from 4,821 in 2014 to 5,250 deaths in 2018, an increase of 9% over the 5-year period. However, the rate of deaths adjusted for employment has only risen approximately 2.2% over the same period, as an improving economy has led to additional employment. In 2018, the average fatality rate among all jobs was 3.4 per 100,000 workers.

    Our study found that some jobs are significantly more dangerous than others. The most dangerous job, logging, was 33 times more dangerous than the average job nationwide. Additionally, many of the most dangerous jobs earn average salaries that are below the May 2019 annual mean wage of $53,490. Companies that hire workers with the most dangerous jobs usually have workers’ compensation insurance premiums that are higher than average.

    The study also found that self-employed workers were 3.3 times more likely to die on the job compared with hourly and salaried workers. Wage and salaried workers had an average fatality rate of 2.9 fatalities per 100,000 workers in 2018, while self-employed workers had an average fatality rate of 9.4 per 100,000 workers during the same period.

    For more intriguing insights from the study, read on for the top 25 most dangerous jobs in America.

    .....

    7. Delivery drivers
    BLS Category: Driver/sales workers and truck drivers
    Fatal injury rate: 27 per 100,000 workers
    Total deaths (2018): 966
    Salary: $29,610
    Most common fatal accidents: Transportation incidents

    Delivery drivers load and unload trucks or cars and drive them to their destination within a local area. These workers generally pick up cargo, food, laundry or other items from distribution centers or stores and deliver them to homes and businesses. They also may communicate with customers to coordinate deliveries, collect payment for goods, and process paperwork such as delivery signatures.

    Traffic crashes are the leading cause of death on the job for driver/sales workers and truck drivers.

    ........

    22. Police officers
    BLS Category: Police and sheriff’s patrol officers
    Fatal injury rate: 14 per 100,000 workers
    Total deaths (2018): 108
    Salary: $67,600
    Most common fatal accidents: Violence and other injuries by persons or animals

    Police officers are law enforcement officers tasked with enforcing the law, protecting life and property, and maintaining order. Police officers may perform tasks such as patrolling an area, issuing citations, investigating crimes, arresting suspects, and working with prosecutors on cases.

    How dangerous is it to be a police officer? Working as a police officer is about 4.1 times as dangerous compared with the average job nationwide, based upon the workplace fatality rate. Police officers have a workplace fatality rate similar to maintenance workers, construction workers, and heavy vehicle mechanics.

    The most common cause of death for police officers at work is violence by persons.

    .....

So, cops are about half as likely to die on the job as the person bringing you tasty treats.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 7

I also add in the context of the thread that Mar[…]

The half of your budget goes to the military be[…]

The decision to do what is necessary was due yest[…]

They're basically just automatically believing th[…]