[wat0n]

@wat0n

1. Your speculations are irrelevant. Mr. McClain’s death shows that even the most innocent black person can be killed by police recording it on body cams, and the system still lets them off. And even if we accept that body cams reduce force, there is no acceptable level of u justified force.

Even the most innocent person can be subject to violent crime by anyone (cop or not), and that alone is unacceptable too. Yet we accept as a reality this happens and that it's unlikely there will be no violent crime ever again regardless of whatever policy is implemented. At best, one can expect to reduce the general violent crime victimization rates. The same applies for people specifically subject to unjustified violence by the police - and this is no reason to simply say the policy isn't useful. That's exactly what a Nirvana Fallacy is.

2. You can split hairs as much as you want. Facts are that policing and laws were already started at least a century before abolition came to the northern states.

Yet it is true that such policing had little to do with modern one at both the institutional and practical levels. What you are saying is that we should somehow deem picking a gun and patrolling your own neighborhoods to be comparable to an actual policeman in terms of commitments, training and so on, which is of course nonsense.

3. I never made a claim about a funeral. Yes, it is a distinct possibility that the cops are corrupt. What are the chances of the cops investigating where the money came from?

You did mention the money for the Floyd family was raised for his funeral. As for the cops, it would be as simple as filing a suit if you think there is wrongdoing. I'm also not sure about what this has to do with democratic control over DAs.

[Hindsite]

@Hindsite ;

So he did his time, and should have the benefit of a doubt in treating him as a regular member of society. A man pays for what he does, and that should be the end of it.

Once convicted of a crime, it always remains part of his record and is not just dismissed and removed from the record once he completes his time in prison.

Innocent until proven guilty.

True, however once convicted of a crime, one is not innocent and "Big" George was convicted of a crime and had a criminal record. Now he has been accused of another crime and the police are required to arrest him. That is what these police officers were attempting to do. They don't determine his guilt or innocence.

They say, right? Let's just let the facts play out in court and see what really happened. I'm interested in what can be seen from the cameras the police wear these days, the footage hasn't been released yet.

Yes, that is the point of view of the facts that most on here have been missing. That is why I presented these facts in an attempt to balance out the argument.

A knee to the neck is not a good compliance measure. I understand that he might have been high, etc... Doesn't make what was done to him right. Have some compassion, and understand that just because your partisan enemies are on one side of this doesn't automatically make them wrong. Same with them, too. Follow the truth not the political bickering making hay out of a man's death that both sides are wrong about to a degree.

I have never been a police officer, so I don't know what may or may not be considered a good compliance measure. However, according to the autopsy done by the family, it was the constant pressure on the back that stopped "Big" George from breathing, not the knee on the neck. But as you say, this is best left to the courts.

[Pants-of-dog]

@wat0n

1. Is there a point to this paragraph? You seem to be simply accepting violent killings by police because “there will always be crime”. For you, there seems to be an acceptable amount of police killing innocents and being given impunity. How many obviously unjust killings by police are acceptable?

2. Your opinion on the professionalism of the police force is irrelevant. The point is that the northern usa had racist laws in place at the time, and they had people and institutions enforcing said laws, and these people and institutions helped form the following police and laws.

3. So cops murder a person, and get away with it until there widespread protests. Noe cops use what is almost certainly crime money to pay bail and also get way with it. Do you ever think that cops should be investigated when they do something suspicious? It seems not. It seems like you think the DAs should just always look the other other way.

[wat0n]

@wat0n

1. Is there a point to this paragraph? You seem to be simply accepting violent killings by police because “there will always be crime”. For you, there seems to be an acceptable amount of police killing innocents and being given impunity. How many obviously unjust killings by police are acceptable?

It's not about what I think is acceptable but what I think is achievable. Yet bodycams can also be helpful to successfully prosecute perpetrators when that happen, and also exonerate cops if it turns out their use of force was in fact justified.

2. Your opinion on the professionalism of the police force is irrelevant. The point is that the northern usa had racist laws in place at the time, and they had people and institutions enforcing said laws, and these people and institutions helped form the following police and laws.

And yet the institutional aspect of course matters. If you abolished the PDs now, communities will obviously still enforce their laws.

3. So cops murder a person, and get away with it until there widespread protests. Noe cops use what is almost certainly crime money to pay bail and also get way with it. Do you ever think that cops should be investigated when they do something suspicious? It seems not. It seems like you think the DAs should just always look the other other way.

In what way are these guys getting away with it when they are still being prosecuted?

It seems you are trying to set a straw man up and tear it down. Since prosecutions are still in process, then let them run their course before commenting further.

[Pants-of-dog]

@wat0n

1. Then provide evidence that having no police killings is unachievable.

2. So you agree that northern states had racist laws and police enforcing them and that this informs the police that followed them.

3. I was referring to the fact that they did get away with it until widespread protests forced the DA to change their mind. And are now getting away with what seems to be another crime. Do you think that the DAs refusal and the cops refusal to investigate cops is a problem?

[wat0n]

@wat0n

1. Then provide evidence that having no police killings is unachievable.

Even Canada and EU countries have police killings from time to time.

2. So you agree that northern states had racist laws and police enforcing them and that this informs the police that followed them.

The Northern states did indeed have racist laws (they had their own Jim Crow system before the Civil War), but this has nothing to do with whether modern policing is inherently racist. Cuba also had similar laws before the Revolution, would you say Cuban police is inherently racist too or this only applies to the USA?

3. I was referring to the fact that they did get away with it until widespread protests forced the DA to change their mind. And are now getting away with what seems to be another crime. Do you think that the DAs refusal and the cops refusal to investigate cops is a problem?

Yes, they are problems. But unlike you, I understand there may be issues with regards to the likelihood to get convictions (e.g. evidence gathering) and issues that apply to public officials in general (e.g. unions) that can make it hard to successfully prosecute some incidents.

[Pants-of-dog]

@wat0n

1. Please provide evidence for your claim.

2. Yes, you previously claimed that policing magically got rid of the inherent and systemic racism at some point but never supported that claim.

3. Since you agree that cops and DAs giving themselves impunity is a problem, do you agree that this problems needs to be solved? And you also agree that the current system is not solving this problem?

[wat0n]

@wat0n

1. Please provide evidence for your claim.

Go ahead

2. Yes, you previously claimed that policing magically got rid of the inherent and systemic racism at some point but never supported that claim.

I said that police was simply enforcing the prevalent laws at the time. Again, is Cuban police inherently racist today for having enforced pre-Revolution law? How about PDs in Indian Reservations, are those inherently racist because the Tribes would enforce their own slavery and similar laws when they were in place?

3. Since you agree that cops and DAs giving themselves impunity is a problem, do you agree that this problems needs to be solved? And you also agree that the current system is not solving this problem?

Yes, it needs to be solved. I don't know of any alternatives that would be clearly better at solving the problem, if you know of any please feel free to cite research on the matter.

[Pants-of-dog]

@wat0n

1. Since you are refusing to support your claim that no police killings is an unachievable goal, I am now going to dismiss it as unsupported.

2. I am not going to address your whataboutisms.

3. Well, we obviously cannot have cops policing cops. Cops who do try to hold other cops accountable are almost always fired. Curt Stansbury, Ray Lewis, Shanna Lopez, Cariole Horne, Andrea Heath, Joe Crystal, Regina Tasca, Laura Schook; all cops who were fired for trying to hold police accountable.

[wat0n]

@wat0n

1. Since you are refusing to support your claim that no police killings is an unachievable goal, I am now going to dismiss it as unsupported.

Well, if you want to dismiss statistics on the matter then I can easily assume you have no leg to stand on.

2. I am not going to address your whataboutisms.

Why don't you just answer the question? Is community policing such as the neighborhood watches inherently racist? How about the police who arrested Derek Chauvin, are those racist too?

3. Well, we obviously cannot have cops policing cops. Cops who do try to hold other cops accountable are almost always fired. Curt Stansbury, Ray Lewis, Shanna Lopez, Cariole Horne, Andrea Heath, Joe Crystal, Regina Tasca, Laura Schook; all cops who were fired for trying to hold police accountable.

So what do you propose then?

[Pants-of-dog]

@wat0n

1. You did not present statistics. You just copied and pasted a link. I am not going to address evidence that you never presented.

2. Because your questions are whataboutisms.

3. So you agree that cops will fire cops who hold cops accountable. This means that they do not fire those who maintain the blue code of silence. Since it is cops who are monitoring other cops with body cams, this means that brutality recorded on body cams will be either ignored, or the cameras may be “dropped” or otherwise unavailable.

[wat0n]

@wat0n

1. You did not present statistics. You just copied and pasted a link. I am not going to address evidence that you never presented.

A link with statistics you can easily check, in tabular form.

2. Because your questions are whataboutisms.

So you will instead evade the question, huh?

3. So you agree that cops will fire cops who hold cops accountable. This means that they do not fire those who maintain the blue code of silence. Since it is cops who are monitoring other cops with body cams, this means that brutality recorded on body cams will be either ignored, or the cameras may be “dropped” or otherwise unavailable.

No, the footage can be uploaded to a secure server (perhaps controlled by the State Government) in real time if necessary. Furthermore if it disappeared then the PD itself could be held accountable. This is something cities can regulate.

[Pants-of-dog]

@wat0n

1. Since it is easy to do, please do so.

2. So you imagine some reforms that might address impunity, which means that you agree that impunity is a problem. Now, since DAs seem to be no better, we cannot rely on them for keeping cops accountable. You seem to be arguing that cops need to be monitored at all times. Are you also arguing that all this monitoring needs to be available to the general public or some other group whose job it is to keep police accountable?

[wat0n]

@wat0n

1. Since it is easy to do, please do so.

Is it even possible to copy data into a table in the forum?

2. So you imagine some reforms that might address impunity, which means that you agree that impunity is a problem. Now, since DAs seem to be no better, we cannot rely on them for keeping cops accountable. You seem to be arguing that cops need to be monitored at all times. Are you also arguing that all this monitoring needs to be available to the general public or some other group whose job it is to keep police accountable?

Actually your last question is a good one. I'm not sure if the public should access such server freely or if FOIA requests should be necessary, as they have been filed in the past.

As for DAs, that's why a declaratory ruling on whether prosecution would have been warranted would be useful. But the truth is that the fact that they are democratically elected is in itself a form of community control.

Your nonresponse above allows me to conclude that you indeed do not regard policing in the Indian Country to be inherently racist. Please justify why it isn't yet it is in other American jurisdictions.

[Pants-of-dog]

@wat0n

1. I can simplify this: does the table show any countries where no police killings took place? yes or no?

2. Please answer the question. We already saw that DAs are almost never held accountable for allowing racist police brutality.

[wat0n]

@wat0n

1. I can simplify this: does the table show any countries where no police killings took place? yes or no?

Which ones? Denmark and Iceland did have police killings during the 2010s as per one of the tables. Switzerland had at least one police killing in 2018.

2. Please answer the question. We already saw that DAs are almost never held accountable for allowing racist police brutality.

Already answered.

[Pants-of-dog]

@wat0n

1. So having less than one killing a year is achievable. Good. The USA is estimated to be at 1 000 or so.

2. So I will interpret your answer as meaning that yes, monitoring of police should be done by people other than the police and DAs. Do any police departments do this?

[Drlee]

4. The relevant facts are that George Floyd was an ex-convict recently released from prison

Typical Trump supporter lies. I guess, Hindsite that you are just not able to read. Get an adult to read to you about Floyd. Start with this:

After Floyd's release, he became more involved with Resurrection Houston, a Christian church and ministry, where he mentored young men.[3][8][24] He helped his mother recuperate after a stroke. He delivered meals and assisted on other projects with Angel By Nature Foundation, a charity founded by rapper Trae tha Truth.[25] Later he became involved with a ministry that brought men from the Third Ward to Minnesota in a church-work program with drug rehabilitation and job placement services.[8]

In 2014, Floyd moved to Minneapolis to find work.[26][27] He was a truck driver and a bouncer, and lived in St. Louis Park.[4][13][28] In 2017, he filmed an anti-gun violence video.[3][15] From 2017 to 2018 he was a security guard for a Salvation Army facility.[29]

But the some murderers killed him in cold blood and are on trial for it right now.

Is that what you meant to say? Or do you prefer your disgusting racist lies?

[wat0n]

@wat0n

1. So having less than one killing a year is achievable. Good. The USA is estimated to be at 1 000 or so.

Maybe. But it would only happen every once in a while and seems unlikely to happen in a country with 330M inhabitants.

2. So I will interpret your answer as meaning that yes, monitoring of police should be done by people other than the police and DAs. Do any police departments do this?

Police is effectively being monitored by the wider society, even if it's not systematic. Balancing the powers of the DA could of course be an option.

As to whether some PDs do that, that's the wrong question. The right question is if there are states that have mechanisms in place to balance the prosecutorial prerogatives of DAs. The only one I'm aware of would be West Virginia, where citizens do have some tools under the State Constitution to do so.

...

Although most jurisdictions will defer to a prosecutor’s decision not to pursue a criminal case, at least one state allows a person to seek a writ of mandamus to compel a prosecutor to file charges. In West Virginia, the state’s case law has recognized the prosecutor’s right to exercise discretion in deciding which charges to file or whether to pursue a case at all; however, the state’s courts have also recognized that the state Constitution requires prosecutors to vindicate the public and victims' rights. Therefore, where probable cause exists that a person committed a crime but the prosecutor has failed to act, a victim or any member of the public may seek a writ of mandamus to force the prosecutor to pursue criminal charges against a suspect.

[Pants-of-dog]

@wat0n

1. Do you see any reason why the USA, or any country for that matter should not be able to reduce police killings to the level of Denmark or Switzerland on a per capita basis? If we simplify it by saying that Denmark has one killing a year, then the USA should be able to attain 56 per year, since it has approximately 56 times the population. Is there any reason why the US cannot do that?

2. So, no, you cannot think of cops that are not being monitored by cops. I have no idea how you can then go on to say that they are “effectively being monitored” after accepting that.

To reiterate:

Cops do not hold cops accountable. In fact, they routinely get rid of cops who try to do so.

Police unions do not hold police accountable. In fact, they openly champion that murderers caught on film be rehired.

DAs do not hold police accountable. Only one DA ever lost his job over racist police brutality in the history of the USA.

Bodycams do not hold police accountable since they are being monitored by cops or DAs. And police can turn them off or “drop” them with impunity.

So, how exactly are police “effectively being monitored”?