Police Accidentally Record Themselves Conspiring to Fabricate Criminal Charges Against Protester

[JSt0rm]

What would this solve? The LAPD and NYPD aren't large and corrupt enough already?

it would make sure everyone is trained in certain ways.

 

[ivwshane]

What would this solve? The LAPD and NYPD aren't large and corrupt enough already?

Its an interesting solution for sure.

For one, as has already been mentioned, training would be standardized. Which would then require that qualifications also be standardized. It would also allow for better screening of candidates. It would also allow better communication between precincts about unqualified/disqualified candidates and officers. If one office is fired for something in one city they won't be hirable in another. It also allows for better transparency and accountability. If good cops have a place to report bad cops and actually have something done about it then we are more likely to get rid of bad cops.

Honestly, the more I think about it the more I like it. Can you counter with why it would be a bad idea?

 

[HamburgerBoy]

Standardization is only good if the training itself is good, doesn't really have any value of its own, i.e. the problem isn't so much that some police departments are better than others as much as some police departments are simply bad and need to be fixed. More thorough and standardized qualification/screening are nice in concept but could also be unnecessarily difficult for very small departments, cuz let's face it, a lot of rural towns just aren't going to have the best candidates around. Unless the officers are gathered from a national pool and then stationed around the country randomly, but I think that could be expensive and hurt local cop-citizen relations. A cop from San Diego doesn't want to spend his career in Nowhere, Nebraska, and a yokel driving his John Deere intoxicated on a public street doesn't necessarily need to be arrested if a local cop can convince him to head back to his farm. Not that the other extreme is good either (e.g. Officer White going extra hard on the unwelcome minorities in town) but I think a lot of issues with disparity in arrests on race and etc are better addressed through lawsuits. I think federal cops serving together would be very willing to cover for each other just as soldiers are.

The rehiring concern makes sense, although is it a common practice? Usually the problem is that bad officers are never fired in the first place, and if they are, half the time they get to keep their pensions anyways. The main problem with cops right now is that they're close friends with prosecutors and judges and all it takes is the former declining to charge, or an appeal to "Many years of great service" from the latter, and the offending officers get off with almost nothing. What independent group ensures that federal cops are actually held accountable? I could go halfway with what you're saying though, create a federal board/agency to enforce standards in equipment (e.g. bodycams) and data storage, as well as ensuring that prosecution of the cops is not biased by local representatives. That could also provide an anonymous avenue for officers to turn on their own, and a permanent record so that the whistleblower can't be fired from their department in retaliation.

 

[JSt0rm]

That was a bunch of nonsense. I kind of skimmed it.

 

[hal2kilo]

It would be interesting to see what the average percentage of ME veterans make of the police forces throughout this country. Also, it would be interesting to see what percentage of police involved in shootings resulting in death or wounding are ME veterans. PSDTs may be part of what's going on. It just seems that the amount of shooting of suspects by the police has skyrocketed compared to 10 or 15 years ago.
Not a vet hater, but I think it's something to look at.

 

[Blue_Max]

Digging deep to find actual reasons to justify your hatred of police, eh?

This one is pretty weak.

 

[Linux23]

Sadly enough they do this shit more often than not.

 

[SMOGZINN]

As good humans we have to recognize this fact and we have to have systems in place that protect good humans from shitty humans, including having systems that protect us from shitty human protectors.

You are exactly right. The problem that many are complaining about is that the system as it pertains to the police is designed to protect the shitty ones from the good. The thin blue line is just that, a shield to protect the worst of them against the best of us.

Yes changes need to be made, with cops, the media, and citizens. Waiting to be shot at, before shooting isn't one of them.

The problem is that the people are quickly losing faith in the police. It is hard to trust a group of people with a 'shoot first, ask questions later' policy if you don't trust them to use good judgment on when to apply that rule. We need to find the root of this problem, is it merely perception, or is there are real grain of truth in it? Either way closing rank and claiming there is no problem will not fix it. We need faith in our police for this system to work. The only way forward with that is going to be transparency.

 

[Maxima1]

Usually the problem is that bad officers are never fired in the first place, and if they are, half the time they get to keep their pensions anyways. The main problem with cops right now is that they're close friends with prosecutors and judges and all it takes is the former declining to charge, or an appeal to "Many years of great service" from the latter, and the offending officers get off with almost nothing.

It's a grey area. I don't like the idea of putting a cop in jail because of irrational fear or a perception of a fairly weak but legit concern of a threat. Many black people demand punishment even in cases where there is a legit threat. This is one reason why police want special legal protections. Look at that Asian cop in New York who didn't get jail time. Many Asians didn't want to see him get punished. Punishment is also suppose to serve as a deterrent, but since it stems from irrational fear, poor training, etc., it isn't going to stop the police from shooting when they perceive even a little danger. I also find it hypocritical on the black community's part because they demand lower sentences for crimes like gun running, while demanding a cop be put in jail for decades to life because of their irrational fear/perception when they felt the need to shoot a person.

 

[ivwshane]

It's a grey area. I don't like the idea of putting a cop in jail because of irrational fear or a perception of a fairly weak but legit concern of a threat. Many black people demand punishment even in cases where there is a legit threat. This is one reason why police want special legal protections. Look at that Asian cop in New York who didn't get jail time. Many Asians didn't want to see him get punished. Punishment is also suppose to serve as a deterrent, but since it stems from irrational fear, poor training, etc., it isn't going to stop the police from shooting when they perceive even a little danger. I also find it hypocritical on the black community's part because they demand lower sentences for crimes like gun running, while demanding a cop be put in jail for decades to life because of their irrational fear/perception when they felt the need to shoot a person.

I haven't seen anyone influence or a position of power on the BLM side of the issue calling for heavy punishment of police officers. I have seen calls for accountability. Do you have examples of your claim?

 

[Maxima1]

I haven't seen anyone influence or a position of power on the BLM side of the issue calling for heavy punishment of police officers. I have seen calls for accountability. Do you have examples of your claim?

BLM doesn't have a "leader", nor did I imply I was talking of such. Anyway, are you serious? A lot of blacks think cops get away with murder, not manslaughter, even for cases where there was a legit threat. Just a FYI, a majority of them think they should be receiving reparations for slavery according to the polls. This is also the belief of the SJW types who try to aid them.

 

[interchange]

Until we are able to accept that sometimes we are powerless to prevent harm from coming to us we will never be able to appreciate that sometimes we confuse harm coming to us with the wrong thing.

Until we are able to accept that sometimes we are powerless to prevent the wrong thing from happening we will never be able to appreciate the difference between winning and the morally right thing.

Until we are able to appreciate the difference between winning and the morally right thing, we will never be able to prevent abuse of our power.

Until we are able to prevent abuse of our power, we will never be able to stop ourselves from seeking greater and greater authority only to protect ourselves.

Until we are able to stop ourselves from seeking greater and greater authority only to protect ourselves, we will never be able to prevent things like what is being discussed here.

I do not see this as a problem of correcting behavior. I see this as a problem of society reinforcing the defenses which produce the behavior in the first place. In fact, by seeing this as a problem of bad intentions producing bad behavior, we are using the same exact defenses which enabled the officers to behave as they did.

 

[Darwin333]

Unfortunately, among pretty much every very large group or organization there are going to be some antisocial personality disorder/sociopath types that lack empathy and are capable of destroying people's lives. Remember that FBI agent that was helping Whitey Bulger? I think his name was Connelly or some such. Read the article a long time ago.

And it just so happens that 3 of them not only work for the same department but are assigned the same shift AND the same assignment? That's a hell of a coincidence.

 

[Darwin333]

Don't act like it's even close.

You want cops to wait to shoot back until they've been shot at. So if a guy has a gun in his hand, cops tell him to put it down and he doesn't, instead raises it up at them, the cops can't shoot till the bad guy actually pulls the trigger and shoots them? This makes zero sense, you have to see that. You're far from stupid, but claiming that cops would have to wait in that situation is stupid. Yes changes need to be made, with cops, the media, and citizens. Waiting to be shot at, before shooting isn't one of them.

Personally I'd be happy with cops waiting until they have confirmation the person has a weapon and they appear to be preparing to use it.

 

[JSt0rm]

And it just so happens that 3 of them not only work for the same department but are assigned the same shift AND the same assignment? That's a hell of a coincidence.

Exactly. All cops will do this. The us vs them mentality.

 

[Ackmed]

The problem is that the people are quickly losing faith in the police. It is hard to trust a group of people with a 'shoot first, ask questions later' policy if you don't trust them to use good judgment on when to apply that rule. We need to find the root of this problem, is it merely perception, or is there are real grain of truth in it? Either way closing rank and claiming there is no problem will not fix it. We need faith in our police for this system to work. The only way forward with that is going to be transparency.

Bolded mine. I believe it is both. Sure there are bad shoots, bad decisions being made by cops. Its actually pretty rare, but the media plays a huge part in making it look worse. Politicians do too. Hillary just did this with the recent shootings. So do every day people like us. Who closed ranks and claimed there was not a problem?

your right its not even close. More citizens are killed by cops then cops are killed. Therfore more threads about dead blacks then dead cops. But they all get a thread.

Ok in that one situation the cops can shoot. But will they actually tell the guy to drop it? Or will they just fill him up and say they did?

True they are, yet you're missing the point. Even when someone is sadly and justifiably killed, a thread pops up almost instantly. Well, depending on the race of the person killed anyways.

The problem with your idea of waiting until being shot at is the example I already laid out, the other is that in almost 80% (according to the Washington Post) of police shootings that resulted in death the person shot is armed with a weapon, using a vehicle as a weapon, trying to get the officers weapon, fighting with the officer, etc. Basically trying to harm or kill the cop. Waiting until the cop is under deadly attack is just not realistic.

 

[JSt0rm]

Not realistic for who? Humans can be in agitated states. They shouldn't mean death if you come into contact with a cop while being in that state. Cops should be trained correctly. Toss out the criminal justice degrees and have cops major in psych. Of course most cops wouldn't be able to make it in real courses.

 

[Ackmed]

Not realistic for who? Humans can be in agitated states. They shouldn't mean death if you come into contact with a cop while being in that state. Cops should be trained correctly. Toss out the criminal justice degrees and have cops major in psych. Of course most cops wouldn't be able to make it in real courses.

I agree it shouldn't mean death should come to someone simply by being upset in front of a cop. However it can lead to that if the person doesn't listen and has a weapon, reaches inside their pockets, making a threatening maneuver, etc. It simply is not realistic to expect cops to wait until they are being shot at (or something equal) to fire their weapon back. You can't always talk someone out of what they want to do, and they may already be in the act that requires cops to fire their weapon. Do you have proof that cops won't make it in "real courses"? No, just more slamming of cops as per usual. Cops who make bad shoots need to be punished. More training and new procedures may need to be mandatory, obviously something needs to happen. Unfortunately there are going to be mistakes made, there are in every job. Sadly when cops make them they can result in deaths.

 

[JSt0rm]

Lol. Have you seen the course material for criminal justice majors?

 

[Ackmed]

Yes, I have. Graduation rate isn't that great across America. So unless you can prove that cops would fail at a worse rate then the normal person... I don't see your comment being useful here. I would be all for cops having a degree btw.

 

[JSt0rm]

Psych degree. Not criminal justice softball shit.

 

[interchange]

The idea that some deficit knowledge is the reason for this behavior in cops such that a psych degree would teach them the right way to act... well I think it's a rationalized fantasy to avoid the real problem. No knowledge is required to possess empathy, and no amount of reading about it will give it to you. I fear that trying to learn it through formal education would merely grant you a license to rationalize your failings in the matter.

The only thing worse than being a hypocrite is backing it up with the tools to disavow that you are. Scratch that. The worst thing is society agreeing with you.

The part that gives me hope though is that while formal education on the matter doesn't grant you empathy, it is something nearly all of us possess and we can practice it and improve.

 

[JSt0rm]

Its one step.

1. Giving police the deep knowledge about the human condition via 4 year degree.

2. Nationalize the police force and training. Bad apples cant slide around.

3. Focus training on nonlethal responses.

4. Higher the most intelligent people you can find.

This problem will take 20 years to fix.

 

[soulcougher73]

No most cops are just like you and me, they just want a job where they can make decent money and have a positive impact on the world or their community. Some, I assume are bad people.


Btw, making generalizations like that puts you in the same category as people like Texashiker. That's not a good thing and not something to be proud of.

I'm not disagreeing with your message, but are you not also generalizing? Just saying

 

[ivwshane]

I'm not disagreeing with your message, but are you not also generalizing? Just saying

True but I think my generalization was very vague and impossible to not be true, while his was very specific and almost impossible to be true. I also wasn't trying to demonize a certain set of people nor was I trying to portray them as angels, whereas he was trying to demonize them.

Its still a generalization though. So...