I don't know that cowardice is their issue.Cowardice is absolutely the issue, being so f*cking scared you can't get your targets straight.
You're absolutely wrong. Absolutely. 100%. Wrong.
Those cops weren't afraid. They didn't care. They didn't think one whit about the consequences of pulling the trigger. They're so brazen that they randomly shoot up a truck. That isn't fear.
This whole thing is so surreal. I read his manifesto and all the news reports and I feel like I'm reading a synopsis to an episode of Numbers or something, not witnessing a real event.
It really bothers me that my knee jerk reaction to this is sympathy for Dorner. He may have been mistreated by the LAPD, he may be correct that LAPD is rotten and corrupt, but the guy is a psychopath who is murdering innocent people. He is not some Hollywood antihero. He does not deserve my sympathy.
And yet, my knee keeps jerking. :(
If it helps your knee calm down, from reporting I am reading today, it looks like there is an established paper trail that existed prior to the alleged beating, that details that Dorner was losing it and on a fast track out of the LAPD. The supervising officer that he accuses of kicking a subject had already informed him that he was getting an unsatisfactory performance review. It seems likely that his anger towards lezzi/Nazi/feminist in his manifesto is aimed at her. If anything, this just seems like one more case of our horribly failing and under funded mental health system.
On the other hand, I would not be surprised if all manner of paperwork indicating that he was on a fast track out of LAPD started to appear right out of thin air.
Which begs the question, why was he hired in the first place?
Because they needed cops. He's a veteran, so he probably got points for that.
Which begs the question, why was he hired in the first place?
Or why was he kept in the field versus trying to move him into some kind of functionary role in the station.
Police is to state and local governments what defense is to the federal government-it keeps growing, and funding is a sacred cow. And with the war on drugs after the 70's, the general war on crime since the 60's, and now the war on terrorism, there are so many ways states and cities can inflate their police forces.
You can much about with the BJS here. There are some good tables in the PDF.
People like more police because they think it lowers crime. How many cities are so peaceful that they should have fewer officers?
On the other hand, I would not be surprised if all manner of paperwork indicating that he was on a fast track out of LAPD started to appear right out of thin air.
To be clear, the paper trail appears to have existed during his four termination appeals, including civilian courts. Also, as someone who works around government records, let me say that it would be extremely hard to forge believable records that would hold up to scrutiny. In my experience, when local government is up to no good, they are not able to produce the records they should have according to the relevant retention schedules.
Deterrence is largely a myth. When interviewing criminals in prisons, they never conceive of being caught for their crime, or even arrested.
The FBI stats on arrests are also fun.
Deterrence is largely a myth. When interviewing criminals in prisons, they never conceive of being caught for their crime, or even arrested.
The FBI stats on arrests are also fun.
Two things:
1. Police forces are mostly reactive and have a very small preventative/deterrent component.
2. Most criminals don't every expect to be caught so the actual "law" means little to them. It's precisely for that reason that capital punishment is not a deterrent.
Deterrence is largely a myth. When interviewing criminals in prisons, they never conceive of being caught for their crime, or even arrested.
Source? I don't imagine that anyone is certain of being caught, but you make it sound like nobody in jail recognized the existence of a risk. You're also not counting people who may consider committing a crime but don't because they're worried about getting caught.
KingGorilla wrote:Deterrence is largely a myth. When interviewing criminals in prisons, they never conceive of being caught for their crime, or even arrested.
Source? I don't imagine that anyone is certain of being caught, but you make it sound like nobody in jail recognized the existence of a risk. You're also not counting people who may consider committing a crime but don't because they're worried about getting caught.
I have never read one, that stated criminals thought they had a 60% chance of getting away.
The theory of deterrence operates on the belief that a person weighs chances of being caught, severity of the punishment, against committing the crime. I have never encountered a study of prison populations that demonstrates this calculus writ large.
Most deterrence studies get convoluted as it often mistakes, or fails to take into account the incapacitive effects that prison and the death penalty have-IE, a man in jail or who got the chair cannot re-offend. The incapacitive effect is very pronounced with murders and rapes, because these tend to carry very long sentences (20 years, 30 years, life).
The clearest evidence that I have against the theory of deterrence, is in the recidivism rate in the US. We are a few years out from the next series. The latest is 2002, looking at recidivism from the mid 90's.
http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub...
You then can look at probation and parole.
http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/p...
There is also the logic of the matter. You do not cheat on your wife, if you think there is a good chance you will be caught. You do not shoplift a videogame. You do not engage in a drive-by shooting, and so forth.
You have to consider the entire population, not just the criminal population, in considering the effect of deterrence.
I would totally use my super powers for evil if I wasn't worried about being locked in some super-prison. As such, I just sit at home and float quarters.
You have to consider the entire population, not just the criminal population, in considering the effect of deterrence.
Is this a bit like the old "Would you steal a car if it were legal?" "Or would you take a diamond ring if you knew for sure you would not get caught?" survey? That is a matter of morality, not the effect of prisons.
Because I would draw your attention to the differences between prison, probation, and parole. Probation, while rare and reserved for non-violent offenders mostly, tends to have a 30-25 percent higher success rate than prison, or parole after prison. Supervision, rehabilitation, education, is at least as successful as prison alone, typically more successful.
A contention that criminals and non-criminals are a distinct group, apart from Americans or apart from Human Beings has certainly been something criminologists have attempted to reconcile for centuries. We seem to still be stymied in poor people do it.
Look at what California accomplished. Due to full prisons, more violent offenders are being sentenced to probation.
It's not a matter of morality. It's a question of flawed methodology.
You've said deterrence is ineffective and pointed to studies of prisoners. That's like saying a drug is ineffective by looking only at people on whom the drug had no effect, not considering all the people who took the drug.
fangblackbone wrote:Which begs the question, why was he hired in the first place?
Or why was he kept in the field versus trying to move him into some kind of functionary role in the station.
According to what I just heard on NPR, after returning from a 13 month deployment, he requested additional training and was denied.
One person going rogue is not indicative of a failed system; the rest of the LAPD going berserk in response is.
Absolutely. The fact that the LAPD hosed down two separate cars with bullets shows both that A) they're f*cking terrified, a bunch of nancypants (they'd beat the f*ck out of me for saying so, but that just makes them nancypant bullies), and B) they are absolutely out of control.
If it helps your knee calm down, from reporting I am reading today, it looks like there is an established paper trail that existed prior to the alleged beating, that details that Dorner was losing it and on a fast track out of the LAPD.
Oh, and the LAPD is such a trustworthy source, too.
In regards to the whole hiring and deterrencey discussion, it's fair to keep in mind that LA had a HUGE gang problem in the 80s and 90s. During the time that Daryl Gates was chief of police who was not exactly known for his clemency.
He also actively avoided working with community activists in dealing with the gang problem, even though they did a lot of peace brokering and gun trade ins during that time. I mean, think of all the anti-cop songs you can think of, and there's a 90% chance that it's an LA musician.
And post Rodney King riots, well it was basically rich white folks against everyone else in terms of how the city should be policed. (not that it wasn't like that to an extent before, but it really brought it to the surface).
KingGorilla wrote:nel e nel wrote:LouZiffer wrote:KingGorilla wrote:Axel is from Detroit Lou. Former City Council Member Gill Hill plays the chief in them even.
Yes. And it's a humorous cop movie set in L.A.
Technically speaking, Beverly Hills is incorporated, with its own mayor and police department. So, while it's technically in LA county, it's not LA.
I cannot tell if we are being playfully pedantic, or just dicks.
What's the use of an internet forum if we can't be dicks to each other? At least we're friendly dicks.
Speak for yourself f*ckwad.
I keed, I keed
The LA Times has a couple of stories about Dorner's time in the police department.
I took out the link codes. Hopefully they'll work now.
Yep, thanks
Here is a picture of the other truck LAPD shot up with two more people inside. The APB is on a Grey Nissan Titan.
Shot up? Looks like it was rammed in order to break that axle in the middle of the road like that... Same thing with the airbags - they wouldn't deploy except on impact. Unless there's something on the other side of the street we can't see I don't get that setup. There's no debris or skid marks and the tree isn't damaged.
Sure there's a couple of bullet holes in the drivers side window (that person is dead?) but otherwise it's a bit weird.
Oh, and I thought they tested police applicants for colourblindness and removed them as potential candidates?
Pages