[Discussion] Violence by or at Police

Posting news articles about recent events involving either violence directed at police officers or violence done by them, as well as discussion of those events and the general subject.

sometimesdee wrote:

There's a step you're missing between being recorded and being publicly accessible. Otherwise there'd be no Hillary email scandal.

If it is stored on a computer that is in any way connected to the Internet, or transferred by USB, it IS publicly accessible. It's just a matter of time and resources.

Better to have everything recorded. As far as the rape example is concerned, I would think the victim would want there to be video evidence for a court case if police see part of it. Is there a chance it could be released? Maybe but that is the same for photos. Easier to have the evidence and maker sure there are rules for storage and release of those types of things for victim protection.

Yeah, the idea that 'evidence may leak so better not to gather it' seems a touch strange tbh.

It seems pretty clear to me. If your camera isn't on, you aren't 'on the clock' or acting as an agent of the state. Sure, turn the camera off if you are on break or have a personal emergency that means you need to deal with personal issues that shouldn't be recorded. But if you don't turn it back on any actions you take are no longer shielded by the state and you are personally liable for the consequences. Also, you don't get paid even if nothing happens because you never went back on the clock.

I could live with that.

Sister calls police as brother is having a seizure.. brother shot dead by police.

http://usuncut.com/black-lives-matte...

More from CNN

http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/28/us/cal...

queue.. officers feared for their lives.

It takes more training time to become a barber than a police officer

While covering the recent protests in Charlotte, we met Derrick Jacobs, who said he had to go through more training to become a barber than a police officer does.

We wanted to see if that was true. Because every time there's a controversial police shooting, the question comes up: How much training do officers get?
Turns out, Jacobs' claim is right. And it's not just in North Carolina. In California, New Mexico and New York, you can get a badge hundreds of hours sooner than you can use a pair of barber shears.
And it's not just barbering, either. Many trade jobs require more hours of training time to get a license than it takes to get a police badge. (Important caveat, though: Police departments can choose to go beyond their state's minimum training requirements - and many do.)

It shows.

oilypenguin wrote:

Read please.

Exactly. I know I'm lucky to never have had an overly negative encounter with police (I don't count receiving tickets as negative, because I deserved them, and I'm sure I was stopped once only for my race, but I was let go with only a reminder that my registration was expiring soon). I worry that my short hair will get me mistaken for a man that "fits the description." I don't know what I can do to seem less threatening...

I think I'll go wig shopping, even though I freaking hate wigs. Just until my hair grows out enough for me to get weaves.

Police kill a six year old. The police officers were charged. I guess the officer thought his toy truck was a gun. The father was also shot.

The link has the video of the shooting. I didn't watch it myself but it says it is graphic.
6 year old shot

Absolutely awful. I'm glad that the officers were charged. Note that the victim is white and both officers are black, though. And I've already heard comments along the lines of 'Where are Black Lives Matter now? Once the victim is white, they don't care!' My response was "Yes, but in this case the officers were actually charged with murder, which is not the usual outcome at all." Oddly, that got dismissed out of hand.

Yeah I asked why this wasn't getting a bigger response and wonder was it because the officers were charged right away on another site. The response was "Its because he is f'ing white. If he was black you would be hearing about riots to get free sh*t." small edit for bad word.

Sign outside Tampa law firm prompts support, backlash on social media

Attorney Mike Trentalange wrote:

If the statement ‘Stop Killing Unarmed Black Men Now’ is anti-police, then we have a much bigger problem that anyone can imagine

Mic drop

Oh my god:

“When you publicly post a message of anti-police sentiment, such as ‘Stop Killing Unarmed Blacks’, you have shown you no longer concern yourselves with the legal process,” wrote another user.

What does that even vaguely have to do with anything resembling a legal process?

If that's anti-cop, that means that the job of cops is to kill unarmed black people.

Malor wrote:

If that's anti-cop, that means that the job of cops is to kill unarmed black people.

That's what I was trying to get at. Apparently, some people actually think that. It scares the sh*t out of me.

*Goes back to wig shopping*

Man, education is just falling apart in the US. People are supposed to realize that it's not the job of police to kill anyone. If they have to, they have to, but anytime that happens, that's a failure on their part, not a success.

Their job is to apprehend, not punish. And then calling 'don't kill unarmed black people' an anti-police saying is just..... that is just so far off the charts wrong that I'm torn, once again, between silence and ranting. (clearly, I'm opting more for ranting, in this specific case.)

edit: ya know, I think I'll just leave it at this..... the only reaction to 'don't kill unarmed black people' should be duh.

Malor wrote:

Man, education is just falling apart in the US. People are supposed to realize that it's not the job of police to kill anyone. If they have to, they have to, but anytime that happens, that's a failure on their part, not a success.

Their job is to apprehend, not punish. And then calling 'don't kill unarmed black people' an anti-police saying is just..... that is just so far off the charts wrong that I'm torn, once again, between silence and ranting. (clearly, I'm opting more for ranting, in this specific case.)

edit: ya know, I think I'll just leave it at this..... the only reaction to 'don't kill unarmed black people' should be duh.

IMAGE(http://www.therobotspajamas.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Volo_Car_Transformers_baracade_Mustang-1.jpg)
Too many people taking their education unironically from Transformers movies, I fear.

Or deciding that Idiocracy is the ideal...

Or they fail to recognize that Judge Dredd is a satire, and at least in the awesome movie Dredd, his methods are ultimately futile and meaningless.

Talks about police accountability and why death by police stats are hard to come by.

A new study shows that after a so-called "isolated incident" of police brutality, 911 calls reporting crimes significantly drop.

The findings square with earlier research showing that communities—specifically black communities given recent events—become more cynical of law enforcement after brutality cases. But the new study, published in the October issue of the American Sociological Review, is the first to show that people actually change their behavior based on that elevated distrust. Namely, community members become less likely to report crimes to law enforcement, likely out of fear of interacting with police or skepticism that police will take them seriously and help.

This, in turn, may contribute to crime spikes. In the six months after local media first reported Jude’s beating in February of 2005, homicides surged by 32 percent over the previous six months. The researchers noted it was the city’s deadliest period across the seven years they studied.

“Police departments and city politicians often frame a publicized case of police violence against an unarmed black man as an ‘isolated incident,’” the authors noted. However, “the findings of this study promote a more sociological view of the issue by suggesting that no act of police violence is an isolated incident, in both cause and consequence.”

The drop in 911 calls also cast doubt on another common theory: that crime levels rise following such brutality cases because communities lash out and police become afraid to use force. But reluctance to use force is irrelevant if police aren’t responding to crimes. Instead, it’s the fears of the community members that seem to make a difference, the researchers suggest.

Doesn't surprise me the tiniest bit. I live in a predominantly black community, something would have to be seriously, seriously wrong before I called the police and risked them showing up and murdering one of my neighbors.

Police Complaints Drop 93 Percent After Deploying Body Cameras

A study from Cambridge University documents an immense drop in complaints against police officers when their departments began using body cameras. But even more surprising is that the data suggests everyone is on their best behavior whether the cameras are present or not.

The data was collected in seven police departments, and represents over 1.4 million hours logged by 1,847 officers in 2014 and 2015; the researchers published their data last week in the journal Criminal Justice and Behavior.

Officers were randomly assigned to wear or not wear cameras week by week (about half would be wearing them any given week), and had to keep them on during all encounters. The authors used complaints against police as a metric because they’re easy to measure, an established practice in most police forces and give a good ballpark of the frequency of problematic behavior.

In the year before the study, 1,539 complaints in total were filed against officers; at the end of the body camera experiment, the year had only yielded 113 complaints.

So having body cameras makes everyone act better which implies to me that it would help to make officers safer right?

On the other hand seeing videos like this make it kind of hard to have much sympathy for police.

*I am not even completely opposed to running down someone who is a danger to officers or the public but it certainly doesn't seem like this person was a threat

Twice, Sacramento cops tried to run down mentally ill man, then they shot him 14 times

“Inexplicably, the officers failed to contact any properly trained mental health counselors or make any attempt to use less than lethal force and ignored the established police protocols to make attempts to de-escalate the situation.”

I'd say the latter instance is the primary point behind the body cameras. The goal is to have cops do their job properly because they know there'll be video evidence of any misconduct. That they can be used to exonerate them against false reports of misconduct and that the cops are generally safer because everyone knows they're being recorded by the cops are very welcome side-effects, but not the reason most people want them to be mandatory.

farley3k wrote:

On the other hand seeing videos like this make it kind of hard to have much sympathy for police.

*I am not even completely opposed to running down someone who is a danger to officers or the public but it certainly doesn't seem like this person was a threat

Twice, Sacramento cops tried to run down mentally ill man, then they shot him 14 times

“Inexplicably, the officers failed to contact any properly trained mental health counselors or make any attempt to use less than lethal force and ignored the established police protocols to make attempts to de-escalate the situation.”

I wonder if these cops understand how much this makes me want to hurt a police officer.

John Oliver: Police Accountability

The phrase isn't "It's just a few bad apples, don't worry about it". It's "A few bad apples spoil the barrel."
Quintin_Stone wrote:
The phrase isn't "It's just a few bad apples, don't worry about it". It's "A few bad apples spoil the barrel."

I hate this phrase, because it can equally be applied to Syrian refugees coming into the country. It's much more nuanced than that.