The problem is: who polices the police? This isn't just an American problem or a Canadian problem. In fact, many other countries have it far worse, where cops will arrest you if you don't bribe them... that sort of shit. I've also heard stories of cops in some South American countries being in business with the criminals. Oh darn, you are a tourist and your rental got jacked? Pay up to the cops and they will recover the vehicle.
I've never lived in any countries like this, but I've been to a few of them. In my uneducated opinion of the matter I'd imagine that the answer would be a mixed bag between your take on it and what Pug says depending on the circumstances. Either way, it's better than the fucked up places where you just disappear in the middle of the night. Like Oakland. Has anyone seen Que lately?
gpw, if you have your way, either people will stop being cops, or cops will refuse to act in any controversial situation. Everything is a matter of balance. You don't see thousands of proper arrests and exemplary police conduct on the news every day. You see the one abysmal screwup once a month. I'm not saying it's OK. I'm saying knee-jerking all police power and discretion away will have much worse consequences than what this one case led to.
I think you misunderstand what I'm saying. I understand fully that a dystopia situation exists which leads to the necessity of the police, and I'm well aware that a lot of the times the police do their jobs adequately, and even sometimes go beyond that. That's great, but that's a non-issue. The issue is the times they don't. It IS all about balance as you say, but I never said that all police power and discretion should be taken away either.
If being severely punished and criminally charged beyond that of a normal citizen for a gross error leading to a human death is something that would keep someone off the force, then perhaps they shouldn't be even on the force in the first place. It's not an issue where I demand police not act controversially in controversial and dangerous situations, it's an issue of the police should never act controversially in non controversial situations. I.E. Tazering a man four times when he is not resisting and shows no signs of doing so.
Yes, I understand that it's a complicated issue and one really needs context before assessing a situation, but we're not talking about every instance of police action. We're talking specifically about those times when the police have acted in an irresponsible manner with grave consequences. All I'm saying is that every situation that could be one of those should be properly investigated by a non-biased organization, and if the police are found to be guilty of whatever injustice which is paramount to crime, they should be punished more so then they would as an ordinary citizen. Honestly, if that's going to keep people from becoming cops, then they shouldn't be cops. Beyond that, if they can't hold the same faith and trust in that how the fuck are we as a population supposed to hold any faith or trust in the system they represent?
he unabashed cynicism in this thread saddens me. Yes, there are lousy cops just like there are lousy people in all professions and positions. That doesn't negate the necessity of good cops, or the fact that the majority of them are fine.
No one ever said otherwise in this thread to my knowledge.
But that doesn't mean it's right to go mouthing off that cops are such shit and they're a bunch of fucked up idiots who don't know how to do their jobs.
You're right, that'd be a generalization based upon another generalization. I'm assuming for the topic of this conversation, we're talking about the shitty cops. The problem is that you don't know which are which until after the fact.
I'll also try to ignore that a couple of those who seem to have more negative opinions have in the past openly admitted to doing a lot of shit that would get them arrested outright according to basic law.
Funny how those who may have had some experience dealing with police might be the same ones that could possibly criticize. Never mind the fact that the more you are exposed to absolutely anything the chance that you might come across something you find questionable would increase. This, again, is that dangerous assumption that I wish people didn't have. A lot of the worlds problems have been caused by the underlying base assumption which causes people to think this way.
We can all agree that abuse of power is plain bad, no matter what form it takes, but overgeneralizing this shit is basically doing exactly what you're accusing the cops of doing, which is forming an opinion with no basis in fact that leads to an attack. Just because you're assaulting their character instead of a physical body doesn't make it any less hypocritical.
Hypocritical? No. Dangerous, yes. And accusing cops in general and accusing cops who may or may not have been a part of some abuse of power is a completely different story. I'd also like to point out that there is absolutely nothing wrong with accusing or (more specifically here) questioning any authoritative body which holds power over you in an intelligent way. Personally, I'd think anyone who generally thought otherwise isn't deserving of the freedoms they have because better people fought for them, literally or figuratively.
