Cops Are The Worst

[E.H. Ruddock]

Are you pro cop ruddo?

What did you think about that barrel roll?

I'm not pro or anti anything. But I am against lumping all cops into the "sh*tty" category because of how some act. Just like I'm against cops treating a dude bad based on color or religion. Everyone in this thread seems to be anti cop no matter what the circumstances though.

Yea but this is the "cops are the worst" thread so im just in thread integrity!

touche'

[Fuck You Jobu]

Are you pro cop ruddo?

What did you think about that barrel roll?

I'm not pro or anti anything. But I am against lumping all cops into the "sh*tty" category because of how some act. Just like I'm against cops treating a dude bad based on color or religion. Everyone in this thread seems to be anti cop no matter what the circumstances though.

Not so much anti-cop.

More anti-

[Rangi Guy]

[McParadigm]

What we really have is a legal system designed in such a way as to encourage cognitive dissonance and perceptive disruption. It's not a 'cop' thing, and I don't think it's racial in any way other than that any malfunctioning legal system is going to disproportionately hurt the poor. It's a conflict-focused system, and conflict produces mental bias. Every time. You can scrape down to the subcutaneous layers of this system, and still see it...even in a footnote like the Reid Technique.

I remember reading a study a few years back in which around two dozen prosecutors who had won life sentences or death row convictions against people later proven by DNA to be innocent were asked to give their thoughts on the cases, in light of this new evidence. In many of the cases, DNA or other evidence had even suggested who the actual guilty party might have been, and in nearly a third a confession had resulted.

Not one prosecutor was prepared to say that the original conviction was a mistake. Not one. The phrases were all different...sometimes it was "I'm convinced society was better off with person X behind bars," or just "I still have my doubts about the evidence," etc. But it all came down to what I think is probably the most impactful force in this type of human conflict: at the end of the day, we are inclined to want to see ourselves as good, intelligent people...so if we do something harmful to you, it becomes a part of our self-image preservation to protect ourselves from considering that you might not have deserved it.

I'm also reminded of a neuroimaging study not too long ago in which people were exposed to ideas and/or facts that were either in direct conflict with their stated beliefs (acquired courtesy of pre-session interviews), or which supported them. For what might be called 'harmless fact' information (ie "this room is 17 feet across"), the areas of the brain associated with logical thought lit up. For "deeply held" beliefs (ie religious or ethical), it depended...opposing statements resulted in emotion, but otherwise, it was the analytical thinking section. For interpersonal statements ("your abusive father also volunteered at a homeless shelter"), it was only ever emotion. Not shocking. But what was a big surprise was that the pleasure centers lit up a bit whenever the information or statement supported negative opinions...and the more negative the statement, the more the brain rewarded the person for having seen it.

I can't even tell you how fascinated I am with that. If the individual disliked a person, and was told a negative thing about them, there was a faint hint of pleasure.

[B]

I think the biggest difference between police in the USA and Europe (at least England) is that in America the police are trained to treat everyone as a threat and to constantly be on guard. To an American cop the public is the enemy, which may save a few police lives in the short term, but also leads to a lot more unnecessary civilian deaths. It also breads mistrust between the police and the public, which is only going to make things worse going forward.

Yes, but ...

American public:


British public:

[Leatherhead]

I think the biggest difference between police in the USA and Europe (at least England) is that in America the police are trained to treat everyone as a threat and to constantly be on guard. To an American cop the public is the enemy, which may save a few police lives in the short term, but also leads to a lot more unnecessary civilian deaths. It also breads mistrust between the police and the public, which is only going to make things worse going forward.

Yes, but ...

American public:


British public:

[simple schoolboy]

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/06/14/ny ... ?referrer=

"The last time I called the cops, someone got choked to death," he said. " Eric got killed because I called."

More folks should understand this before it happens to them. If you call 911, you might end up with a great cop that de-escalates the situation, or you might end up with a roided out maniac. A mere annoyance is not worth calling the cops over.

[Green Habit]

Not entirely cop-related, but this is a great article regarding AEDPA, one of the many terrible laws that Clinton signed when he was in office.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/17/magaz ... .html?_r=1

[Fuck You Jobu]

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/06/14/ny ... ?referrer=

"The last time I called the cops, someone got choked to death," he said. " Eric got killed because I called."

More folks should understand this before it happens to them. If you call 911, you might end up with a great cop that de-escalates the situation, or you might end up with a roided out maniac. A mere annoyance is not worth calling the cops over.

If they can't be counted on to uphold the laws, even if it's just a "mere annoyance", why are they there?

What's the point of police if they can't be counted on to do their job of Serving and Protecting (except of their own Blue Code) and there's a decent chance they are going to kill someone?

It seems nearly a day can't go by with they "needing" to kill someone. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/won ... g-in-2015/

[Green Habit]

Not entirely cop-related, but this is a great article regarding AEDPA, one of the many terrible laws that Clinton signed when he was in office.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/17/magaz ... .html?_r=1

Alex Kozinski, a prominent Ninth Circuit Judge, agrees:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/vol ... ce-system/

3. Repeal AEDPA § 2254(d). Prior to AEDPA taking effect in 1996, the federal courts provided a final safeguard for the relatively rare but compelling cases where the state courts had allowed a miscarriage of justice to occur. One of the better-known examples of this is the case of Ron Williamson, who in 1994 was just 5 days away from being executed for a murder of which he was eventually cleared by DNA evidence. He was saved when U.S. District Judge Frank Seay entered a stay of execution that began a process culminating in Williamson’s exoneration. The case is described in depth in John Grisham’s non-fiction book, The Innocent Man.

The federal court safety-value was abruptly dismantled in 1996 when Congress passed and President Clinton signed the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act. Hidden in its interstices was a provision that has pretty much shut out the federal courts from granting habeas relief in most cases, even when they believe that an egregious miscarriage of justice has occurred. We now regularly have to stand by in impotent silence, even though it may appear to us that an innocent person has been convicted.

Not even the Supreme Court may act on what it believes is a constitutional violation if the issue is raised in a habeas petition as opposed to on direct appeal. There are countless examples of this, but perhaps the best illustration is Cavazos v. Smith, the case involving a grandmother who had spent 10 years in prison for the alleged shaking death of her infant grandson — a conviction secured by since-discredited junk science. My court freed Smith, but the Supreme Court summarily reversed (over Justice Ginsburg’s impassioned dissent) based on AEDPA.

AEDPA is a cruel, unjust and unnecessary law that effectively removes federal judges as safeguards against miscarriages of justice. It has resulted and continues to result in much human suffering. It should be repealed.

[Green Habit]

There was some real Mickey Mouse shit here:

[simple schoolboy]

There was some real Mickey Mouse shit here:

She was obviously guilty of contempt of cop. She was lucky to have gotten off so easily.

That the officer is now on desk duty suggests to me only that he failed to manufacture some sort of BS probable cause to justify removing her from the vehicle. If he had claimed that he smelled pot and then sought to search the vehicle, I can't imagine he would be in trouble.

[Strat]

So she committed suicide in Jail though?

Sad story all around.

[jwfocker]

There was some real Mickey Mouse shit here:

She was obviously guilty of contempt of cop. She was lucky to have gotten off so easily.

That the officer is now on desk duty suggests to me only that he failed to manufacture some sort of BS probable cause to justify removing her from the vehicle. If he had claimed that he smelled pot and then sought to search the vehicle, I can't imagine he would be in trouble.

I think this incident is about to get really dark.

http://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow ... story.html

[Green Habit]

I think this incident is about to get really dark.

http://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow ... story.html

Yeah I read about that early this morning. "Mickey Mouse shit" is an even better description if they indeed edited it.

[LoathedVermin72]

So this went from a traffic stop due to failure to signal to a suicide/homicide in three days? What the fuck happened here?

[jwfocker]

She was six feet tall as well - a important trait when you consider she supposedly hung herself from a wall shorter than six feet.

[McParadigm]

All the law enforcement 'experts' and cop message board discussions being highlighted by the media really betray just how systemic the behavioral issues within the profession are. Lots and lots of debate about how well his behavior fit into the confines of the law, and very little about whether it was reasonable or necessary.

"Hey, this guy actively and aggressively worked to exacerbate a minor situation into unnecessary, consequential collapse. And he made a number of disturbing threats and remarks along the way."

"Well, yeah. But the law doesn't say that he CAN'T do that. So everyone is way overreacting."

[Strat]

All the law enforcement 'experts' and cop message board discussions being highlighted by the media really betray just how systemic the behavioral issues within the profession are. Lots and lots of debate about how well his behavior fit into the confines of the law, and very little about whether it was reasonable or necessary.

"Hey, this guy actively and aggressively worked to exacerbate a minor situation into unnecessary, consequential collapse. And he made a number of disturbing threats and remarks along the way."

"Well, yeah. But the law doesn't say that he CAN'T do that. So everyone is way overreacting."

I will light you up, McP

[simple schoolboy]

All the law enforcement 'experts' and cop message board discussions being highlighted by the media really betray just how systemic the behavioral issues within the profession are. Lots and lots of debate about how well his behavior fit into the confines of the law, and very little about whether it was reasonable or necessary.

"Hey, this guy actively and aggressively worked to exacerbate a minor situation into unnecessary, consequential collapse. And he made a number of disturbing threats and remarks along the way."

"Well, yeah. But the law doesn't say that he CAN'T do that. So everyone is way overreacting."

Spend too much time reading Police One or a similar site and you stop having any sympathy for cops as human beings.