I saw a smash cut where after every passionate sentence he said it cut to police attacking peaceful protestors. Pretty funny but also a bit infuriating
@Commander Peanuts, they say the boss controls the culture at their workplace.
@Commander Peanuts, was it clips of his officers attacking peaceful protesters or just random officers?
@Sir Borksalot , both I guess. Some of the clips were from the New York protests, others I don't think were. But he wasn't speaking just on behalf of his own police either. In his speech he was talking about police as a whole
@Commander Peanuts, in that sense I guess I do agree with some of what he said, in the sense that the general opinion that police are terrible to a certain extent conditions them to act that way, in combination with how underfunded and understaffed they can be sometimes. It's probably a hell of a thing for keeping the peace to literally be your job for years and then get treated like youre the problem. Not saying this justifies what the more corrupt officers out that have done, as obviously it doesn't and what they've done is wrong, but it does make it more understandable.
@Your Waifu, I get the frustration that individual officers have, and I fully understand that many of them aren't bad people. I have family that are/ have been police. But his speech was awful. Not once did he address the systemic issues. When he said "black mothers worry about their kids not coming home... that doesn't happen" that was a straight up lie. But instead he claimed to be a victim. He said "we've been left out of the conversation" meanwhile people are desperately trying to work WITH police for reform. Not every cop is a bad person. But there are some real issues that the police brutality at protests are making real apparent. And instead this guy says that the problem is "people are being mean." Totally tone deaf, and nothing will ever change if people like him don't learn to listen.
@Commander Peanuts, I completely agree that the speech as a whole sucked. That's why I said I only agree with some of what he said, because the vast majority is garbage.
@Your Waifu, yeah, I just think even the few things he said that were correct, he believes for the wrong reasons
@Commander Peanuts, oh, I'm sure that's true. But I'm of the opinion that even if something is said for the wrong reasons, there can still be merit to thinking about it, even if only to understand how an opposing side of an argument thinks to better argue against them.
@Your Waifu, completely agreed. Ignorance helps no one
@Commander Peanuts, except the fact that no one is willing to work with them instead they are making them the villain and trying to cut their budget to help with better training, you work with what you got it what is given and police officers aren't given anything
@park66, is there evidence of this "fact"? Or are you basing that off of all the news headlines saying people are chanting that the police are bad? I haven't seen anything that says that people aren't willing to work with police to create change. As for budget, maybe if police weren't also responsible for so many social services that could be done by other services that instead are getting cut more and more, and maybe if they actually allocated more budget to training instead of outfitting departments with things like high ballistic proofed armored trucks, they wouldn't have that issue. I don't think it's what you meant, but "You work with what you got" is a meaningless and disgusting excuse for the systemic issues of the police force.
I remind everyone again. 0.001%. Enough said.
@CocoasBro, still too high, and the ones who don't stop the 0.001% are part of the problem too. I know alot of good cops and i know a couple bad ones, who do you think stands out more?
@CocoasBro, Thats like american airlines saying, "ohh well only 0.001% of our pilots like crashing into mountains, the others like to land safely". They'd be shut down faster than you could blink. The police are one of those careers that the perverbial "few bad eggs" rots the whole batch.
@Medic135, does it matter?
@CocoasBro, .... yes, obviously it does
@Thanatoz, yes a very tiny percentage of planes crash. Sh!t happens. Its about 1 in 5.4 million according to google.
About 0.00001% well 0.0000185185185 repeating but basically 0.00001% unless you wanna round it to 0.00002% whatever makes no difference to the larger point. Its right around where a likely amount of police shootings are. My 0.001% came from averaging out police interactions at 10. Litterally if i make it a more likely number of 1000. You get a similar number. And thats just killings in general justified or not. If you turn that 1004 into just like 10. Holy sh!t does that number get small.
@Medic135, why? Perception is in the eye of the beholder. You can look at planes as death machines because of the 0.00001% of them that crash or you can say hey im more likely to be struck by lightning or die in a car crash and move on.
@CocoasBro, mostly because plane crashes don't target minorities or poor neighborhoods and the other planes don't make up excuses for why that 0.0000000000000001% of planes crashed. Planes don't shoot your dog. Planes don't kick your door down in plain clothes, wrong house, and murder you in your home for trying to defend yourself against presumed robbers 🤷♂️
@CocoasBro, And the point is still lost on you.
Its not really if you are likely or unlikely to be killed by a cop.
The issue is there are cops out there that are pointedly killing or assaulting people and not being held accountable until the streets are burning.
My analogy wasn't "accidents happen" but that willing negligence or deliberat harm was inflicted.
Yes accidents happen, and if an officer has an accident action should be taken. The incident shouldn't just be brushed under the rug and ignored which is all to often the status quo.
If that incedent is invested and determined to be a legitimate accident then the officer should be exonerated and allowed to return to work. But if the incident turns out to be willing negligence or deliberate action to cause harm they should be locked up like any other person that comments a crime.
@CocoasBro, but when planes crash there's a government organization that immediately starts investigating it, and when they find out the problem they tell the airlines and the airlines change either their planes or their training programs to make sure it doesn't happen again. There's no government organization that investigates police, and police training programs haven't changed in a long time.
Also, over 90% of plane crashes are accidents, while over 90% of murders committed by cops are deliberate.
@Your Waifu, yeah dude i dont understand your obsession with it being government run. They are investigated by private organization outside the influence of the government specifically to help prevent corruption.
@CocoasBro, they arent investigate by private organizations unless those private organizations are paid to investigate them, because that's what the private part of private organizations means. And in what world does it make sense for there to not be a government organization that investigates them when theyre also a government organization and when there's already a government organization for each and every other thing? It creates more law enforcement jobs, it weeds out bad cops, and more people will be willing to be cops because cops will have a better reputation. I literally see no downside and have no idea why you're so against there being any system to investigate bad cops. The only way you being against bad cops being investigated makes sense is if you are one, otherwise what's the problem?
@Your Waifu, Im not against a system to investigate cops. Im telling you it already exists. What do you actrually think there was no system in place already. Yes there are many failsafes in place i assure you.
@Your Waifu, and its not just the private investigators my dude theres alot of agencies, the FBI for one, the CIA, etc were a massive bureaucracy we have watchmen to watch the watchmen to watch the watchmen to watch the watchmen to watch the watchmen!
@CocoasBro, the FBI don't investigate cops, they investigate crimes that happen across state borders. The CIA don't investigate cops, they just collect, monitor, and analyze intelligence. Private investigators are individuals who work as freelance businesses that only investigate what they're paid to investigate because anything else is a waste of time and money, and who as private citizens have none of the investigative rights of any of these other organizations.
There is no organization that specifically investigates cop related cases. This would be very easy for you to realize if you just googled it and googled each of these organizations or types of business instead of assuming they do things that they actually don't do.
@Your Waifu, The FBI does indeed investigate corruption on a state, local, and federal level yes that is there job discription.
I still dont understand you obsession with payment. Do you really think that just because theyre a member if the goverment that suddenly their incorruptable? Were litterally talking about bad police officers who work for the goverment. Does working for the government suddenly make all police officers good cops? And yes as ive said before it is automatic as a result of any complaint there is an outside investigation automatically. It happend with george floyd and every other police shooting.
@CocoasBro, I'm not saying members of the government are incorruptible, I'm saying a government official with a stable paycheck is less likely to fall into corruption than a private citizen whose only source of income is when someone commissions them to investigate a case. They have to pay the bills somehow, and when they don't know when the next client will come they have to take their money where they can get it, even if they don't necessarily like the source. Morals are nice, but they don't put food on the table, so without a stable source of income you can't always afford to have both money and morals. That's why I keep mentioning their pay, because more often than not if someone pays them more to look the other way their most likely going to accept.
And the FBI's job description is literally to solve criminal cases that cross state borders. Corruption isn't their job unless there's reported confirmation of a crime and it crosses state lines. Easy five minute Google search.
@CocoasBro, also, some additional first hand proof on both points: my grandfather is a lawyer that owns his own law firm and has worked with private investigators. They work off commissions, and there isn't a network of investigators.
And my brother once accidentally got involved with a person who stole a car and crossed state lines to meet him. Guess who showed up? The FBI. No corruption involved, just auto theft.
@CocoasBro, do you mean how George Floyds family had to pay for a third party autopsy because the coroner who first looked at it said there was an underlying condition when there was not?
@Your Waifu, also sorry for waisting your time but i just happend to look it up. There is a government agency that investigates police. Called internal affairs. Secondly no a rigid hierarchy is much more susceptible to corruption than random private organizations. Because instead of corrupting a dozen odd individuals you just gotta buy out one at the top.
Your also wrong because they get paid regardless of the conclusions they come to.
@Patamon, autopsies have nothing to do with the private investigations from third party individuals.
@CocoasBro, I think the bigger issue though, is that police unions know how to get officers from getting in trouble. They know what phrases to tell cops to say. Also, if an officer is fired for misconduct, they should not be able to just go start working for another precinct.
@CocoasBro, I never claimed they had to solve the cases they got, and the fact that they get paid regardless of the conclusions they come to only further proves that they're not even remotely reliable as a "system", because they could easily claim someone's corrupt who isn't or claim someone isn't corrupt who is.
And the issue with internal affairs is they're divisions of the local law enforcement and report directly to the chief. Like you said, all it takes is one corrupt official at the top, and if the chief is corrupt internal affairs means nothing.
But see, isn't it amazing what you can learn when you do actual research instead of just assuming things?
@CocoasBro, you're right, they don't, because only police have access to autopsy results until long after the case has been closed.
@Patamon, thats the problems and the great part of investigation. You gotta proove beyond a reasonable doubt. Thats a pretty hard thing to do alot of the time. Even with body cams.
@Your Waifu, your telling me you think only paying the PIs when they come to the right conclusions would make them less corrupt? And its not like theyre arrested on the basis of the PIs conclusion. Its just like a is it fishy or not vibe from them. What they made of the case from my limited understanding of it.
@Your Waifu, why would you assume the PI's wouldnt have access to the autopsy report?
@CocoasBro, because it's illegal for them to have the autopsy report before it's publicly releases due to them being civilians and not law enforcement.
@Your Waifu, theyre part of the investigation. I assume they can look at the evidence of said investigation.
@CocoasBro, no, I'm saying that PIs aren't a reliable way to regulate anything because they're not a system and you have no way of knowing if they're corrupt, and that there should be an actual system put in place.
@CocoasBro, they arent part of the investigation, they're civilians. Again, easily provable through a five minute Google search. They have no investigative rights and can only use what is legally available to them to do their investigations, and what's legally available to them is only what's legally available to everyone else. You literally have legal access to just as much information at this moment as a PI does. The only difference is it's their job to investigate so they have entire days to look into things and ask people questions, and after doing it for so long they get decently good at putting pieces together.
@CocoasBro, and let me ask this just to confirm something, are you sure you're not confusing PIs with Detectives? Because Detectives are Law Enforcement. They're officially part of the police force, are higher ranking than regular cops, and have full investigative privileges except when their higher ups say otherwise.
@Your Waifu, you know what dude it looks like ive waisted both of our time. I couldve sworn on my life everytime ive heard about a police shooting that multiple third party detectives are called in to investigate and that theyre cleared but i cant find anything about it online now? More research to follow.
@Your Waifu, its looking like i was wrong about that.
@CocoasBro, private investigators can sometimes be commisioned by the police force if they need extra manpower on an investigation, but it's very rare because most cases generally don't need more than one or two detectives, and cases that are too big usually also cross state lines and get handled by the FBI. That might've been what you were thinking of, as cases big enough to warrant that are usually also newsworthy.
@Your Waifu, no i remember hearing specifically that they were brought in to investigate a use of force by police officers. Specifically one where they killed the suspect because he pulled out a hammer or a gun or some sh!t. They went in and looked over the crime scene and said the officer hadnt done anything wrong in their oppinion. And other such events. But no it looks like i was wrong. Thats not this works. My apologies for waisting your time.
@Medic135, 1000 people die at the hands of police. Justified or not.
Know how many people die due to neglegant medicsl practice and medical errors... 250,000....
We are talking about less than 100 deaths a year unjustified... know how many people a year die to venomous/ poisons animals a year? 100...
Being killed by hitting an animal on the highways... 200 deaths a year.
Sure, no deaths are acceptable, but to be afraid of something so rare, it's pretty much a paranoia phobia.
@Medic135, also firefighters commit arson at a higher rate than the general public...
@CocoasBro, and when police are investigated? Is there a third party or is the investigation internal? Who prevents that corruption
@phalcon , ahem... venomous and poisonous animals is a dumb argument, thats out the window. Same for hitting an animal on the highway, totally irrelevant so thats out. We are not discussing the odds of death by various causes, we are talking about being murdered by your government in this case the police.
So, medical errors I'll start there. I am a medic (if that wasn't obvious) and you are right medical errors by medics nurses and doctors alike result in alot of otherwise preventable deaths. Some of this is blatant malpractice, alot of it is circumstantial mistakes which is not ok because everyone should learn from their mistakes instead of repeating them, and the remainder are likely ignorance. The amount of factors i could rattle off is exhausting, but minus the blatant malpractice or incompetence i will say the remainder of medically caused deaths are at best accidental and will not stand up in court for anything. Please consider that the publics perception of medicine is very
@phalcon , inaccurate and that there is alot of "guess work" involved in laymans terms.
Next is firefighter! I am a fireman, by trade, have been since i was 20. Among volunteer fire depts., especially rurally, there is a disproportionate number of arsons connected to members. I think the thrill attracts them, the ability to not only set the fire but also to watch it burn and play with it. And that is fvcked up, and there absolutely needs to be better vetting for firefighters nationwide to prevent this. This is comparable to corrections or security/law enforcement, those fields of work are not always hard to get into and they attract a certain kind of person often times. People who have anger issues and want to fight, people who have a twisted sense of self righteousness or authority, or who were picked on as children. You can see this in those fields anywhere in the country.
And now, general law enforcement such as municipal police. Sure, there are low numbers of conviction for..
@phalcon , .. cops in cases of brutality or homicide or abuse of power. But 40% are reported. The investigations are more often than not done internally. And a death at the hands of police was not from chance like hitting a deer or being bitten by a snake, its not from ignorance or missing a detail like a hospital death. It is someone that you, as a taxpaying citizen, gave a badge to protect and defend you and instead they shot you. They put their knee on your neck until you died. They kicked down your door and murdered you and your boyfriend, despite it having been the wrong address. They ordered you out of your hotel room with rifles on you because of a third party report that you might have a rifle of your own (not that you used it, merely had it, and you didn't) and they shot you while you were on your knees.
If you do not see the problem of not only brushing off these things, but allowing it to be defended as just. Then i can only ask, how does boot polish taste?
@Medic135, I think its reasonable to compare traffic and venomous animals...
The thing is, unjustified police deaths will never be zero.
Trying to reduce it to zero isnt a bad thing either.
But the question is, is it a small problem, a medium problem or a huge problem? Everyone is saying it's a huge problem...
Do people live in fear of hitting an animal on the highway and dying? Nope. Do people live in fear being stung or bitten and dying from poising? No...
So then is it reasonable to live in fear of being one of what? 10-20 unarmed black person killed by police every year?
If you're not afraid of a bee or bambi killing you at 10 to 20x high likelyhood, how is it reasonable to fear the cops killing you?
That's bordering on mental health issues of paranoid delusions and phobias.
Even more so, you have more control over things, like George. Don't be high on meth and fent, and driving and passing off fake Bill's.... the guy in atlanta?dont drive drunk and then fight the cops...
@Medic135, read my apology to waifu.
@CocoasBro, i glanced over it because this thread is too long to read completely, I accept thanks and sorry
@Medic135, yes, I agree it should not exist.
But that's not what I am saying.
What I am, saying is why is it such a big issue when there are bigger issues?
No one seems to care about black on black murders. Around 2500 a year. White on white is 2700 a year.
How does 12% of a population kill pretty much the same as 72% of a population?
To me that's like putting a bandage on a abrasion meanwhile ignoring the arterial bleed and skipping the tourniquet.
Thats why I am suggesting when you compare it to other things, it seems like an over reaction.
I mean Chicago had 18 homiceds in one day. That's pretty much the same as all unjustifiedable black deaths at the hands of police in a year.
Again, bandage on an abrasion while ignoring the arterial bleed.
@phalcon , i think that you are wrong as well as misguided, although i see your intentions are good. So i offer this, i think we do care about black on black violence. But, how do we solve that when we are having a drastic issue with the police, who are the ones tasked with crimes? We have to solve one first.
Also, something i think you might be missing, the issue here is not odds of death or death at all. It's principle. If we do not stop police brutality in its tracks, no matter the numbers, then we are allowing a part of the government to have free reign over us. We should not fear the government (or police), they should fear us
@Medic135, but that's the point I take contention to "we are having a drastic issue with the police". I 100% any police brutality is wrong. I just don't see how one can define it as "drastic" when there are so many other issues that are off the charts in severity compared to this issue.
I mean what do people expect will happen when 12% of the population commits 28% of the crimes?
Consider Asians. 5.6% of the population but 1%of the crime. Also on average they have the highest income level in the US.
If people want change, than they should focus on the biggest issues first. And that comes from within these communities, not from without.
@phalcon , man, all i can say is that somehow somewhere the importance of not letting sworn government officials murder their citizens has gone over your head
@phalcon , I think your just talking over their heads. Or they just dont want to understand. Kinda makes me think they aren't even reading your comments~
@TheGoogler, seems that way.
It's a, simple concept... It will never be zero...
So how do we benchmark the issue as being super rare, concerning, out of control etc...
There has, to be some criteria where we can judge success or failure.
What, I see is people saying if we have more than one it's a failure of the system.
I don't buy that.
I mean, drunk drivers kill 1200 kids a year... Where's the reaction of people to that vs what? Maybe 30 police deaths a, year? Why is 30 so much more outrageous than 1200?
To me "your worried about the police killing you? Well you should be 83x more worried your own brother will kill you" seems to be reasonable statment (2500 black on black murders)
I just dont get the overreaction, and the underrections.
@phalcon, I agree. Overall corrupt killings do not happen all that much. Even in general cops killing people does happen all that much. So saying that the entire system is corrupt because a few bad apples makes no sense.
Honestly, I chalk it up to "rage culture", as well as the media making it seem like these situations are extremely common occurrences.
People aren't happy unless they are raging about something, and the media gives them just that.
@TheGoogler, ya well be nice if the started raging against the high crime and murder rates within their own communities... We have amazing changes.
Also 2020... It's always someone's else's fault...
Which is, why they can't admit they have a problem in their own communities
@phalcon , the problem is that black on black murders and the like are not "controversial." Which means it wont sell.
Pointing fingers is always easier isn't it?
@TheGoogler, and that's why I want nothing to do with the BLM movement, cause it's really just antipolice movement. They don't actually care about black lives, they just use black people to further their own leftists Marxist ideology.
Which historically is kinda a shame that a people group who has been used for other people's personal gain, are being used again...
Even worse they don't even recognized they are being used...
(hmmm I kinda just had that thought now, does that qualify as an epiphany?)
@phalcon , if you think about it, most of these movements are using people. The way I see it is movements tend to be ok at first, but then out stay their welcome very fast.
Anyways, I'm off to work. Nice talking to you 😎👍
@TheGoogler, have a good night shift? And likewise.
Joseph Carey Merrick.