Police brutality, how should it be handled?

[chris89300]

I realize that you tried to end this with you know that there are good cops out there, but most are abusive little shits... and I find that incredibly insulting. As my father is a cop, my step-brother is a cop, I have friends that are cops. But mostly, my father... who I am incredibly proud of, who has done more than his fair share in this world of trying to be a good person, and all the rest of them that are treated like they're all one entity as if each cop from each precinct, from each district, from each city, from each county, from each state are the same.



Because they're not. And while I am the first one in line to punish over zealous and abusive cops, God knows I've had my fair share of run ins with them, I would never treat anyone with as much disrespect as you just showed right there. That is just wrong.

They are the same or they wouldn't let their corrupt colleagues act like this. If they manage to pull this off, it means they're no better. The buddy system shouldn't be applied to people who are supposed to be an example for the general population.
Even if they're not the ones causing the trouble, the fact that they don't do anything makes them accomplices. Also, you don't know how your pals/dad/brother/etc are when on the job. People don't act the same in different situations.

When people get beaten to death by the police force, it means something is very rotten at its core, doesn't matter the percentage of shitty vs good cops. This shit should not be happening.

How exactly do you punish them? Are you in a position to do so?

First off, let me give you a lesson in how state by state mechanics work. My father lives in Alabama (ooooh, scary!). I grew up in Indiana with my mother. She married a black man. When she did this, I learned the dirty side of a force that didn't care one way or another what people thought, because they were crooked and had no reason to change. I was stopped for no reason, just walking down the street at 5 in the afternoon going home from my tutors house. I was called a ****** lover from an officer. I was thrown into the back of a car once during a huge altercation, I was threatened arrest on more than one occasion, and I was under the age of 18 during this entire situation. So I know the dirty side of cops. But this is a district that is known for having dirty cops. Known for it.

When I got old enough to go to University, which is also in my home town, the same cops maced me, handcuffed me, hit me, threw me against walls, all during peaceful protests. Because we protested the war. They didn't care, because they're not good people. Because they could do that.

But you know what? That's what is different city by city, county by county, state by state, because that's how it goes. Not one police force is like another. You could go to one town over and the police force is completely different. Because they have a different budget, they have a different type of union, they have a different type of captain, they were trained differently. But that is too complicated for most people to wrap their heads around, they just want to blame someone, so they blame "police" instead of looking at the micro.

So do you know what I would do? Start at training, training would be thrown out from post 9/11 days, as it has gotten way out of control to give police more and more gadgets and worry to try to stop terrorism on the streets, and that went from the federal government down to the state government, not from the police up. They didn't force that, the DOD started that shit. I would also make internal investigations a thing of the past and make them all external. It would be done by independent boards who have no stakes in the matter. Simple as that. It cuts out people getting away with things because certain districts, counties, cities pulling in the wagons.

And nothing you can say can make me think any less of you. You insulted an entire arm of the civil service. I don't agree with war, but I don't think people that go off to fight in war are bad people. Just because a system is broken doesn't mean that you can look at thousands upon thousands upon thousands of police officers and spit on them verbally and expect us to respect you afterwards as some kind of freedom fighter.

As for "people that steal vodka go to jail" remark, yes. I don't know what that has to do with cops. That's a law, that has to do with congress. I don't agree with them either, and I have a lot to say about that, but I would never show them the same disrespect that you showed a lot of hard working men and women that risk their lives daily. Criminals already have guns and free will, that's why they're criminals. They go out and do things that are against the law. They break the law, and then they get arrested. It's honestly as simple as that. If you don't like a law, you lobby your congress person about that, not your local police officer. He/she can't change a law, they just have to enforce it.

Actually, you're not far off one of my points.

Yeah, there are scumbags and good officers. But its their moral duty to not let these jackasses do whatever they want.

Someone is always in charge in any situation, so when the people in charge notice that lets say 50% of their guys are corrupt assholes, why don't they instantly end their careers? Why do the so obviously corrupt ones still have their badges?

When every piece of evidence is against them, how come they're still roaming the streets and not rotting in a cell like the criminals that they are?


The vodka thing was my way of pointing out the absurd situation. When some drunk dude goes to jail for stealing a bottle of vodka, cops should damn well go to jail for beating the ever living shit out of someone who didn't ask for it. And even if the person asked for it, this isn't a street fight, so use restraint. You don't need to have the person bleeding on the sidewalk to immobilize them.

You have very good ideas, but I'm talking about the rampant violence they use when unnecessary and the fact that they don't get punished for it.

If a cop breaks the law, he's still a criminal, he should instantly be treated as such and therefore, jail.

That's my main problem. We don't get away with jaywalking yet they get away with literally murder.

 

[SonOfVoorhees]

In the UK they are doing a trial where police were cameras so they record everything. So if a criminal/innocent person brings charges against the police then there is a record of the incident. Because yes a very small majority of police abuse their power, but also a lot of criminals bring fake charges.

 

[kyp275]

I'm not lying, because as a human being, I'm also capable of restraint.

If you say so, but IMO, someone who in this very thread who blatantly admitted at laughing at the beating of a person by a mob isn?t someone who I?d trust about claims of ?restraint?. It doesn?t matter who the one being beaten is, whether it?s police, criminal, or just regular civilian. Your callousness is on full display here.

I was riding a scooter with a pal once they pulled in front of us and stopped us because they noticed we were going too slow (I was almost out of gas and I didn't think I'd make it to the gas station, so I was going at like 15 miles an hour) at like 12:30am.

It was a huge van. 6 officers, armed to the teeth surrounded us, even with the engine cut, fingers near their ***automatic assault rifles*** triggers. Bulletproof vest and grenade/shells belts. We were 15 year old kids going to a party.

Yea ok, I gotta raise the bullshit flag on this one. A van? What, a SWAT unit is just randomly loitering with nothing better to do at 12:30 in the morning than traffic duty? Do you even have a basic understanding of how police units work?

Both I and my pal were incredibly polite the whole time, calmly explaining why I was driving so slow in the middle of the night, at the edge of town where there was nothing in sight.

But of course there was a van of SWAT officers just?sitting there, apparently. I guess maybe they were going to the same party?

Seriously, this is quite amusing, when will you get to the part with the CIA black helicopters and maybe the alien abduction?

At this point I have to agree with Bees. It?s blatantly clear to anyone with half a working brain cell that you?re not interested in having any kind of reasonable and logical discussion on a very valid issue, but is just trying to have your echo chamber of confirming your hatred against police.

 

[chris89300]

There are a lot more good cops than bad cops, just that good cops don't usually make the media salivate because its just not sensational enough to get headlines. Thats the unfortunate part of the media, they don't care about truth, just shock value. So please, stop feeding from the media trough. I'm pretty sure it lowers the IQ.
Why is it more prevalent? Media bias, its easy to play up the bad parts of society by rarely showing its good side. Skewing data can show anything to be "true" but it doesn't make it that way. I've known a lot of different law enforcement personnel in my life, and yes some of them were unfit to wear the badge, scumbags. But the rest (and the absolute majority) are decent hardworking folks who have a shitty job and get little to zero credit for what they do.
Most of the ones I know aren't on a powertrip. Actually the ones who act as if the badge gives them super-powered authority to fuck with people however they want don't last as cops or get stuck on traffic duty their entire careers.
There are bullies and jackasses everywhere, badges don't make them that way.

I actually haven't watched TV or the mainstream media since I was like 13 or something, so it has nothing to do with it. I'm talking about stuff I see everywhere I go. I posted something in the next page, check it out, it's a personal encounter with asshole militarized police officers. And that was almost 10 years ago, nowadays, it's getting to the point of ridicule.

You're still one in about 1000 encounters with cops. Like I said there are jackasses everywhere in every profession and cops happen to carry weapons. I read your story, seems a bit out of place and you may have rolled up on some cops doing something else and happened to think you were suspicious. Hell I have a tendency to think kids out past 12:30am are suspicious as hell.
As for media bias, you don't have to watch mainstream things to be affected by the bias. Where else are you getting your information? Underground news sites? Its kind of hard these days to avoid all types of media unless you stay off the internet. How much truth do you think is really true and not just a context issue?
I don't know you so I can't say but its hard for me to believe you have managed to avoid every outlet of news media there is and somehow stay plugged into whats been happening in society. I may be wrong but I do my utmost to keep out of certain things in life, most recently I did everything I could to stay the hell way from the Zoe Quinn issue and I still ended up knowing more about it than I wanted to. Without unplugging yourself from society, you can't stay away from media it just isn't possible. Myself I take what I hear in passing with a grain of salt due to humanity's penchant for embellishing the truth to make things sound bigger than they are.
Are cops more militaristic? No, they have some hardware but its not exactly military grade stuff. Its usually used stuff thats had most of the militaristic features removed and its not trotted out on a consistent basis. Also one other thing, unless they are using heavy machine guns, no cops have fully automatic weapons. AR-15's (M-16's) and their 8-inch barrel equivalents are not fully automatic, they have single fire and 3-round burst modes, as do their military equivalents. Automatic fire is wasteful of ammunition and in an urban environment a hazard to civilians. There's no reason for cops to have them or use them.
So yeah, there's shitty cops but they haven't gotten worse or more prevalent. There's just more noise being made about them in society as of now, especially after the whole Ferguson issue.

No, dude, obviously, but there are lots of media outlets, ya gotta cherry pick them.
Because I used to hang out a lot. And I've witnessed insane acts of unprovoked police brutality. When you see this kinda shit for yourself, from the beginning, it's not bias talking, it's your eyes and years.

In the middle of the night, with our helmets on, we were looking like adults (I've always looked much older and my pal had the same constitution, only a much younger face).

Yeah, that Zoe Quinn character is pretty much a societal problem, meh, what she represents pisses me off, but in a way it relates to the police, since in both cases, it's corruption.

Some of it is military grade stuff. Dude, they were machine guns, that's my problem. That kind of shit belongs in a MILITARY base, not in a police station. This wasn't a SWAT team I'm talking about, these guys were policemen. Yeah I know weaponry basics and I know why they use what they use, but an actual automatic machine gun is not justified in the police. This isn't Iraq, they don't need machine guns.


Yeah, I didn't actually pay any attention to that case. Isn't it the case where some dude was wrecking shit in some store and a cop shot him? And then black people "peacefully" rioted and looted stores in Florida and shit?
Because if that's the one, the rioters should have been victims of police brutality and the cop's action could have been justified. If the aggressor was (again, don't really know what I'm talking about here, so take this with a grain of salt) a raging lunatic, out to kill people, or the officer, hell, fire away.

But if the first thing he did was pull out the gun and fire it, then he should definitely go to jail.

But yeah, the rioters should have been brutalized, and badly, period.

Some cases need police brutality, but it needs to be justified, otherwise they're not cops, but violent criminals.

 

[chris89300]

I'm not lying, because as a human being, I'm also capable of restraint.

If you say so, but IMO, someone who in this very thread who blatantly admitted at laughing at the beating of a person by a mob isn?t someone who I?d trust about claims of ?restraint?. It doesn?t matter who the one being beaten is, whether it?s police, criminal, or just regular civilian. Your callousness is on full display here.

I was riding a scooter with a pal once they pulled in front of us and stopped us because they noticed we were going too slow (I was almost out of gas and I didn't think I'd make it to the gas station, so I was going at like 15 miles an hour) at like 12:30am.

It was a huge van. 6 officers, armed to the teeth surrounded us, even with the engine cut, fingers near their ***automatic assault rifles*** triggers. Bulletproof vest and grenade/shells belts. We were 15 year old kids going to a party.

Yea ok, I gotta raise the bullshit flag on this one. A van? What, a SWAT unit is just randomly loitering with nothing better to do at 12:30 in the morning than traffic duty? Do you even have a basic understanding of how police units work?

Both I and my pal were incredibly polite the whole time, calmly explaining why I was driving so slow in the middle of the night, at the edge of town where there was nothing in sight.

But of course there was a van of SWAT officers just?sitting there, apparently. I guess maybe they were going to the same party?

Seriously, this is quite amusing, when will you get to the part with the CIA black helicopters and maybe the alien abduction?

At this point I have to agree with Bees. It?s blatantly clear to anyone with half a working brain cell that you?re not interested in having any kind of reasonable and logical discussion on a very valid issue, but is just trying to have your echo chamber of confirming your hatred against police.

By a mob? No, no, no, you're embellishing it, by ONE KID, there was no "mob", just passersby and they were just looking, not intervening.

No, that's the point, they weren't a SWAT team (SWAT = USA, not France), but normal police officers, and no, they were passing by, going somewhere, not waiting for someone, we just happened to be on that road. Read what I said, don't imagine extras.

As for the other stuff? Seriously? Are you a child? I'm not reading you a story book here, I'm recounting what happened to me.

I'm talking about the fact that they shouldn't point guns at unarmed non-threatening civilians, and you're seeing this as a conspiracy theory?

Looks like you're the one not interested in a logical conversation. Where do you get to the part where you or your partner/dad/son/aunt/whatever are cops?

Because you sound very much like a cop trying to discredit a comment on what you yourself call a valid issue.

 

[VoidWanderer]

First thing that pops into mind is the word 'context'. Most cops that act violently genuinely feel their life is in danger. Granted that is not all of them, but there are the ones who act out.

Honestly, for those cases where it is police brutality and not 'brutality', the offending officer should be suspended for three months while undergoing psychiatric visits. But to combat the problem, I feel that Police should be better trained in grappling techniques, getting an advantage over an unarmed offender without beating the crap out of them.

But just remember, it is the 'vocal minority' it is the bad cases which catch the attention of the media and blown out of proportion.

 

[chris89300]

In the UK they are doing a trial where police were cameras so they record everything. So if a criminal/innocent person brings charges against the police then there is a record of the incident. Because yes a very small majority of police abuse their power, but also a lot of criminals bring fake charges.

Yeah I've heard of this. It's a great idea, as long as these cameras stay on for the entire duration of their shift.
But they can edit the video and pass it off as a malfunction, because malfunctions happen, and how are you gonna prove it wasn't one. Cops sometimes temper with evidence as to support their case., but I still agree that it would be a huge step in the right direction.

I think liability is what all this boils down to. They don't have enough of it.

 

[kyp275]

No, dude, obviously, but there are lots of media outlets, ya gotta cherry pick them.

Problem #1

Because I used to hang out a lot. And I've witnessed insane acts of unprovoked police brutality. When you see this kinda shit for yourself, from the beginning, it's not bias talking, it's your eyes and years.

No, that?s the very definition of bias. Your personal experience is literally worth nothing more as a tiny anecdotal speck in the grand scheme of things. My father worked for decades in a furniture store located in one of the worst city in metro Detroit (seriously, the police precinct IS the boarded up and dilapidated building), and through his ?eyes and ears?, he ended up forming a most unfavorable opinion about black people in general(no, before you try, he?s not white, he?s a first generation immigrant from the other side of the planet). I'd certainly not call his view "bias-free", would you?

Some of it is military grade stuff. Dude, they were machine guns

No, they were definitely not machine guns. You know why? Because I actually know what machine guns are and how they?re used. A M240 is a machine gun, a M2 is a machine gun, a M19 or a M249 is a machine gun.

A M4/M16? Not a machine gun, not even the burst-fire models. (btw, that isn?t something you can tell without a close inspection, especially at 12:30 in the morning. Somehow I doubt those cops would?ve handed you their weapon for you to check out what markings are on their fire selector).

In short, if it's something that looks like a rifle you see being carried by a police officer that doesn't have a tripod somewhere, it's most likely not a machine gun.

Some cases need police brutality, but it needs to be justified, otherwise they're not cops, but violent criminals.

No, in no cases are police brutality needed nor justified, when aggressive or deadly forces are required, those are not ?brutalities?.

By a mob? No, no, no, you're embellishing it, by ONE KID, there was no "mob", just passersby and they were just looking, not intervening.

My mistake, the ?entire crowd? part was what I got caught on. Regardless, my point stands even if it?s just one person.

No, that's the point, they weren't a SWAT team (SWAT = USA, not France), but normal police officers, and no, they were passing by, going somewhere, not waiting for someone, we just happened to be on that road. Read what I said, don't imagine extras.

You?re not making the connection here, which in retrospect should?ve been obvious given how little actual knowledge you have displayed on the subject. Here, let me put it as plainly as possible ? patrol unit usually consist of one to two officers in a police cruiser, typically armed with their service weapon and in some cases a long gun stored in the cruiser (rifle or shotgun).

In no police department anywhere in the US(nor France I don't think) will you find a police patrol consisting of a VAN (first giveaway), with 6 officers in full body armor armed with automatic rifles, that would be the typical SWAT or equivalent tactical unit.

As for the other stuff? Seriously? Are you a child? I'm not reading you a story book here, I'm recounting what happened to me.

I'm talking about the fact that they shouldn't point guns at unarmed non-threatening civilians, and you're seeing this as a conspiracy theory?

No, quite simply, I believe you?re lying. If you want to make extraordinary claims, you need to either provide the supporting evidence, or at least hold a substantial claim to credibility and trustworthiness to the public. You have neither. Add in the fact that a lot of what you said are either improbably or unknowable by someone in your position, I would say most reasonable person would have cast serious doubt on your claims.

Looks like you're the one not interested in a logical conversation. Where do you get to the part where you or your partner/dad/son/aunt/whatever are cops?

None of them are.

Because you sound very much like a cop trying to discredit a comment on what you yourself call a valid issue.

A valid issue that deserves much better than what you?ve been throwing out here.

 

[Verlander]

They're people and should be bound to the same rules and laws as people, with very clearly defined guidelines for abuse.

The US' problem is that there is no consistency nor quality control for being a copper. It's nearly impossible to be one in the UK, there are huge waiting lists, stringent training, testing and physical requirements. You rarely get the "fat doughnut eating" stereotype over here, and when you do it's usually an older officer. They also wear stab/bullet proofs as standard, their helmets are specially designed to protect against thrown missiles, and they have a utility belt larger than Batman's. We have special units for dog handlers and for police specifically trained in weapons - the average bobby doesn't carry a firearm, and doesn't need to. Training here lasts a few years, and it's very specific - you work towards a special driving license and suchlike for high speed pursuit (as an example).

Until you start demanding the same standards from your law enforcement, you won't get results. There was a TV show a while back, where they got police from various countries to train with the London Met, see if they were good enough. None really were - had a general from columbia, so didn't expect him to keep up (more senior chap), outback cop from Oz, female officer from Samoa and a chap from Africa, I think Botswana. They were all upstanding people, but couldn't believe how hard it is to join our force... most of them did it because it was a "family thing". That doesn't happen over here, and nor does rampant police brutality.

 

[chris89300]

First thing that pops into mind is the word 'context'. Most cops that act violently genuinely feel their life is in danger. Granted that is not all of them, but there are the ones who act out.

Honestly, for those cases where it is police brutality and not 'brutality', the offending officer should be suspended for three months while undergoing psychiatric visits. But to combat the problem, I feel that Police should be better trained in grappling techniques, getting an advantage over an unarmed offender without beating the crap out of them.

But just remember, it is the 'vocal minority' it is the bad cases which catch the attention of the media and blown out of proportion.

Yeah but I'm mostly talking from personal experience since I don't really follow this kind of stories, but I agree, I see headlines like this more and more.

The cases I pay more attention to are cases like the kid who ended up being interrogated for drawing on a school table with a magic marker. You know, the kind of ridiculous that you'd initially think it's an Onion article.

 

[major_chaos]

Seriously, this is quite amusing, when will you get to the part with the CIA black helicopters and maybe the alien abduction?

For bonus points, some low effort research shows this ( http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7b/Renault_trafic_police_nationale_strasbourg_-1.JPG/1280px-Renault_trafic_police_nationale_strasbourg_-1.JPG ) as the largest vehicle in use by the French police, and I wouldn't exactly call it a "huge van". Also best I can tell, some parts of the French police rarely carry the FAMAS rifle, but most just have handguns, so "yea man there was SIX OF EM' and they had MACHINEGUNS!!" is also hard to swallow. And Grenades? really?

as for the OP, its clear you made this thread for validation, not discussion. If you have had shitty experiences with cops that does suck, but it doesn't justify your massive overgeneralizing or callous hostility. If your claim that this opinion of yours is formed entirely from personal experience not the influence of others or media, then the problem is that its all just anecdotal evidence. I can easily counter that with my own anecdotal evidence that I have delt with cops many times and never had an issue. Hell as a Computer forensics major I interact with police 4 times a week at minimum, whether its my teacher, guest speakers, or just the campus PD (who are actual sworn officers from the county PD, not rent-a-cops) and I have never had an issue with any of them personally, nor have I ever seen them act in an unacceptable fashion. And the same holds true for all the times I have encountered police outside the School setting.

I'm not trying to claim police are perfect, there are certainly assholes and there are times where they just lose their job for a crime that should have put them in prison, and that is a problem. But your entire position seems to be based on anecdotal evidence and ten second non-indicative cellphone videos, and that doesn't make for a convincing platform. Also you don't seem to realize that the hostile "us Vs. them" mentality is a huge part of the problem that is perpetuated as much by civilians as it is by police.

As for what should be done, I fully agree with the idea of cameras on both cars and officers. It protects citizens from police overstepping their bounds, and it protects police from morons trying to claim "police brutality" to get out everything from a speeding ticket to assaulting an officer. And it far more reliable then cellphone videos from bystanders, which tend to be unclear, biased, and show only a very, very small part of a complex situation.

 

[kyp275]

The US' problem is that there is no consistency nor quality control for being a copper. It's nearly impossible to be one in the UK, there are huge waiting lists, stringent training, testing and physical requirements.

Yes and no, there are quality control, there is just no consistency in said QC. Police authority is not a singular national institution in the US, each jurisdiction going all the way from the federal government down to each individual city can have its own police force. Nor is it practical to have some national police department in the US - every state have their own laws and ordinances, and that applies to each individual counties and cities within the state as well.

There was a TV show a while back, where they got police from various countries to train with the London Met, see if they were good enough. None really were - had a general from columbia, so didn't expect him to keep up (more senior chap), outback cop from Oz, female officer from Samoa and a chap from Africa, I think Botswana. They were all upstanding people, but couldn't believe how hard it is to join our force.

Well, you have to admit, it's doesn't sound like they gathered the cream of the crops for competition there either...

.. most of them did it because it was a "family thing". That doesn't happen over here, and nor does rampant police brutality.

And unfortunately, the US culture in general is far more violence-prone, apple and oranges.

For bonus points, some low effort research shows this ( http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7b/Renault_trafic_police_nationale_strasbourg_-1.JPG/1280px-Renault_trafic_police_nationale_strasbourg_-1.JPG ) as the largest vehicle in use by the French police, and I wouldn't exactly call it a "huge van". Also best I can tell, some parts of the French police rarely carry the FAMAS rifle, but most just have handguns, so "yea man there was SIX OF EM' and they had MACHINEGUNS!!" is also hard to swallow. And Grenades? really?

Well you know, maybe the French police there went and rented a bigger van to stick all those machinegun-wielding officers to fight some terrorist cells... or the just party down the street, I don't know, could be anything, and obviously found messing with the OP on his scooters as the most important thing they should be doing at 12:30 in the morning.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Some of it is military grade stuff. Dude, they were machine guns

No, they were definitely not machine guns. You know why? Because I actually know what machine guns are and how they?re used. A M240 is a machine gun, a M2 is a machine gun, a M19 or a M249 is a machine gun.

A M4/M16? Not a machine gun, not even the burst-fire models. (btw, that isn?t something you can tell without a close inspection, especially at 12:30 in the morning. Somehow I doubt those cops would?ve handed you their weapon for you to check out what markings are on their fire selector).

In short, if it's something that looks like a rifle you see being carried by a police officer that doesn't have a tripod somewhere, it's most likely not a machine gun.

A quibble, but the term "machine gun" can be extended to assault rifles, especially in nations where it is a term defined in law.

Personally, I'd question the term "military grade", which is generally a meaningless phrase.

 

[chris89300]

Seriously, this is quite amusing, when will you get to the part with the CIA black helicopters and maybe the alien abduction?

For bonus points, some low effort research shows this ( http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7b/Renault_trafic_police_nationale_strasbourg_-1.JPG/1280px-Renault_trafic_police_nationale_strasbourg_-1.JPG ) as the largest vehicle in use by the French police, and I wouldn't exactly call it a "huge van". Also best I can tell, some parts of the French police rarely carry the FAMAS rifle, but most just have handguns, so "yea man there was SIX OF EM' and they had MACHINEGUNS!!" is also hard to swallow. And Grenades? really?

as for the OP, its clear you made this thread for validation, not discussion. If you have had shitty experiences with cops that does suck, but it doesn't justify your massive overgeneralizing or callous hostility. If your claim that this opinion of yours is formed entirely from personal experience not the influence of others or media, then the problem is that its all just anecdotal evidence. I can easily counter that with my own anecdotal evidence that I have delt with cops many times and never had an issue. Hell as a Computer forensics major I interact with police 4 times a week at minimum, whether its my teacher, guest speakers, or just the campus PD (who are actual sworn officers from the county PD, not rent-a-cops) and I have never had an issue with any of them personally, nor have I ever seen them act in an unacceptable fashion. And the same holds true for all the times I have encountered police outside the School setting.

I'm not trying to claim police are perfect, there are certainly assholes and there are times where they just lose their job for a crime that should have put them in prison, and that is a problem. But your entire position seems to be based on anecdotal evidence and ten second non-indicative cellphone videos, and that doesn't make for a convincing platform. Also you don't seem to realize that the hostile "us Vs. them" mentality is a huge part of the problem that is perpetuated as much by civilians as it is by police.

As for what should be done, I fully agree with the idea of cameras on both cars and officers. It protects citizens from police overstepping their bounds, and it protects police from morons trying to claim "police brutality" to get out everything from a speeding ticket to assaulting an officer. And it far more reliable then cellphone videos from bystanders, which tend to be unclear, biased, and show only a very, very small part of a complex situation.

Was larger than that and when the lights are on, it looks bigger, but you're missing the point. Where you live, you might have a lot more normal cops than here. I deal a lot with cops too, most of them I don't know well enough to have an informed opinion about them but at first glace seem perfectly normal and polite people, we joke around even when pulled over for a routine check, hell I've even helped some cops out with accidents while waiting for extra manpower (a large number of people in my family are either cops, hang out with them (contractors, translators, etc), or have cop friends). But a more than reasonable amount of cops I've dealt with or seen the whole thing from the start, were far from being reasonable.

Dude, this isn't science fiction, would I need to make this stuff up? They were probably flashbangs or smoke grenades, I couldn't care less, they looked like grenades. And even if they were marshmallows, what matters is HOW they acted. The only thing I know (I've even asked a few higher-ups about this shit), is that, no, they're NOT supposed to pull that kinda shit off. I don't care where they got the hardware, either, I just don't want them to point it at me without reason.

Unless I'm pointing a gun at them, it is inexcusable. Guilty till proven innocent much? How about we just shoot first and not bother with silly things like morals or questions or anything else for that matter. Or better yet, use some common sense.


But I'm tired of debating this. I was initially asking for solutions, not a flamewar.

I love the cameras idea because it levels the field. People won't be able to as easily abuse broken laws or technicalities AND cops won't be able to act like dicks, because hey, we got your shit taped.

I disagree however with street cameras, because I don't want to be in a dystopia and/or China.

An idea of mine was to have another organisation dedicated solely (civilian, obviously, WITH background checks for every employee to eliminate ex-cops/ex-military) to handling ALL complaints and investigations against anything related to police and to handle the investigations however they see fit, even thru hidden cameras. I mean something really strict and invasive.
Sounds a lot like a team of private detectives you'd see in cartoons or something lol.
But I don't know how that could work tho. Because we're all human, and we can't check out with who they hang out, obvious privacy issues aside, we're not in a spy movie, that demands manpower. And hey, civilian organisations shouldn't act like the NSA or the FBI you know?

Problem is we can't give a civilian organisation power that could go too far beyond the law, and we already have enough NSAs and FBIs.

 

[chris89300]

Some of it is military grade stuff. Dude, they were machine guns

No, they were definitely not machine guns. You know why? Because I actually know what machine guns are and how they?re used. A M240 is a machine gun, a M2 is a machine gun, a M19 or a M249 is a machine gun.

A M4/M16? Not a machine gun, not even the burst-fire models. (btw, that isn?t something you can tell without a close inspection, especially at 12:30 in the morning. Somehow I doubt those cops would?ve handed you their weapon for you to check out what markings are on their fire selector).

In short, if it's something that looks like a rifle you see being carried by a police officer that doesn't have a tripod somewhere, it's most likely not a machine gun.

A quibble, but the term "machine gun" can be extended to assault rifles, especially in nations where it is a term defined in law.

Personally, I'd question the term "military grade", which is generally a meaningless phrase.

Nah, they looked nothing like that. Especially not an M240/M249, and no, c'mon it wasn't a handgun, yeah he would have most likely kicked my ass for asking.
It wasn't something I've already shot, it looked like a seriously oversized Uzi but with a big ass charger, and the big ass charger really sticked out, that's what makes me think they were fully auto.
The things had way too large chargers for a pretty small barrel, I doubt burst only weapons have that many bullets in them.

They couldn't have been custom because as far as I know law enforcement don't have the right to carry personal weapons on the job, and there were 6 of them, at least 2 more in the van (were 2 more guys that didn't come out).

Maybe you're right about the not being machine guns part, but they looked nothing I've seen in a police station, and nothing I've seen/shot with the cops in my family etc. I'm pretty sure they were military equipment.

 

[chris89300]

The US' problem is that there is no consistency nor quality control for being a copper. It's nearly impossible to be one in the UK, there are huge waiting lists, stringent training, testing and physical requirements.

Yes and no, there are quality control, there is just no consistency in said QC. Police authority is not a singular national institution in the US, each jurisdiction going all the way from the federal government down to each individual city can have its own police force. Nor is it practical to have some national police department in the US - every state have their own laws and ordinances, and that applies to each individual counties and cities within the state as well.

There was a TV show a while back, where they got police from various countries to train with the London Met, see if they were good enough. None really were - had a general from columbia, so didn't expect him to keep up (more senior chap), outback cop from Oz, female officer from Samoa and a chap from Africa, I think Botswana. They were all upstanding people, but couldn't believe how hard it is to join our force.

Well, you have to admit, it's doesn't sound like they gathered the cream of the crops for competition there either...

.. most of them did it because it was a "family thing". That doesn't happen over here, and nor does rampant police brutality.

And unfortunately, the US culture in general is far more violence-prone, apple and oranges.

For bonus points, some low effort research shows this ( http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7b/Renault_trafic_police_nationale_strasbourg_-1.JPG/1280px-Renault_trafic_police_nationale_strasbourg_-1.JPG ) as the largest vehicle in use by the French police, and I wouldn't exactly call it a "huge van". Also best I can tell, some parts of the French police rarely carry the FAMAS rifle, but most just have handguns, so "yea man there was SIX OF EM' and they had MACHINEGUNS!!" is also hard to swallow. And Grenades? really?

Well you know, maybe the French police there went and rented a bigger van to stick all those machinegun-wielding officers to fight some terrorist cells... or the just party down the street, I don't know, could be anything, and obviously found messing with the OP on his scooters as the most important thing they should be doing at 12:30 in the morning.

You know, if you think it's all bullshit, why did you bother coming to this thread?
I'm asking a serious question and you're treating me like a kid who's watched too many action movies, WTF.

 

[Verlander]

The US' problem is that there is no consistency nor quality control for being a copper. It's nearly impossible to be one in the UK, there are huge waiting lists, stringent training, testing and physical requirements.

Yes and no, there are quality control, there is just no consistency in said QC. Police authority is not a singular national institution in the US, each jurisdiction going all the way from the federal government down to each individual city can have its own police force. Nor is it practical to have some national police department in the US - every state have their own laws and ordinances, and that applies to each individual counties and cities within the state as well.

There was a TV show a while back, where they got police from various countries to train with the London Met, see if they were good enough. None really were - had a general from columbia, so didn't expect him to keep up (more senior chap), outback cop from Oz, female officer from Samoa and a chap from Africa, I think Botswana. They were all upstanding people, but couldn't believe how hard it is to join our force.

Well, you have to admit, it's doesn't sound like they gathered the cream of the crops for competition there either...

They were all outstanding officers, with the Columbian general being responsible for the largest drug bust in Columbian history just before the show aired.

Every officer should be expected to have in depth knowledge of local laws and ordinances, that shouldn't stop there being a national standard which is lacking in the US. I'm not just a US basher either, I used to live there, and take a very active interest in US politics and current events (and work there every now and then). The lack of quality in the emergency services is one of the more negative consequences of the devolved federalist structure that fools in the UK are screaming for

 

[Bruce]

Here is how I think you could deal with it long term - organise a group to go to the police station with muffins, coffee and that sort of thing.

For the most part the biggest problem with the cops is that they see the communities they serve in adversorial terms, generally because if there is one person who only sees you are your very worst it is a cop.

By showing them some kindness, by making it clear you are not simply people but people they like, you reduce their wish to harm you. You stop being "citizen" and you start being your name.

And they stop being cops, and start being their names.

 

[chris89300]

They're people and should be bound to the same rules and laws as people, with very clearly defined guidelines for abuse.

The US' problem is that there is no consistency nor quality control for being a copper. It's nearly impossible to be one in the UK, there are huge waiting lists, stringent training, testing and physical requirements. You rarely get the "fat doughnut eating" stereotype over here, and when you do it's usually an older officer. They also wear stab/bullet proofs as standard, their helmets are specially designed to protect against thrown missiles, and they have a utility belt larger than Batman's. We have special units for dog handlers and for police specifically trained in weapons - the average bobby doesn't carry a firearm, and doesn't need to. Training here lasts a few years, and it's very specific - you work towards a special driving license and suchlike for high speed pursuit (as an example).

Until you start demanding the same standards from your law enforcement, you won't get results. There was a TV show a while back, where they got police from various countries to train with the London Met, see if they were good enough. None really were - had a general from columbia, so didn't expect him to keep up (more senior chap), outback cop from Oz, female officer from Samoa and a chap from Africa, I think Botswana. They were all upstanding people, but couldn't believe how hard it is to join our force... most of them did it because it was a "family thing". That doesn't happen over here, and nor does rampant police brutality.

Wow, nice. Exactly how long does training last?
Yeah but it's a TV show, of course they'll show incompetents (or actors).
But yeah, even in France, from their own stories, they're not that trained in school.
Example: completely rampant drug and alcohol abuse.
From the few times I've personally seen it, half of these guys were smoking joints and drinking beer during breaks. That's not abuse, no, but some of their stories are fucked up.

I mean you expect these stories when you bro out on a weekend off, but on school grounds? Sure, maybe they were embellishing, but they sounded more like high school stories than police school.

 

[chris89300]

Here is how I think you could deal with it long term - organise a group to go to the police station with muffins, coffee and that sort of thing.

For the most part the biggest problem with the cops is that they see the communities they serve in adversorial terms, generally because if there is one person who only sees you are your very worst it is a cop.

By showing them some kindness, by making it clear you are not simply people but people they like, you reduce their wish to harm you. You stop being "citizen" and you start being your name.

And they stop being cops, and start being their names.

That's a pretty good idea, but how do we get that many people on board? In a small local community it would be reasonably easy but in a huge city or an entire region, I don't think that many people like/trust the police anymore to actually do that en masse.

It would be a pretty huge collective effort.

You make an excellent point tho, police view all of us as threats and more and more people feel the same way about the police. It is way too adversarial on a day to day basis, that's what builds mistrust and fear.