Senate No Donuts For You: The U.S. Police Brutality Thread

Odd that we have laws in some communities that make it illegal for civilians to stand by when someone is in danger.

 

Are you referring to Warren v. District of Columbia, or in a different context?

 

This breaches topics somewhat (and isn't applicable, I don't think, to the due process argument made in the Parkland lawsuit, which seemed designed to get around Warren v. District of Columbia, or the circumstances present), but this is one of the things that I think the gun discussions omit. A large portion of people in the US are under the mistaken intention that the police exist to protect them. That's not just people who believe that that is just what the police will do, but also those that think that's what the mission statement of the police is, even if they fail to do so for other reasons (be they race or class concerns, etc).

What doesn't get addressed as much is that the police do not exist to protect the public from harm, they exist to apprehend those that have violated laws (I wouldn't say 'harmed the public' because a whole lot of those don't have harm of the public involved). That plays a huge role in a discussion on guns because we have major societal issues that do lead to issues with crime, and many people know that if they get in trouble, they are fundamentally on their own. If we had a police force that was focused on protecting people, that would be one discussion, but failing that, it's no surprise that many people want to be able to make preparations so that if they are in a bad situation, they have greater control in the outcome they get. That's not to say that having a gun protects you, or that there aren't major associated risks with firearm ownership (I think both of those points have already discussed in the other thread), but that someone that is, say, dealing with a home invader is going to have more options available to them if they have a gun rather than if they don't. They can end up with the bad options happening (be it by bad choice, bad training, or simply bad luck), but it's still more options than being unarmed in the same situation.

If we had a police force that actually protected people, and more importantly, that people actually believed protected people, I think it would have major impacts on the separate discussion of private gun ownership. As it stands, though, we have a police force that not only doesn't have an expectation that they're supposed to protect people and is very fundamentally failing to protect people (part of the paradox of how police arguably manage to both underpolice and overpolice black communities at the same time comes to mind), but are themselves an additional threat to people. Right off the bat, we need to get to the point where the police are not systematically an additional threat, as they currently are. But even after that, until they are actually protecting people, we'll continue to have major problems, both for those that are directly not being protected by law enforcement and also secondarily from the impact on society when many people take steps to be able to fully defend themselves because they believe that if they don't, no one else will either.

 

I feel like there's no way on earth that they police are legally obligated to protect property either, given how LAPD abandoned large areas of Los Angeles during the LA riots.

 

Just stumbled upon this one, but I feel like there's something wrong with training if the last words someone hears from a cop are not "drop the gun" or "raise your hands" or anything that is remotely close to instructions (rightfully or wrongfully used) but are "you're about to die, my friend":

This time, a shooting in Salt Lake City that took place inside the police station after someone was arrested and denied being taken to mental health care, when he got a hand on an officer's holstered gun. From 2019, but the video seems to have now been made more available.
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/...einholt-west-lake-city-police-shooting-video/

 

Firstly, the police had no corroborative evidence that Breinholt was driving under the influence. The officer said, “Um, you told us you drove here”. Breinholt then denied that he had driven there. All they really have is a positive breathalyser result and a man who has threatened self-harm/suicide.

In those circumstances, the officers should have taken Breinholt for immediate psychiatric evaluation. Instead, they arrested him and took him to the station. Breinholt was clearly a difficult person to deal with, but the officers seemed to revel in their role as the tough guys, “You don’t want to fight with me. You definitely don’t want to fight with this guy”.

Breinholt was cuffed to the rear the whole time (maximising his discomfort, particularly while sitting). When the struggle happened and Breinholt grabbed the gun, it should have been possible to control and disarm him. Clear tactical commands should have been given. Instead, Longman rushes in shouting “You’re about to die, my friend” before shooting Breinholt in the head at point-blank range. When Breinholt lay dead on the floor, Longman shouted “Don’t grab the gun”. Too late for that.

The saddest thing about this incident is that, with a little empathy and kindness from the first officers on the scene, Breinholt could be alive and well today. They could have taken a messed-up guy to get help. Instead, they arrested him and stood over him like school bullies before shooting him in the head.

 

Speaking of Utah...

Teen arrested and charged with hate crime after stomping and crumpling 'Blue Lives Matter' sign.

The hell??!!

 

Not surprised in the slightest that the groups in power abuse laws. Even laws about hate crimes and hate speech.

This is why I tend not to support hate speech/crimes exceptions to the First Amendment.

 

I'm not sure I understand the question about cops being an oppressed group, since nothing in that article said they are.

 

Philly police officer charged for allegedly deleting video of arrest.

 

Because "Blue Lives Matter" was created to mock Black Lives Matter and create an alternative conservative narrative about how they're the ones being persecuted.

 

Not exactly police brutality, but imagine the horrendous potential given this program:

Pasco County's Intelligence program seems Gestapo/KGB-like.

 

I found this to be the most disturbing part of that article:

Innocent people could begin their lives and careers with this ugly label hanging over their heads. This could lead to undue police attention given to law-abiding people who happened to have a tough childhood.

 

Attempts to figure out who to focus on because they're "likely to commit crimes in the future" reminds me of the Chicago efforts which, if I recall correctly, mostly indicated who was likely to be involved in a crime, not just commit one. So it was also increased scrutiny on those that would end up being victims.

It opens a whole thing of the ethics of big data.

Yeah, but they're alleging a hate crime. That doesn't have any 'oppressed group' requirement to qualify. It's utterly stupid for other reasons, but them being an 'oppressed group' or not has nothing to do with if it's a hate crime.

 

Considering the neighborhood I grew up in (the crime center of the area), the visits from Child Protective Services, and the poor early attendance due to poor health, I would have been labeled as "destined to a life of crime" (according to their manual) by seven years old. How do they get access to school records, I thought they were protected?

This is sick. The cops claim to be helping kids, but that's not their job and I would be against it being their job.

Holy ****

This is how you keep people down. If you look for reasons to punish someone, you'll find them. Lots of good, law abiding citizens from my neighborhood would have gotten one trivial violation or another, and the costs would have ruined them and pushed them into crime, homelessness, prison, or all of the above.

I never got into crime, I stayed away, so it's unlikely they ever would have caught me with anything or doing anything (except maybe fighting out of self-defense), but I was resentful and defiant of authority, so if I got visits from these cops....well, I probably would have told them to **** off every time, and I don't think that would have gone well. I can imagine it changing my life for the worse.

The entire Sheriff's Office needs to be wiped clean and replaced.

 

Of course it's Florida.

The best part is spinning it like it's a positive thing - "If you take our constant, focused harassment without complaint for a couple years, we'll move on to another target and downgrade you to Standard-Level Police Harassment(tm)!"

 

Alabama police officer, who continued to get paid after being convicted of murder resigns.

 

The state of Colorado is one of the few that has taken serious action against police misconduct (and frankly, I'd welcome anyone being able to name another, but offhand it's the only state I'm aware of)

That has meant that when there were allegations this year that police acted inappropriately, in this case tasing a man that was standing in his own apartment and was unarmed and not posing a threat to anyone, the body camera footage was released relatively quickly, as these things go, and so body camera footage was made available and public in less than 2 months.

https://www.cpr.org/2021/07/23/body-camera-footage-released-forceful-arrest-idaho-springs/

While he's not being particularly compliant, it's also worth noting that he's been given directions to *both* get on the ground *and* to get out of the apartment as the two officers are both giving instructions. The officer that tased him is now facing charges. The officer is facing one felony charge of assault for this and was fired from the department about a week ago.

One hopes that this is going to be representative of how such cases will unfold in Colorado now.