Policing Is Hard Work

[Leo Gura]

6 minutes ago, Extreme Z7 said:

Do you think the Atlanta incident is an example of over-policing

You mean this Wendy's case?? Or some other case?

I think the Wendy's case is not over-policing. Other cases are different, like Floyd.

[remember]

1 minute ago, Leo Gura said:

Europe is more egalitarian with less economic disparity and slightly higher level of Spiral development.

in many aspects its different, but we also have especially at some blue-orange levels some really difficult issues.      in sense of openmindedness we would in many cases not be like we are without hollywood and american music, we would probably still be stuck in blue. 

[Extreme Z7]

@Leo Gura Okay then. I can respect that opinion.

I'm actually on the fence with the Wendy's case. I recognize that Brooks violently resisted arrest, but I keep wanting there to be an alternative to shooting someone who's running away.

I guess it could just be me, speaking as a fragile snowflake who'll never handle a gun in his life lol. (Or at least, I sure hope not)

[SerpaeTetra]

One police reform could be to use a shoot-to-wound policy  in some cases like these.  With an officer behind him, and knowing the suspect didn't have another weapon (they already frisked him), I think he could have shot him in the ass or leg.  Cops in the US are always trained to shoot-to-stop the threat; usually multiple shots in the chest or back (which often results in death).  This would of course require more marksmanship training.  

That being said, I agree the split-second decisions cops are faced with are extremely difficult.  Also, if I start wrestling with two cops, I expect to be dead more often than not.  Cases like these would never result with a criminal charge to the officer in the past, but this guy will probably be used as an example.  

Edited June 14, 2020 by SerpaeTetra

[Epikur]

30 minutes ago, Husseinisdoingfine said:

Lolololololololololololoollolololool

Admit it Leo, a lot of your sympathy for the police comes after running this forum

I am not shure about it. Some admins have a different opinion on it. In general I agree. Maybe that is why chaz is a good test run if it can made better. We can not evolve without experimentation.

Though I am not ready if one should get tazered if one gets a warning at the forum. Some experiments should be taken with precaution I guess

 

[Leo Gura]

37 minutes ago, Husseinisdoingfine said:

Lolololololololololololoollolololool

Admit it Leo, a lot of your sympathy for the police comes after running this forum

Actually this correct.

You can't appreciate policing until you've personally done some form of it.

The thing about policing that most people don't understand is how relentless it is. The volume is very high. You are handling borderline cases all day long for years. After arresting hundreds of people and dealing with thousands of devils it makes you jaded. You can't handle each case like a snowflake. There are too many devils to treat each one like angle. Devils take advantage of your generosity. You don't shoot one of them, and he stabs you in the back with a knife.

20 minutes ago, SerpaeTetra said:

One police reform could be to use a shoot-to-wound policy  in some cases like these.  With an officer behind him, and knowing the suspect didn't have another weapon (they already frisked him), I think he could have shot him in the ass or leg.  Cops in the US are always trained to shoot-to-stop the threat; usually multiple shots in the chest or back (which often results in death).  This would of course require more marksmanship training. 

I agree this could be improved upon. Like, don't shoot in the chest or head unless he has a loaded gun. But then again, if a criminal was shooting a tazer at me, I would shoot him in the chest. That's a serious threat. It is the height of arrogance to steal a cop's tazer and use it against him. You thereby practically leave him no choice but you shoot you. That tazer was the cop's humane tool to arrest you with.

[Onemanwolfpac]

2 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Lots of police-bashing these days. And I agree that reforms are necessary to expunge systemic racism.

But also consider why this issue is much more complicated than it seems. Try to appreciate the challenges of policing drunk, crazy, and criminal people.

This video shows the challenges: two cops armed with a taser are still not able to successfully arrest 1 guy.

In my mind, if you resist arrest, steal a cop's taser, run away, and then fire his taser at him. Yeah... you should expect to be shot.

Exactly. If I was in America particularly where insanity is going on, I wouldn't hesitate to use a gun. It sucks too. I am reading Path to God by Ram Dass and I wouldn't hesitate if my life or the life of my family was in danger. 

[Forestluv]

30 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

I agree this could be improved upon. Like, don't shoot in the chest or head unless he has a loaded gun. But then again, if a criminal was shooting a tazer at me, I would shoot him in the chest. That's a serious threat. It is the height of arrogance to steal a cop's tazer and use it against him. You thereby practically leave him no choice but you shoot you. That tazer was the cop's humane tool to arrest you with.

And what would you do if you were a non-criminal and an armed predator wanted to abuse and kidnap you? I would grab the predator’s tazer, run like hell and use the taser against him.

I get your point about how good cops have to deal with shitty dangerous people/situations everyday and become jaded. I couldn’t do it. Yet I think you may be underestimating the corruption in police departments and how it is reasonable for noncriminal young black inner city males to see police officers as predators they need to defend themselves against. 

The situation reminds me somewhat of Medellin, Colombia. The police there have to deal with a lot of criminals and dangerous situations and are jaded. The locals in the city only partially trusted the police since they were so corrupt. They warned me to be cautious of the police, yet it’s better to trust the police over the mafia and criminals.

Below is an example of how hard it is to be a good cop in a corrupt system:

 

[Leo Gura]

26 minutes ago, Serotoninluv said:

And what would you do if you were a non-criminal and an armed predator wanted to abuse and kidnap you? I would grab the predator’s tazer, run like hell and use the taser against him.

You ain't gonna fight the cops with a tazer. In this case you let yourself get arrested and deal with the aftermath.

I have yet to see videos of cops killing people who surrender without a struggle. Such cases are very rare and would deserve severe punishment for the cop.

Quote

Yet I think you may be underestimating the corruption in police departments and how it is reasonable for noncriminal young black inner city males to see police officers as predators they need to defend themselves against.

I agree that police culture is very self-serving, as we see with police unions who defend their own unconditionally in a self-biased manner. This should be reformed and improved.

Any predatory behavior must be reformed. But I think 99% of cops cannot be reasonably called predators or kidnappers. But then again I ain't black and my experiences with police are not from the ghetto. How it works in a ghetto, I dunno.

[Forestluv]

16 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

I have yet to see videos of cops killing people who surrender without a struggle. Such cases are very rare and would deserve severe punishment for the cop.

Part of the problem with that is there is an unfair justice system. What if I’m in a situation in which I have a prior drunk driving arrest and received a disproportionately severe prison sentence. Cops and the justice system are against me. If I get caught drunk in my car, the consequences are disproportionately stacked against me. If I surrender, I’m not going to get a fair shake and I’m going back to the damn prison. That factors into my response of wether I surrender or not.

This is why fairness and trust is so important. Every unfair police encounter and unfair judicial decision breaks the social contract of trust. 

16 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

But then again I ain't black and my experiences with police are not from the ghetto. How it works in a ghetto, I dunno.

Have you ever lived in a society in which you didn’t perceive the police force as being on your side? Rather than protecting you, you perceived them as threatening and to be avoided? I experienced this when I lived in Colombia. It’s a very different dynamic. 

 

[Leo Gura]

10 minutes ago, Serotoninluv said:

Part of the problem with that is an unfair justice system. What if I’m in a situation in which I have a prior drunk driving arrest and received a disproportionately severe prison sentence. Cops and the justice system are against me. If I get caught drunk in my car, the consequences are disproportionately stacked against me. I’m not going to get a fair shake and I could go back to the damn prison for this. That factors into my response.  

Yes, of course. I totally get that. If you're in poverty you cannot even afford to pay a speeding ticket.

- - - - - - -

More regarding that Rational National video:

We have to recognize that those who are given power are likely to abuse that power. So like the Standford prison experiment showed, people put in positions of power over "criminals" are likely to abuse it. That is a problem deeper than racism.

How do you stop cops from wielding power in a bullying way when they are upset? That's not easy to do. Remember, cops are human and they have egos. If you piss them off, yeah, they will crack your skull just for the satisfaction of it.

It's very difficult to train a cop to be totally fair and neutral, especially under stressful conditions. Being a cop is harder than being a judge. A judge can be neutral in the comfort of his office and high chair. A cop has to be on the streets dealing with punks and idiots all day long. Imagine a judge trying to be neutral while the defendant is spitting in his face and calling him names. The courtroom has the luxury of decorum. And even so, judges are human too and they are not always neutral.

The general problem here is: How do you train highly conscious people who are given lots of power? Any given cop or judge can only be as good and uncorrupted as his level of consciousness and development allows.

[Epikur]

3 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

 

How do you stop cops from wielding power in a bullying way when they are upset? That's not easy to do. Remember, cops are human and they have egos. If you piss them off, yeah, they will crack your skull just for the satisfaction of it.

One thing to consider is that "nice" people don't want to be cops because the working environment is so harsh. I guess if they have to do it in a rich and peaceful neighborhood they would do it. 

So because of limited ressources and manpower people with higher sadistic level might taken in to the force. Comparable to the military. 

As long the country is faced with crime these people with some dark triad might be needed. Ideally we could change the society quickly and don't need them. Still we are not seem to be able to do it in a efficient manner without problematic sideffects.



 

[Leo Gura]

5 minutes ago, Epikur said:

"nice" people don't want to be cops because the working environment is so harsh.

That's a big part of it.

Cops are self-selected to be more tough-guys than the general population, in the same way that bouncers are selected to be huge dudes. The average person cannot become a bouncer.

If you observe a lot of cops, you'll see that they even share some physical body characteristics. They have a more alpha appearance than the general population. An LSD-taking hippie is not gonna apply to be a cop. Cops needs to be law-and-order types.

Oh, wait! Maybe that's the solution! 10 mandatory trips of LSD for all cops!  

[Epikur]

10 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

 

Oh, wait! Maybe that's the solution! 10 mandatory trips of LSD for all cops!  

That would be great if that would be so easy. The more "nicer" they become the more they want to quit the job I guess.

Yes bouncers and police are quite comparable. Additionally there is a gratification loop there. These alpha chads seem to get the hotties who like the "alpha" guys. The more they do the job the more addicted they get to the powertrips and girls I guess. Later the habits are to strong to change.

Naval Ravikant says we all have to become scientists. It is a nice idea. I wonder if there is something to it.



 

[Leo Gura]

8 minutes ago, Epikur said:

That would be great if that would be so easy. The more "nicer" they become the more they want to quit the job I guess.

That's the catch-22. The more conscious you become the less willing you will be to fill roles requiring low consciousness to succeed in them.

Quote

Naval Ravikant says we all have to become scientists. It is a nice idea. I wonder if there is something to it.

That's totally foolish as not all people have the personality type suited to succeed in science. And if everyone became a scientist who would fill all the other roles?

Mankind's strength comes from our ability to specialize into roles.

[Epikur]

12 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

That's the catch-22. The more conscious you become the less willing you will be to fill roles requiring low consciousness to succeed in them.

That's totally foolish as not all people have the personality type suited to succeed in science. And if everyone became a scientist who would fill all the other roles?

I guess it might be a brainwashing with training people with scientific methods and or make it like a religion. Pythagoras seems to have created a pseudo scientific mystic cult.

It reminds me of the programming of the children in asia. Hundreds of millions of poor became middle class. 

When I was a kid my hero was Galileo Galilei that kind of gave me a role model. Even if I could not become a scientist I could think partly like one. So I was able to think more rational than emotional.

I think that was the way till the first world war till the wars happened and people lost their orientation a bit afterwards. 

Discipline, hard work, science may go against our nature that might be a problem. Biologically we are too much still primitiv animals.

But maybe there is a way. Gamification is one great hope. The quality of apps gets so much better. Apps like duolingo to learn languages for example.











 

Edited June 15, 2020 by Epikur

[electroBeam]

30 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

That's the catch-22. The more conscious you become the less willing you will be to fill roles requiring low consciousness to succeed in them.

There's a difference between being low conscious and being ruthless or tough.

some sages are pretty fucken ruthless. I've heard of some scary stories from some indian gurus and also Jesus. 

[electroBeam]

17 minutes ago, Husseinisdoingfine said:

Do you think the United States will end?

My dad is a trump supporter/fan of breitbart news, he's been saying 'the world's finished' since I was a kid, 'germany is finished now that merkel let in all the black cunts', 'the US is finished', etc. 

And you know he's right, he's exactly right, because what's finished is his worldview. But he confuses his worldview for reality.

So when you say will the united states end, what you're actually asking is will your worldview end? 

There is no united states in reality, just whatever ideas you've projected. There is no 'end' either, that's all made up. 

Your version of the united states will probably end, yes. If it hasn't already. 

Edited June 15, 2020 by electroBeam

[Preety_India]

Leo, 

(just one reply from me on this thread and no more, because it's just common sense so I don't need to reply over and over) 

I completely disagree with you on this. The video you have shown in your post is not a case of proper policing. I discussed this issue with my American boyfriend yesterday and he is a white guy and he doesn't come from a ghetto. He absolutely agreed that it wasn't okay to shoot the guy. In fact he was the one to show me the same video yesterday. 

You don't need to actually come from a ghetto to actually understand someone from there. You need basic empathy to understand people better. With empathy you can put yourself in their shoes and visualize how it feels to be treated like them. 

This black man was a sturdy guy who had immense strength. Those 2 white officers were completely unprepared to handle this guy on their own. You would need a minimum of 6 white police officers to handle such a guy. So the police department was under staffed to deal with such a situation. If there are more police officers they wouldn't be so stressed out. The responsibilities would be divided into lot of people. 

Now the main context. This person was running away with a taser. There is no requirement for them to shoot this person. They can arrest him the next day. If they have a person running away from them, then they just have to let them go.. 

Now see how I can dig holes in your argument. 

Look at the police in other countries. Police in my country for example. Here the police is very under staffed and the criminals always run away. What do the police do? They come back the next day and catch them. That's hard work that these American cops do not wish to do. They are impatient and full of toxic pride. The black guy ran away. Maybe that hurt the pride of the cop because they couldn't get him so maybe they shot him to get their job done. At least that's how I see this situation. 

Consider this situation a bit tilted and changed. Imagine that it's not a black man in this same situation. But a pregnant black woman. Let's say they are trying to overpower her and she somehow grabbed the taser and is now running away. Would the cops still shoot her??  The danger that they have to face from this black man holding a taser is the same danger that they will face from the pregnant black woman holding a taser. But they most likely wouldn't shoot her and let her go. Out of sympathy for her being pregnant. So why would they shoot this guy?? 

Because it's probably much easier to shoot a black man than any other race or gender. 

Would they shoot a kid who is running away with a taser? 

This is where your theory falls completely apart. 

The perceived sense of danger is only a perceived sense of danger. Remember when you sign up for being a cop, you sign up for all sorts of dangers, mainly danger to life. 

You can't sign up for the military and expect not to get killed. You can't sign up to be a cop and not expect to be killed in line of duty. 

This is their duty. Their duty is not to arrest people dead. But to arrest them alive. 

Police duty is not as hard as you make it out to be. It is hard only and only in the US. It is hard in other countries as well but guess what people don't end up dead at the hands of the police. 

You have to be glad that this is the US and this shit is allowed under your constitution and people aren't fighting enough. If this was happening in Saudi Arabia and India or any other non European country, the police would have been immediately disbanded because these countries don't tolerate such brutal violence, that's why we don't have guns and that's why we don't have a gun culture. 

I will give you a good reason why your police is so agressive in their actions. 

First reason is that United States has such a ridiculous gun culture that doesn't exist in any country in the world. This should probably be a good clue that guns are just bad. Communities have to live in basic decency and not in constant fear and mistrust of each other. Otherwise it should be called a tribal community, like yours, and such communities are not sustainable, because they will lead to a lot of chaos out of sheer fear and paranoia, just like your country is witnessing right now. 

Second reason is that your constitution just allows all of this violence from the cops. In other countries there are procedures for arrests, and by constitution they are not supposed to kill a person even if it meant letting him go. And this applies to severe criminals as well. Police strictly follow these procedures or they will be indicted for murder. Other countries are fully aware that police can abuse power if power is absolutely concentrated in their hands. That's why they don't let the police make absolute decisions. The fact that your police officers can decide between life and death during an arrest (and they aren't arresting Ted Bundy or El Chapo or Pablo Escobar in this case, just a regular arrest of a criminal)  then it goes to show how much power has been placed in the hands of the cops, given that America is touted as the greatest democracy, the land of the brave and free, this is laughable. Freedom should not come at the cost of someone's death. Total power in the hands of the cop is the opposite of Freedom and Liberty. 

Third reason is - absolutely zero respect for the rights of the citizen. Understand that with or without a constitution, by human law, a person has the basic right to life. Even a doctor cannot decide to end the life of the terminally ill and such a request to end the life is then surrendered to the family members to finally make the decision. The Right to Life is the most important of all rights and can be compromised only in the situation of self defense. In the case of a cop, self defense situations are arising every day. Doesn't mean that he can simply kill everyone who he perceives as a threat. A cop can use a gun when the criminal is armed, not with a taser, but with a gun, and when the criminal is actually using the gun.. The perception that someone might shoot you is just a perception, a paranoia. This is why police training is done. Police training means training the police to accurately gauge which situation is deadly and which situation is not. To understand the difference between a real threat and a perceived threat. Nobody needs such a training more than a cop. They have to know exactly when to pull the gun. This will substantially reduce the trigger happy behavior. 

Killing a person on the spot instead of letting him go is a clear violation of that person's Right to Life. That basically means violation of human rights. 

You cannot simply kill a person just because you perceived a threat. Understand that even a normal citizen, when they kill a person out of a perceived fear, have to face 2nd degree murder charges unless they are able to prove that self defense was absolutely necessary /justified. In case of cops, these rules will have to be fine tuned even further because they can have a greater probability of escaping criminal charges by simply claiming self defense. 

You are not focusing on the root of the problem but only on band-aid solutions. 

I agree with what @electroBeamsaid in this thread. People need to feel safer, their basic needs must be met, they shouldn't have to feel they are going to be discriminated, poverty has to be reduced, less systemic problems, people need to be treated better and not like shit, there has to be compassion and only then people will feel safer around the police and they will be less likely to resist and less likely to fear a cop. 

Also you constantly kept saying in some other threads that these are rare occurrences in the US out of thousands of arrests. Doesn't look very rare to me given that just a few weeks ago George Floyd was killed and now this incident in Atlanta. 

You have come to accept the American culture as the standard culture because you think that you know better when you don't know better which is a typical American mentality. Self righteousness is their creed. 

Do you understand that you are normalizing something that is very abnormal. Because you have been raised in the United States and you have gotten so used to it. Maybe live in some other culture, live in Europe, South America or Australia or India and see the difference for yourself? Nobody is carrying a gun here and nobody fears a cop. Nobody fears their neighbor either. 

You should thank your Gods that these people are only resisting arrest. If people completely turn against the police, they will openly shoot the police on sight, simply out of fear, this can easily become deadly, and for this nobody will be more responsible than your cops that you are defending. 

 

 The USA needs a notice or warning from the United Nations Human Rights Commission for clear violation of human rights using cops as a guise. It's not acceptable on international guidelines of policing or treatment of citizens. 

 

Edited June 15, 2020 by Preety_India

[Forestluv]

2 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Yes, of course. I totally get that. If you're in poverty you cannot even afford to pay a speeding ticket.

It’s not just being in poverty. There is also the unfairness part. If there is a 20% chance I will be maltreated and not get a fair shake in the judicial system, the calculus changes. 

In NYC, there were thousands of “stop and frisks” - the vast majority of them against inner city black and brown young men. And the vast majority were non criminals without a weapon. (I think it was 94%). And many of them were brought into the station for hours and kept in a small crowded room. Most were likely released without charge, yet a proportion had to to deal with disproportionate attention to minor infractions. This degrades the social contract of trust. If I was in a poor neighborhood in NYC and was approached for a frisk, I would 100% surrender to it. It’s a no brainer. I’m not carrying a weapon. I know the officer will not use excessive force or bring me into the station. I know the police department won’t comb though my history looking for any infractions they can exploit. I 100% submit because I trust the police to be fair and do the right thing. . .  Yet if I am a young noncriminal, unarmed young black male in NYC, the calculus changes. It’s no longer a 100% no-brainer surrender decision. If the cop is far enough away and didn’t see my face, I may run away. If I’m close to a place I can hide and know he won’t find me, I may go for it. And I’m not running because I did anything wrong. I’m running because there is a decent chance I’m going to get maltreated and have to deal with a bunch of crap I don’t deserve. 

2 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

We have to recognize that those who are given power are likely to abuse that power. So like the Standford prison experiment showed, people put in positions of power over "criminals" are likely to abuse it. That is a problem deeper than racism.

How do you stop cops from wielding power in a bullying way when they are upset? That's not easy to do. Remember, cops are human and they have egos. If you piss them off, yeah, they will crack your skull just for the satisfaction of it.

And that abuse of power is not limited to the incident. It creates a toxic relationship between police and community. More cops will be perceived as predators than the number of actual predatory cops. Uncertainty of whether you can trust police officers in your community is a toxic dynamic.

When I was in Honduras and Colombia, there were places I didn’t know if I could trust the police officers. That changes the calculus. I avoided the police and always tried to be respectful so I didn’t stick out or piss them off. Yet there were a couple times, the option of running was on the table. And not because I didn’t anything wrong. There was a small chance of getting harassed, having to deal with a bunch of crap I didn’t deserve and paying a fine for some stupid infraction they made up. 

Police officers must have a certain amount of toughness to deal with criminals. I wouldn’t want a bunch of hippie cops that get run over by criminals. And I’m not trying to suggest that the majority of cops are predators or the majority of police departments are corrupt or the majority of the judicial system is unfair. Yet there is enough to cross a threshold of breaking social trust for a lot of people.