Policing Is Hard Work

[Forestluv]

49 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

 

He makes a couple points I hadn’t considered and I agree with a lot of what he says. I would even add in another point in support of the cops. In particular, I like how he didn’t just say “It’s police policy”. Rather, he described the rationale of why it was an appropriate response.

— I don’t think there was a racial element during the initial interactions. I’ve been in similar situations and the police treated me very similarly. Here, the cops seemed very professional and respectful. 

— I agree with the officer that this is not a good example of police brutality or racial targeting. This goes into another category and using it as an example of police brutality and racial targeting by protestors is counter-productive for the immediate cause.

— In general, liberals SUCK at messaging. This is not the case to use to message for restructuring police departments. As well, “Defund the Police” is an awful message slogan. What they are calling for isn’t even “defunding” the police. Liberals are sooo good at snatching away defeat from the jaws of victory. . . 

— I’m impressed that CNN is telling this side of the story and educating their viewers. CNN is often criticized for being one-sided and it’s nice to see them air this view. 

— The officer stated that a cop does not want to be on the ground in a wrestling match - their life is in danger. Here, I actually think the cops showed restraint. They yelled at the guy and warned him they would taze him if he didn’t stop. To me, this is restraint and giving the guy another opportunity to comply. 

— I did not know that a taser paralyzes a person for five seconds. That makes a taser more powerful than I originally thought. However, I’ve read that a police taser can only repel a person up to 20ft. It looked like the guy was about 20ft away and I don’t know if it is as effective at that distance. 

— I have mixed feeling about his statements that if the cop didn’t shoot him, it would send a message to black youth that they can run away from cops without consequence. I think there is some truth to this in today’s environment, yet I also think there is another issue at play. There is also the issue that a lot of noncriminal minority inner city youth do not trust police or the justice system. Many have been unfairly treated for minor infractions such as cannabis possession in the “War on Crime”. And they’ve seen it in their peers. Imagine if “complying” means that you go to prison for a year on a minor infraction. That’s the other side of the coin. The idea of “You shouldn’t run away from a cop” doesn’t hold as much weight for non criminals or petty offenses if complying with the cop means unfair draconian consequences. . . If I had a dime bag of weed and was approached by a cop and feared that I would lose my job, go to prison and lose my chance at a decent career over cannabis possession, the calculus changes. It’s no longer as simple as “just comply with the cop”. And if I ran from the cop, it’s not completely fair to charge for a second crime and add an extra year to the prison sentence. My life is Donzo at this point. 

When the consequences are extremely over-severe for the infraction, it’s a different dynamic. 

[Godhead]

4 hours ago, Raze said:

@Godhead

In 2018 Germany had 901 murders, and the USA had over 16,000. The rate of Germany's police killings is irrelevant, look at the size of Germany's population and amount of murders compared to America's. There are more violent criminals in America so the police kill more often. 

Iraq and Sudan have higher homicide rates and are still doing better.

Even if you adjust all the numbers to make everything equal (adjust the numbers so population doesn't make a difference and "act" as if Germany had the same amount of murders) America is still doing ~8x worse than Germany. I don't get why many (not all) of you guys don't see a problem in this and try to justify needless killings by saying policing is tough. I'm all for seeing both points of view, but shouldn't a society point out wrongdoing so it can be made better? Am I missing something here?   

[AtheisticNonduality]

30 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Some keyboard jockey who has never policed anything in his life thinks that he knows how to do policing better than a sheriff with 20 years experience? No way.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority

[Danioover9000]

@Leo Gura

58 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

 

   This adds to the other video as well. From what I saw, the officer during the struggle warned the suspect that he'll use a taser, and the suspect still resists. If they only had some form of ground combat training, they really could've immobilized him. I can't remember the exact video, but it showed two London/ European officers being man-handled by a resisting guy either high on drugs or something else, but those officers could've easily joint-locked the guy into submission.

[Preety_India]

5 hours ago, Raze said:

You don't understand how dangerous the situation is, a taser shot at you by a drunk person can result in death, paralysis, losing an eye, a cop cannot allow themselves

Okay. You made a lot of good points and I am convinced now that a cop has the right to defend himself against a taser. But if the taser is so dangerous, wouldn't it do the same thing (that you mentioned) to the drunk person as well. How is using a taser on him justified. Why shouldn't he defend himself if he is fears injury from the police officers or worse death. Because George Floyd had died just a few days ago during an arrest even while being handcuffed. Obviously this creates a fear of death in a person who is being arrested. That would clearly motivate him to resist and run away. 

Let's say I knew that cops killed people in my place while arresting them, even when people didn't resist, what are the chances that I won't resist. I think zero. Because the moment they decided to arrest me, I would instantly fear for my life. 

So you need to look at it from both sides. 

I understand that the cop has the right to defend himself. But so does the guy.. 

The cop can't have it both ways. You can't use tazing and deadly force while arresting 

Why don't people resist arrests in my city? Because the cops don't use deadly force while arresting. Nobody dies during an arrest. If they resist they are chased again. There is backup ordered. But nobody is killed. So there is no incentive to resist arrest. They are better off going along with the cop instead of an endless chase and landing in the jail at the end of it. They know they won't win when backup arrives. So they simply surrender right away. But they never attack a cop because a cop never attacks them in the first place. 

So you see how this is a vicious cycle. I agree with a lot of what you said and now after watching some videos about tasers I realize the cops fears. But look at it the way from the suspect's perspective. 

If you constantly use deadly force on people even while  they are resisting, this can create a vicious fear cycle between the cops and the criminals or suspects. Resisting an arrest is no big deal, the cops can work harder on tactics to get a person in control during a resistance, why not backup? 

How are two people enough to handle one guy? You would need two people on each arm to bring a person in control. 

Now I have some interesting points here that need to be considered while going meta on this issue, 

First is that the cops in my city are already assuming that the suspect is going to resist. It's just the way it goes. So don't think of it as unnatural or provoking. This consider it as a normal human reaction for a suspect to take off in order to hide from the police. So the police in my city will always ask for backup if they have to make an arrest, that is before arresting. This makes their job very easy and smooth and they don't need to use deadly force, they don't want to use to begin with. We as a culture don't like violence so the cops are never trying to escalate things with violence. As a result there is an inherent trust between the public and the cops. 

Now if I apply the same situation to the US, it doesn't apply.. One thing that I observed is that its very easy to call backup in my country because criminals are extremely few and rare, so they usually arrest once in blue moon and so a lot of the force is simply sitting idle and backup is a good option for them to offer some service. 

This is not the case in the US. There are too many criminals, more than the police can handle. So how many places are you gonna call for backup? It will be impossible for backup to meet the arrest needs of the day with so many people getting arrested in just a single day 

The number of people getting arrested in a single day in the United States is the number of people getting arrested in my country for a year. So you can see how easy it is for the cops here. They have absolutely no stress. Half the time they are sleeping because they have no arrests to be made. 

Now if you look deeply into the problem, you will realize that a lot of these problems are incentivised by guns alone. 

Take the example of my country. No guns. What are the chances that a new criminal can get a gun. Very few. Because an old criminal wouldn't want to give his guns since he himself got them with great difficulty. There is a problem with the distribution of guns in a place where guns are not allowed at all. This makes the job of the criminal much harder. 

In US, there are more guns than people so it's much easier for criminals to get their hands on gun. Getting a gun is like getting sugar 

Now an analogy to explain how guns complicate the issue of fighting criminals 

Now imagine in the picture below  that a blue fish is a fish that carries a gun. 

Look at the picture. If I tell you to spot a blue fish you can easily do that. Because it's easy to spot a blue fish in this picture. 

This is the only fish that has a gun and it's  so easy to spot it. 

 

 

But in this picture, you can't spot a blue fish because all fishes are blue. Here all fishes have guns. 

 

 

In a society with no guns, the only persons who need guns will be criminals and that would make the job of the system much easier to locate criminals. But in a society where everyone has a gun, it is very difficult to know who the real culprit is. 

My point is that the swamp needs to be drained of guns completely. Obviously I understand that removing guns from the US is a monumental task. But this will be the first step towards isolating and targeting a population of criminals. 

Since everyone has a gun, the cops are more likely to use lethal force even on normal citizens who don't have criminal intent or history. That was my point.

This only fuels and creates a vicious cycle of violence and more violence and more incentives to resist arrests. 

 

[Onemanwolfpac]

44 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Some keyboard jockey who has never policed anything in his life thinks that he knows how to do policing better than a sheriff with 20 years experience? No way.

Strong post. I agree. 

There's too many snowflakes, Internet tough guys, and neck beards with opinion on a subject matter with zero life experience. The amount of people applying to the job is going to be miniscule. I saw a girl cop get rag dolled worse then my childhood ultimate warrior stuffy. It really put affirmative in checkmate. And for 60k? The bar for policing is going down the toilet. Its not perfect now. 

Jocko on JRE mad a point about more training and specific life altering scenarios to meet the requirements. The nonsense of affirmative action and quota hirings is not helping. 

The video you posted followed by riots and burning businesses is a example of poor lifestyle choices and a lack fathers in the household. More government intervention is the problem. Not the solution. 

That scene in Matrix with the girl in the red dress comes to mind. 

[Forestluv]

@AtheisticNonduality As an example of the value of different perspectives. Who knows more about police brutality A) An inner-city police officer with 20 years of experience, B) a black inner city poor youth that has 20 years dealing with racial profiling and brutality, C) A white sociology professor with 20 years of researching social dynamics of policing or D) An observer that hasn’t been influenced by any of the factors in (A-C). I would say that each perspective has value and the wisest one’s know the limits of their perspective. For example, it would be silly for the sociology professor to lecture the black youth of what it’s actually like to live in a poor inner city neighborhood and have to deal with police. She doesn’t have the direct experience. 

[AtheisticNonduality]

12 minutes ago, Onemanwolfpac said:

Strong post. I agree. 

There's too many snowflakes, Internet tough guys, and neck beards with opinion on a subject matter with zero life experience.

Brainwash those guys, give them authority and weapons, then set them loose.  Me, as a non-soldier, knows that blowing up a hospital full of orphans in order to make Exxon's stock go up by .0000001% is immoral, but some colonel or general would still say, "Woah there, you don't have any experience whatsoever and have no idea what you're talking about."  If a gang of cops grabbed, cuffed, and transported Leo into a cell for possession of 5-Meo or whatnot, he would find himself in disagreement with the wisdom and 20 year experience of the great and just officers of the law. Authority is not equivalent to being correct.

[Preety_India]

 

Those who are defending cops should also look into police corruption and rampant police abuse and corruption in the Baltimore police department. 

Let's make it fair. It's not all black and white. 

Policing is hard work but policing is also corrupt in many places in the United States. 

Let's not act like the cop system doesn't need reform. 

Practical police reform is absolutely important at this point. 

 

Edited June 16, 2020 by Preety_India

[Raze]

1 hour ago, Godhead said:

Iraq and Sudan have higher homicide rates and are still doing better.

Even if you adjust all the numbers to make everything equal (adjust the numbers so population doesn't make a difference and "act" as if Germany had the same amount of murders) America is still doing ~8x worse than Germany. I don't get why many (not all) of you guys don't see a problem in this and try to justify needless killings by saying policing is tough. I'm all for seeing both points of view, but shouldn't a society point out wrongdoing so it can be made better? Am I missing something here?   

You can't just compare countries like that. Iraq and Sudan are much smaller countries and the police don't have full control there, a lot of criminals literally control areas and do whatever they want. Also they probably have primative reporting, police who work with the gangs and are corrupt, and many of the criminals getting weeded out by the military or rebels. America is a far bigger country than Germany with a far higher crime rate. It's just a different country, America has way more guns available meaning it is far more likely for a fight between a civilian and a cop to turn into a fire fight than in Germany. No one is saying that police brutality and excessive force shouldn't be addressed, but no country in the world would not allow a cop to respond with lethal force if you try to tase them in the face, not even Germany. Just assuming the police are in the wrong by default isn't going to help the problem.

Edited June 16, 2020 by Raze

[Forestluv]

14 minutes ago, Preety_India said:

Okay. You made a lot of good points and I am convinced now that a cop has the right to defend himself against a taser. But if the taser is so dangerous, wouldn't it do the same thing (that you mentioned) to the drunk person as well. How is using a taser on him justified. Why shouldn't he defend himself if he is fears injury from the police officers or worse death. Because George Floyd had died just a few days ago during an arrest even while being handcuffed. Obviously this creates a fear of death in a person who is being arrested. That would clearly motivate him to resist and run away. 

Let's say I knew that cops killed people in my place while arresting them, even when people didn't resist, what are the chances that I won't resist. I think zero. Because the moment they decided to arrest me, I would instantly fear for my life. 

So you need to look at it from both sides. 

I understand that the cop has the right to defend himself. But so does the guy.. 

Why don't people resist arrests in my city? Because the cops don't use deadly force while arresting. Nobody dies during an arrest. If they resist they are chased again. There is backup ordered. But nobody is killed. So there is no incentive to resist arrest. They are better off going along with the cop instead of an endless chase and landing in the jail at the end of it. They know they won't win when backup arrives. So they simply surrender right away. But they never attack a cop because a cop never attacks them in the first place. 

If you constantly use deadly force on people even while  they are resisting, this can create a vicious fear cycle between the cops and the criminals or suspects. Resisting an arrest is no big deal, the cops can work harder on tactics to get a person in control during a resistance, why not backup? 

I think you make some good points about trust and accountability. You bring up a few thoughts in me:

— In the Wendy’s case, they cops did not start off using excessive force. They treated the guy professionally and humanly. Even when he started to fight, the cops tried to restrain him without injuring him. To me, he panicked when those cuffs were about to go on. I don’t know what was going through his mind. To me, there would be no reason to fear that I could get beat by the cops or or get screwed over in a biased justice system. I know the cops will treat me humanly and I will be treated fairly in the justice system. I would actually fair very well in the justice system because I can afford a good lawyer and I have a job that is respected by judges. Since I wasn’t actually driving at the time at my blood alcohol level was barely over the limit, I know I will get off with a slap on the wrist. I was actually in this same situation when I was younger. I fell asleep drunk in my car on the side of the road. Police officers woke me up, just like in the Wendy’s case. I told the cops  “I had a few drinks at a party last night and thought I was ok to drive. Yet I realized that I wasn’t 100% ok to drive. Rather than continuing to drive home or back to the party, I thought it would be more responsible to just pull over, sleep the night and drive back in the morning”. I stressed the word responsible and said it with a humble tone of “given the adverse circumstances I faced, I did the best I could to be responsible”. They actually let me go without even doing a breathalyzer test!! . . . Yet even if they arrested me, I had no reason to resist since I knew I would only get a slap on the wrist. It would be absurd for me to resist.

Yet as you describe, what if the context is different. What if I’m a young black male that lives in an inner-city neighborhood? I know there is a chance they will beat me up and if I comply, I need to be 100% submissive and not give them any trivial reason to beat me up. I got pulled over one time in a city and was searching in my glove compartment for my car registration as the cop approached me. The cop was like “How ya doing tonight? Find that registration yet? I gave it to him and he went back to the cop car. A black friend of mine was in the car and she was shocked. She was like “Oh my god! You can do that?”. I had no idea what she was talking about. She told me that black males in the city put both hands on top of the steering wheel so the police officer can see their hands and they won’t appear as a threat. That never even crossed my mind because I don’t live in that world. . . . For a young inner city black male, the margin of error is much narrower. Even if you are a noncriminal and it’s a minor infraction, you’ve got to be extra careful and complicated to the officer. They chance of getting abused is higher.

Yet in addition to this, there is a good chance as a black inner city black male, you are going to get screwed over in the justice system. And face overly-severe penalties. Imagine being a black youth in NYC during “stop and frisk”. You are a regular noncriminal black male with a little weed on you. You are walking to a friends house to smoke some weed and listen to music. You see a cop. As a black youth, you know that you might get manhandled, yet even if you don’t - when he finds that weed you know you are going to the station, they are going to comb through your record looking for things to exploit and you may serve prison time for cannabis possession and your Donzo.  This is a completely different context than for me. In this context, I can understand running away from the cop. In this context, there would be a very good chance I ran away from the cop. . . 

[Raze]

26 minutes ago, Preety_India said:

Those who are defending cops should also look into police corruption and rampant police abuse and corruption in the Baltimore police department. 

Let's make it fair. It's not all black and white. 

Policing is hard work but policing is also corrupt in many places in the United States. 

Let's not act like the cop system doesn't need reform. 

Practical police reform is absolutely important at this point. 

After the Baltimore riots they put in reforms for the police and now Baltimore's crime rate is the worst it's ever been. I don't know if the reforms caused it, but just because bad things exist does not mean to see things from a lens where the worst is assumed for everything. That just makes the problem worse.

[Preety_India]

@Raze  you have no idea how corrupt the Baltimore police is before blaming the police reform for the spike in crime rates. 

You wouldn't want an overly aggressive police force. 

Aggression and violence never ends well, on whichever side it is. 

A badge doesn't make violence acceptable or without consequences. 

 

 

[Preety_India]

@Raze

@Leo Gura  @Serotoninluv

What are your thoughts on this? 

 

 

[Forestluv]

42 minutes ago, AtheisticNonduality said:

If a gang of cops grabbed, cuffed, and transported Leo into a cell for possession of 5-Meo or whatnot. . . 

People keep leaving out the part about a biased justice system. It’s not just the police treatment. The police treatment could be professional and humane. There is also the justice system. If a white middle class person gets caught with 5-Meo, it’s just a slap on the wrist and a minor penalty, if any penalty at all. Now imagine if a white middle-class person caught with 5-Meo goes to hardcore prison for 5 years after they get screwed over in a corrupt justice system that is biased and incentivized to imprison “dangerous drug criminals” into the prison industrial complex as part of “The War on Drugs”? And cops get extra bonuses for 5-Meo arrests because they are a schedule I drug. The more arrests they make, the better chance they get financial merit bonuses and promotions for their outstanding work on the “War on Drugs”.  And once they are released, they have a felony of possessing a schedule I illegal drug, stigmatized as a drug offender and no longer eligible for things like college loans or lots of jobs. This significantly changes they dynamics. There is now a HUGE incentive to evade getting arrested. And people who use 5-Meo would be throwing a fit. 

[Leo Gura]

1 hour ago, Serotoninluv said:

I did not know that a taser paralyzes a person for five seconds. That makes a taser more powerful than I originally thought.

I have a profressional police taser that fires wired electric darts with a laser sight.

If those darts land, the taser is active for 30 seconds. You will be totally unable to move for 30 seconds and the trigger can be pulled again for another 30 second dose as many times as the battery lasts, and if the darts miss their target the taser can still be used at point blank range.

Profressional tasers are pretty awesome!

In the video you can see the darts flying at the cop.

If any of you creepers get out of hand, your ass is getting tased for at least 30 seconds!

[Forestluv]

7 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

I have a profressional police taser that fires wired electric darts.

If those darts land, the taser is active for 30 seconds. You will be totally unable to move for 30 seconds and the trigger can be pulled again for another 30 second dose as many times are the battery lasts, and if the darts miss their target the taser can still be used at point blank range.

That is more damaging than I was aware of. So, they guy was firing a fairly serious weapon. It’s not like it was a slingshot or BB gun. 

Can they leave any lasting damage?

[Leo Gura]

https://buy.taser.com/products/taser-pulse-plus

I don't think it leaves lasting damage unless the darts maybe hit you in the face.

But certainly if the cop is running at full speed and he gets tased, he will take a nasty tumble on the pavement. Could possibly crack your skull open.

[Forestluv]

6 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

https://buy.taser.com/products/taser-pulse-plus

I don't think it leaves lasting damage unless the darts maybe hit you in the face.

That looks like a good option for someone that wants some home protection, yet doesn’t want to have a gun in the house. 

[AtheisticNonduality]

12 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

 

If any of you creepers get out of hand, your ass is getting tased for at least 30 seconds!

You can't tase all of us. I say, the next time Leo becomes a cop and attacks unarmed black people, we should throw a riot in his house. "No please."