Policing Is Hard Work

[Consept]

2 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

But the point is, piloting can be done by a computer. Policing cannot.

That analogy fundamentally misunderstands the challenges of policing. It cannot be done algorithmically. And the pilot's life is not in danger by the passengers. The pilot wants to not fly into mountains precisely because it aligns with his survival. A cop being nice to criminals is dangerous to his survival.

If drunk people broke into the cockpit on a regular basis, pilots would shoot them.

Yeah but when cops do legitimately fuck up, their colleagues cover for them, i very much doubt that of the 1000 police killings every year since 2005 there are only 35 'bad apples' (cops convicted). If a pilot crashed because he was drunk and his co-pilot and traffic controllers covered for him that would be a bit insane, might happen though who knows

[Onemanwolfpac]

22 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

But the point is, piloting can be done by a computer. Policing cannot.

That analogy fundamentally misunderstands the challenges of policing. It cannot be done algorithmically. And the pilot's life is not in danger by the passengers. The pilot wants to not fly into mountains precisely because it aligns with his survival. A cop being nice to criminals is dangerous to his survival.

If drunk people broke into the cockpit on a regular basis, pilots would shoot them.

I 100% agree. 

The video i posted ITT and another shows activist on the victim card do a 180 after stepping out into the cops world in a scenario. 33.333333% success rate in an arrest + 67.7777% failure rate where he shoots a civilian or gets killed. Its very telling. 

It doesn't mean retraining is not important. It means, sheep should apply, and show everyone how its done instead of the victim card SJW rhetoric. 

[Onemanwolfpac]

18 minutes ago, Consept said:

Yeah but when cops do legitimately fuck up, their colleagues cover for them, i very much doubt that of the 1000 police killings every year since 2005 there are only 35 'bad apples' (cops convicted). If a pilot crashed because he was drunk and his co-pilot and traffic controllers covered for him that would be a bit insane, might happen though who knows

I don't disagree but NOTE, the narrative is police bad not less crime in the community. I think everyone can do better. If i was a cop (i am. Not and i wouldn't be), i am going home to My family. I will do part to avoid a point of discharging my weapon BUT, again, if it comes down to me getting shot or shooting, there's no hesitation. I don't care if people burn down the city. It's irrelevant to the scenario and those people should be jailed.

Stun gun used on cops and two cops assaulted before bud is shot dead. The narrative is victim card. When we have seen his criminal record. The narrative is ridiculous painting him as a Saint when he is a criminal. 

[Preety_India]

 

I can't make my mind on whose life is more important, the cop or the criminal. It's like a zero sum game, one has to die for the other to live. 

But there is this thought in my mind that in absolute sense, all lives are equal, both the cop and the criminal. 

Obviously there are more advantages if the cop lives. Therefore a cop will always have the upper hand 

The question really is how many deaths of criminals per cop should be allowed before the survival of the cop becomes unreasonable 

 

I think when you have a license to either kill or defend, you should be held at a higher standards of accountability and accuracy in judgement over a criminal

 

 

Edited June 22, 2020 by Preety_India

[Onemanwolfpac]

16 minutes ago, Preety_India said:

 

I can't make my mind on whose life is more important, the cop or the criminal. It's like a zero sum game, one has to die for the other to live. 

 

Lol. Become a cop. I'll bump this. 

The argument for better policing is ideal but LOTS of communities especially democratic states need to be better. 

[Preety_India]

 

3 minutes ago, Onemanwolfpac said:

Lol. Become a cop. I'll bump this. 

The argument for better policing is ideal but LOTS of communities especially democratic states need to be better. 

The difference between you and me is that you are looking at things from a rational perspective, which I can do as well if I wanted. 

However I'm looking at things from a meta, turquoise perspective, an absolute perspective, which can clash with your pragmatic rational perspective. 

Here nobody can be truly right or wrong. 

I understand your need to ridicule me but if you look at it from my perspective, it will make sense to you. 

 

[Yog]

A story about riots, looting, politics and policing work in the greatest and most advanced city the world has ever seen. Over the life of two men.
 

 

[Consept]

46 minutes ago, Onemanwolfpac said:

I don't disagree but NOTE, the narrative is police bad not less crime in the community. I think everyone can do better. If i was a cop (i am. Not and i wouldn't be), i am going home to My family. I will do part to avoid a point of discharging my weapon BUT, again, if it comes down to me getting shot or shooting, there's no hesitation. I don't care if people burn down the city. It's irrelevant to the scenario and those people should be jailed.

Stun gun used on cops and two cops assaulted before bud is shot dead. The narrative is victim card. When we have seen his criminal record. The narrative is ridiculous painting him as a Saint when he is a criminal. 

Forget the narrative, what im talking about is applying the law to everyone. If a civilian commits a crime (providing their not connected to the police or someone powerful) theyll get arrested if the evidence is there. If a police officer commits a crime he'll most likely get off, this is endemic in the police and its not to say police are bad, because its human nature to protect your 'tribe'. However their tribe is the only one that can be above the law of which they are supposed to uphold, and of course people are going to feel that that is unfair and so you will get the reaction from the public because people rightfully dont feel that the police are on their side or are there to help them, especially if they kill people illegally and get away with it. I mean its literally only 2 or 3 that get convicted despite 1000 shootings a year, 100 or so involving an unarmed suspect, i dont know how that can foster trust.

[Forestluv]

45 minutes ago, Onemanwolfpac said:

The argument for better policing is ideal but LOTS of communities especially democratic states need to be better. 

In terms of demographics, it’s not so much about “democratic states”. It’s more about rural vs urban and why uban areas are locally in democratic hands. For example, Georgia is conservative republican at the state level and very conservative republican in rural areas. Yet urban areas, like Atlanta, are democratic. Georgia has conservative republicans at the state level and more liberal democrats at the urban level. 

Urban areas are liberal (democrats) than rural areas, because they are far more complex. Conservatives would be much worse in managing urban areas. It’s not fair to criticize urban problems as being democrat, since it would be worse under conservative (republican) management. There is a reason Trump’s rhetoric and actions are inflaming urban tensions. He has a conservative mindset of the 1960s and that isn’t going to work within urban areas in the 2020s. 

It would be like a janitor criticizing a calculus professor when his student’s perform poorly on a national math exam. It could be that the calculus professor is average and needs improvement, yet it would be silly for a janitor to take over the job. For the calculus professor to improve, he needs constructive criticism from above, not from below. 

[Forestluv]

36 minutes ago, Consept said:

Forget the narrative, what im talking about is applying the law to everyone. If a civilian commits a crime (providing their not connected to the police or someone powerful) theyll get arrested if the evidence is there. If a police officer commits a crime he'll most likely get off, this is endemic in the police and its not to say police are bad, because its human nature to protect your 'tribe'. However their tribe is the only one that can be above the law of which they are supposed to uphold, and of course people are going to feel that that is unfair and so you will get the reaction from the public because people rightfully dont feel that the police are on their side or are there to help them, especially if they kill people illegally and get away with it. I mean its literally only 2 or 3 that get convicted despite 1000 shootings a year, 100 or so involving an unarmed suspect, i dont know how that can foster trust.

The unfair part is a major issue for those on the wrong side of the unfairness, yet not so much for people that are insulated from the unfairness. For example, my parents are insulated from the unfairness. They are white upper-middle class that live in a safe affluent neighboorhood in a safe affluent town. Imagine that a cop in NYC is caught planting drugs on a black youth in an inner city. My parents would see this as wrong and that the cop shouldn’t have done it. Yet to my parents, it’s something “out there”. They have the perspective of watching a TV show from a safe distance. It doesn’t affect them. They would probably even soften the crime with things like “well, the kid probably did a crime anyway and law enforcement needed the drugs for a conviction by a liberal judge. The cop shouldn’t have done it, yet I can see why he would”. . .Or “maybe it was a misunderstanding. The cop may have seized drugs from another person and mixed them up”. They would be quick to make excuses for a cop committing a crime, yet slow to make excuses for a black youth committing a crime.  As well, they would be quick to accept any excuse the police give, yet very skeptical of any excuse black youths give. This situation would be perceived very differently by people that actually live in that inner city neighboorhood. Being a noncriminal and getting stopped and frisked as a target of “The War on Drugs” is bad enough, yet if a cop planted drugs on a community member and got away with it - that elevates things to a whole nother level. It breaks the social contract of trust and creates a highly toxic dynamic between police and community members. 

[remember]

On 23.6.2020 at 0:32 AM, Leo Gura said:

But the point is, piloting can be done by a computer. Policing cannot.

 

lol - i don’t know if i would rather trust a human pilot or a computer, that’s probably the reason why in a human plane a human is the person who flies not the airplane. if flying was not as safe as it is today and pilots would crash into mountains like what happened with that i think remembering it was germanwings plane/pilot whole crew +passengers, people would probably not fly much anymore. whereas people would probably not stop getting involved in difficult situations anymore or stopp committing minor crimes because the cops are not doing self reflective self assessing work, or being tested on their psychological capacity, it’s definitely not because their weapons are constructed faulty so you couldn’t say it’s exactly a technical issue as well, maybe you could give them automated weapons.

Edited June 23, 2020 by remember

[Leo Gura]

To be fair, if every cop cost $100 million dollars to build/train, then they would probably be as good at policing as computers are at flying planes.

This is what you really want

But even so, there's the Boeing 737 MAX.

[Lyubov]

46 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

To be fair, if every cop cost $100 million dollars to build/train, then they would probably be as good at policing as computers are at flying planes.

This is what you really want

But even so, there's the Boeing 737 MAX.

let's be real here though... knowing silicon valley and how their smart cameras have a biased at only recognizing white faces the police robot will probably just target minorities "by accident" like that other scene where that one robot shoots that guy in the business meeting. 

Edited June 23, 2020 by Lyubov

[Consept]

41 minutes ago, Lyubov said:

let's be real here though... knowing silicon valley and how their smart cameras have a biased at only recognizing white faces the police robot will probably just target minorities "by accident" like that other scene where that one robot shoots that guy in the business meeting. 

Yeah it will probably be a massacre tbh, like he'll malfunction and see all black faces as a threat 

[Depersonilized]

@Consept Actually, something to note is that police report each other to internal affairs more than civilians do. 

The video here is pretty informative. This guy is an ex-Navy seal, and he's talking from a place of experience. 

[Bodigger]

@Serotoninluv @Consept  Not sure what either of you are getting at.  I didn't mention race or poverty, and I wasn't giving my view on the matter.  Are you projecting a view which does not exist. 

After further thought on this, can it be that the police are ignoring more and more of the crimes taking place so they don't put themselves in a situation where they may get into trouble.  I think the criminals are onto this, therefore, more crime is taking place.  Leadership is missing in many large cities, and if we don't change the leadership, I don't see it getting better.  Milwaukee had a great sheriff in David Clarke for 15 years, and they are missing him now.

[Consept]

1 hour ago, Depersonilized said:

@Consept Actually, something to note is that police report each other to internal affairs more than civilians do. 

The video here is pretty informative. This guy is an ex-Navy seal, and he's talking from a place of experience. 

Yeah didnt watch all of it but he makes some good points about training, definitely needs to be more. It would be hard to actually get numbers for how many officers dont report their colleagues, if they get away with it i dont know how that could be worked out. What you can see is the low conviction rate for offences by police officers, if the training is so poor it stands to reason theyd make a lot of mistakes. I can see how it would be difficult for officers to culpable if the training isnt sufficient, however if its things like shooting unarmed suspects i cant see the excuse for that, it does depend on the case but there are some serious problems there, even if we cant pinpoint the exact reason why   

[Forestluv]

9 hours ago, Bodigger said:

@Serotoninluv  Not sure what either of you are getting at. 

What I am getting at is the lens the mind perceives through. It doesn’t matter if we are talking about crime, football or scuba diving.

Notice how the mind keeps framing questions and interpretations to maintain a particular worldview.

A mind that has been conditioned with a belief structure and is attached/identified with those beliefs will have a much harder time deepening/broadening understanding. If the topic here was about relations between the Quechua and Incan people in South America, the discussion would be very different because your mind hasn’t been conditioned with any beliefs about the Quechua and Incans. You don’t have any attachments or identifications to being Quechua or Incan. There is no desire to maintain any particular Quechua or Incan view or lifestyle. This allows space and fluidity to deepen/broaden understanding.

[Onemanwolfpac]

On 22/06/2020 at 9:27 PM, Consept said:

Forget the narrative, what im talking about is applying the law to everyone. If a civilian commits a crime (providing their not connected to the police or someone powerful) theyll get arrested if the evidence is there. If a police officer commits a crime he'll most likely get off, this is endemic in the police and its not to say police are bad, because its human nature to protect your 'tribe'. However their tribe is the only one that can be above the law of which they are supposed to uphold, and of course people are going to feel that that is unfair and so you will get the reaction from the public because people rightfully dont feel that the police are on their side or are there to help them, especially if they kill people illegally and get away with it. I mean its literally only 2 or 3 that get convicted despite 1000 shootings a year, 100 or so involving an unarmed suspect, i dont know how that can foster trust.

Better training is necessary but the elephant in the room is these democratic states full of crime. 

Sources? 

The video Leo posted shows stupidity. Assault and stun gun cops before getting killed. I don't know where the problem is? He assaulted and fired first what was deemed a deadly weapon. 

The Floyd scenario is wrong. The riots are not an example of higher iq or consciousness. 

? Happy i don't live there

 Nor will. I ever. 

On 22/06/2020 at 9:33 PM, Serotoninluv said:

In terms of demographics, it’s not so much about “democratic states”. It’s more about rural vs urban and why uban areas are locally in democratic hands. For example, Georgia is conservative republican at the state level and very conservative republican in rural areas. Yet urban areas, like Atlanta, are democratic. Georgia has conservative republicans at the state level and more liberal democrats at the urban level. 

Urban areas are liberal (democrats) than rural areas, because they are far more complex. Conservatives would be much worse in managing urban areas. It’s not fair to criticize urban problems as being democrat, since it would be worse under conservative (republican) management. There is a reason Trump’s rhetoric and actions are inflaming urban tensions. He has a conservative mindset of the 1960s and that isn’t going to work within urban areas in the 2020s. 

It would be like a janitor criticizing a calculus professor when his student’s perform poorly on a national math exam. It could be that the calculus professor is average and needs improvement, yet it would be silly for a janitor to take over the job. For the calculus professor to improve, he needs constructive criticism from above, not from below. 

That's more conjecture. The crime in democratic states is appalling. There's more "urban" areas not following the herd anymore. "Change!" 

The stats speak for themselves. My position hasn't changed. I am. All for blm or anybody calling out cops killing. Let's go in on crime in these communities? Fatherless households. "proud single mom" rhetoric. Pump more government resources in the community which has the exact opposite side effect. 

Going back to your 1960s comment, these communities were better off in the 1950s..before the welfare state and running to the government for free shit. 

 

I saw Linsay Shepard ranted about racism in Canada to blacks and aboriginals. She needs a history lesson. The underground rail road led to freedom. Canada didn't have slavery but they had Japanese concentration camps. They blew up Chinese building the railroad. There is a lot of Asian racism in North America and yet, how are the Asian community doing? Academically? Socio-economic status? How is the abortion stat? Divorce rate? Proud single mom status? 

Japan is a mostly Japanese country. Like 98% Japanese 2% other. The country had two fucking A bombs dropped. They are proud of their culture. Certain countries don't give a fuck about race baiting but preserve their culture. 

My childhood friend is from Japan. He is/was a immigrant. He has excelled on work ethic and strong family values. The Asian culture is a good blueprint for many high crime areas. 

I agree with @Leo Gura for the most part and only disagree on larger government and government intervention/welfare state. 

 

There's a inversion going on. Liberals censorship and Conservatives pushing free speech. Pumping on more government resources will cause more problems as Naseem Taleb shows on his book Antifragile. You cannot be antifragile and seek handouts. 

 

The topic pisses me off. I grew up in "urban areas." i got out. I busted my ass. No handouts. Many didn't. I ended up in a predominantly Asian area after. Abortion, single moms and fatherless homes were not existent. 

8 hours ago, Consept said:

Yeah didnt watch all of it but he makes some good points about training, definitely needs to be more. It would be hard to actually get numbers for how many officers dont report their colleagues, if they get away with it i dont know how that could be worked out. What you can see is the low conviction rate for offences by police officers, if the training is so poor it stands to reason theyd make a lot of mistakes. I can see how it would be difficult for officers to culpable if the training isnt sufficient, however if its things like shooting unarmed suspects i cant see the excuse for that, it does depend on the case but there are some serious problems there, even if we cant pinpoint the exact reason why   

I heard about a similar culture problem in armed forces and corrections. The barrier needs to be raised in policing and in communities where crime is high. We can do better. 

[Forestluv]

1 hour ago, Onemanwolfpac said:

The crime in democratic states is appalling. There's more "urban" areas not following the herd anymore. 

All for blm or anybody calling out cops killing. Let's go in on crime in these communities? Fatherless households. "proud single mom" rhetoric. Pump more government resources in the community which has the exact opposite side effect. 

Going back to your 1960s comment, these communities were better off in the 1950s..before the welfare state and running to the government for free shit. 

You are not seeing nuances here. The “democratic state” position is too simplified. I’m not sure if you are from the United States, yet you don’t seem to have an understanding of how government works in the U.S. For example, I live in one of the states you would probably refer to as a “Democratic State with appalling crime”. I’m sure you would say the crime in Detroit is appalling and the riots in Grand Rapids was appalling. So, let’s walk through it. My state generally votes for a Democrat in presidential elections. The state also leans toward electing Democratic U.S. senators. So at the federal level, you would consider it a “democratic state”. However, the state level is very different. The state cycles back and forth between democratic and republican governors. However all the state legislatures are DOMINATED by republicans. They always have full control of all state legislatures. Both the state House and state Senate. At times, they have supermajorities and can override a governor veto. The state has been heavily gerrymandered to favor republicans. I live in a district that is centered two hours away from me on the other side of the state! The republicans drew a lil’ itty bitty line to pull some democrats in my old district into a safe republican district. So now, rather than the districts being split Dem and Rep, they are both Rep. . . As well, there is leadership at local levels, such as city councils and majors. So, is the “absurd crime” in my state because its a “Democratic State”?

Pinning blame on individuals such as “fatherless households” will not solve the larger problem. That is a lazy, myopic view. It is only one piece of a larger puzzle. If you want to deepen and expand your understanding, read a wider variety of sociology and political science, not just the stuff that supports your world view.

To say that “America was better of in the 1950s” is again a myopic conservative view. For example, go learn about the Jim Crow laws of that era.

In terms of “government handouts” and “socialism” you have a very contracted conservative view. If you would like to expand your understanding, I would recommend listening to Anand Giridharadas.