what should be done about police brutality

[smackababy]

Here is the problem: cops are forced into positions where they have to make snap judgments to save lives. This can result in situations where innocents get hurt. That sucks, but if you expect someone to put their life on the line every day, there has to be some give and take. Cops, like everyone else, are not perfect; they make mistakes, and sadly it often results in someone getting hurt or killed. But, they have to be able to make those decisions without hesitation.

There used to be a use of force model that was taught to military police. It outlined the proper force allowable when the suspect does certain things. I believe the FBI had to suspend the training because it didn't work in the real world. It was great for feel good, classroom training, but it was causing officers to hesitate and think longer, resulting in the deaths of them or others.


I agree that cops intentionally breaking the law should be punished; however, I am not blind to fact of what kind of expectation we put on them. Their first job is to protect, and that involves being able to react to situations they might not have all the information to with force that might, on further inspection, have been excessive. Using too much force in a deadly situation is always better than using too little.

And, as far as this idea that "casual drug users" are some kind of non criminal is pretty stupid. You all are conflating you personal opinions on drug policy with right and wrong. Using or possessing a controlled substance is illegal. It isn't the polices jobs to determine if a law is right or wrong outside of some large, obvious issues. If you have a problem with police arresting drug users, change the drug laws; don't hamstring police and their ability to do their job.

As far as "military raids" and that nonsense, how would you suggest going about apprehending a drug user? Should they show up in a polo and khaki shorts, politely knock on the door, announce they are there, and wait for someone to answer?

 

[Chiropteran]

They should issue cops brass knuckles and spiked boots, that would help police brutality.

 

[JEDIYoda]

As far as "military raids" and that nonsense, how would you suggest going about apprehending a drug user? Should they show up in a polo and khaki shorts, politely knock on the door, announce they are there, and wait for someone to answer?

Making light of a very real problem in America.....
The Police serving a search warrant to arrest one person for the use of a very small quantity of Pot using a full military swat team.....breaking down the door only to find a family with 7 kids and a dog who they shoot dead and then they find it`s the wrong address........need I say more???

 

[Oldgamer]

Well, first we need to get rid of Texas, then the cops.

LOL Texas..

 

[mrjminer]

Intentional / obvious brutality should be met with an iron fist. Brutality of circumstance should be met with a wooden fist. Other related errors in judgment should be based on the situation.

 

[Oldgamer]

Hey OP thanks for starting this thread discussion btw! Kudos to you!

 

[Anarchist420]

Hey OP thanks for starting this thread discussion btw! Kudos to you!

you're welcome. i am glad we agree on something

 

[waggy]

when cops can open fire on a vehicle without checking who the occupants are and get away with it they feel they can do anything.

1st) all cops need cameras' they need to turn on with every stop.
a) any cop that has missing video needs a serious displine. if it happens more then once he needs to be fired.

2) EVERY shooting needs to be looked at a civilian board. not by the police force.

3) we need to stop the militarization of the police. it's getting insane.

those are just a start. but i agree something needs to be done.



Let me say that 90% of the police are honest hard working people. trouble is they are willing to hide the bullshit of the bad 10%. this is a major issue.

 

[Oldgamer]

when cops can open fire on a vehicle without checking who the occupants are and get away with it they feel they can do anything.

I know that they have departmental rules about firing on moving vehicles, so I never understand why they would shoot from behind a moving vehicle with people inside of it, like that one time there were kids in the car, and yet no one is held accountable. They really do need to start setting examples and actually dragging these knuckleheads into court and maybe even give them jail time for being negligent and careless like that.

 

[SMOGZINN]

they have to be able to make those decisions without hesitation.

I disagree. I would rather there be a few more dead cops that hesitated rather then a few more dead civilians because the didn't.
This is the core of the problem, we have become overly protective of the police. They do a dangerous job, that is what we hire them for. I don't want to pay them to be the danger.

Using too much force in a deadly situation is always better than using too little.

And this is the core of the problem. Why do we think that overreacting is better then under reacting? I would rather a bunch of killers get away then a single innocent killed by our police. This is a core concept of of our justice system.

If you have a problem with police arresting drug users, change the drug laws; don't hamstring police and their ability to do their job.

We need to do both. We need to tell police that they need to be reasonable when going about preforming their duties. They need to remember that the people that are apprehending are INNOCENT until a jury of their peers decides otherwise.

As far as "military raids" and that nonsense, how would you suggest going about apprehending a drug user? Should they show up in a polo and khaki shorts, politely knock on the door, announce they are there, and wait for someone to answer?

Here once again we face the problem of a society driven to extremes in all things. If we can't arrest a person with out a full swat team and automatic weapons we might as well just send them a certified letter saying to come into the police station for arresting, at their convenience. How is it that a few decades ago we managed to do the job with just a knock on the door?

 

[Oldgamer]

I agree with Smogzinn, in fact the police know what they are getting into. They know the job is dangerous. But they are not suppose to escalate situations and make them worse. It has really become a (shoot first ask questions later) type of thing, where the civilians are the ones who are expendable and their lives are somehow less than a police officers. I being a civilian would rather the officer think first, and even if that means risking a few seconds of a drug user getting away, and downing their little bit of pot in the toilet, then so be it. Even if it means that the officer risks getting hurt by hesitating then yes, I would rather he make that risk since he went into law enforcement fully knowing that this is what he signed up for. At least we won't have so many innocent civilians being killed or seriously injured.

 

[Moonbeam]

Is that a trick question?
Don`t you get high by using speed??

I guess one can, but I don't. I just wonder why it seems so clear that a high speed chase is problematical, but defining it is impossible in my opinion.

 

[smackababy]

I disagree. I would rather there be a few more dead cops that hesitated rather then a few more dead civilians because the didn't.
This is the core of the problem, we have become overly protective of the police. They do a dangerous job, that is what we hire them for. I don't want to pay them to be the danger.


And this is the core of the problem. Why do we think that overreacting is better then under reacting? I would rather a bunch of killers get away then a single innocent killed by our police. This is a core concept of of our justice system.

These both assume that the police are making judgments to only protect themselves. They rarely are. Letting a killer escape endangers everyone that killer then interacts with. Would you be okay if, because a cop didn't want to use "excessive" force, a rapist elude capture (or death) and then raped your daughter? You're thinking in merely one for one mentality. In situations where police make snap judgments to use deadly force, they believe a danger exists not only to them, but to others.

We need to do both. We need to tell police that they need to be reasonable when going about preforming their duties. They need to remember that the people that are apprehending are INNOCENT until a jury of their peers decides otherwise.

No, police do not have to dissect drug policy and determine who is a "real" criminal and who isn't. Controller substances, in all amounts, is currently illegal. Police act in accordance with the law. If you are suspected of, or are found in, possession of a controlled substance you are innocent until proven guilty, but that doesn't make you immune to being held.

Here once again we face the problem of a society driven to extremes in all things. If we can't arrest a person with out a full swat team and automatic weapons we might as well just send them a certified letter saying to come into the police station for arresting, at their convenience. How is it that a few decades ago we managed to do the job with just a knock on the door?

You're thinking that because you hear about it more, it is happening more. That is not the case. Also, the teams doing the house searches are not likely to be the investigators. They merely get the location and a briefing of the situation. They use SWAT gear to minimize the risks associated in coming into someone's house. How people, who are likely drug users, react to a team breaching your door and performing a warranted search for drugs can easily turn deadly. How many officers are killed because some jerk off doesn't want a speeding ticket? People do stupid things, and the officers have to be prepared for that.

 

[CitizenKain]

As far as "military raids" and that nonsense, how would you suggest going about apprehending a drug user?

How about don't do them. Rolling out a armored vehicle and a group of make-believe soldiers to arrest someone for a gram of weed is fucking retarded.

 

[smackababy]

How about don't do them. Rolling out a armored vehicle and a group of make-believe soldiers to arrest someone for a gram of weed is fucking retarded.

You're right. We shouldn't apprehend people who commit crimes! A gram of weed isn't a crime, after all. GTFO with that crap.

 

[CitizenKain]

You're right. We shouldn't apprehend people who commit crimes! A gram of weed isn't a crime, after all. GTFO with that crap.

So you think the appropriate response to someone that is suspected with a gram of weed is a high risk home invasion at night without warning is a good idea. Plus in your thinking, they deserved it because drugs are bad, and you are a simpleton.

Title: Family calls Police Raid Excessive
Type: Raid on an innocent suspect.
State: IA

Description: Des Moines, Iowa: Police officers wearing body armor and carrying rifles used a battering ram to enter a home without giving warning. According to the search warrant they were looking for cellphones, a television, other electronics, and clothes they say might have been purchased with stolen credit cards. "I want to know why they didn't just knock, why they didn't communicate with anybody outside taking a battering ram to the door," said Justin Ross, who lives there. As police entered the house, one officer tore out one of the security cameras installed to monitor the property. In the basement, an officer tried to cover another camera with blankets. The police chief said that covering or destroying cameras is police procedure during a raid to ensure no one inside can monitor approaching officers. Ross was in the bathroom, with his gun, which he has a permit to carry, when the raid happened. He said that he feels lucky that he realized the commotion was coming from police officers and put down his gun before the bathroom door was opened.

Quite the heroes there, I can see why you look up to them. They barely missed out on murdering that guy though.

 

[smackababy]

So you think the appropriate response to someone that is suspected with a gram of weed is a high risk home invasion at night without warning is a good idea. Plus in your thinking, they deserved it because drugs are bad, and you are a simpleton.



Quite the heroes there, I can see why you look up to them. They barely missed out on murdering that guy though.

What exactly was that description supposed to prove? The police got a warrant to perform a raid on a house. You are blaming the police for what exactly? A detective finding information pointing to that house, giving said evidence to a judge who then signed and authorized the warrant? Or the police who carried it out according to procedure? Wearing body armor is a bad thing? Of course it is! We wouldn't want them to be safe. They were carrying rifles? Oh! those big black scary guns are evil!

And, your quote is third hand anecdotal evidence at best. Just because you post a quote were someone claims they are innocent (because criminals never do that, obviously) and a by the books raid, it is bad?

Nice try, but 0/10.

 

[Victorian Gray]

You're right. We shouldn't apprehend people who commit crimes! A gram of weed isn't a crime, after all. GTFO with that crap.

For a gram of weed?

 

[Genx87]

Jesus people really believe a police raid over minor things is a-ok? And they are using "it is the law" reasoning?

 

[CitizenKain]

What exactly was that description supposed to prove? The police got a warrant to perform a raid on a house. You are blaming the police for what exactly? A detective finding information pointing to that house, giving said evidence to a judge who then signed and authorized the warrant? Or the police who carried it out according to procedure? Wearing body armor is a bad thing? Of course it is! We wouldn't want them to be safe. They were carrying rifles? Oh! those big black scary guns are evil!

And, your quote is third hand anecdotal evidence at best. Just because you post a quote were someone claims they are innocent (because criminals never do that, obviously) and a by the books raid, it is bad?

Nice try, but 0/10.

Ok, you seem to have difficulty with simple things, so I'm assuming you either are a cop or want to be one.
How about this:

Title: Officer Tony Patterson

Type: Death or injury of a police officer.

State: KS

Description: On October 12, 1995, police in Topeka, Kansas conduct a 2:50 a.m. raid on the home of college student Stephen Shively, whom they suspect of dealing marijuana. After police have battered down an outer door, Shively awakes as officers were working to break down the door to his apartment. Shively first calls 911 to report what he thinks is a burglary of his home, then grabs a gun and fires at the figures he sees through a crack in the paneling around his door. His bullet strikes and kills Officer Tony Patterson. Prosecutors would later press murder charges against Shively, claiming that he intentionally engaged in a gun battle with police to protect the 12 ounces of marijuana he had in his home. A jury acquitted Shively of murder, but convicted him of aggravated assault and charges related to the drugs found in his possession. The judge sentenced him to 3 1/2 years in prison, taking care to note that Shively didn't fit the description of "a drug lord with horns and fangs." In 1998, a judge released Shively after he had served two years and seven months of sentence. And in 1999, the Kansas Court of Appeals ruled that the search warrant officers used to raid Shively's apartment was illegal. "Regrettably, the loss of an officer's life might have been prevented if the affidavit had been candid and not designed to mislead the magistrate into issuing the search warrant," the court wrote. The Topeka Police Department awarded six officers Medals of Merit for their actions the night of the Shively raid. Sources: Tim Carpenter, "Broken Hearts, Broken Lives," Topeka Capital-Journal, October 9, 2005.

Date: Oct 12, 1995

That guy served almost 3 years in prison because a bunch of fuckwits wanted to play GI Joe, thankfully no one innocent was hurt.
Take a look through this: http://www.cato.org/raidmap
Its a litany of fuckups by the police that all could have been avoided, but Officer Tiny Dick got to pretend he's a soldier instead.

 

[Thebobo]

The police got a warrant to perform a raid on a .

They got a warrent to perform a raid? I thought they got a warrent to search the premisis. Just saying in the old days they knock on the door.

 

[Oldgamer]

Ok, you seem to have difficulty with simple things, so I'm assuming you either are a cop or want to be one.
How about this:



That guy served almost 3 years in prison because a bunch of fuckwits wanted to play GI Joe, thankfully no one innocent was hurt.
Take a look through this: http://www.cato.org/raidmap
Its a litany of fuckups by the police that all could have been avoided, but Officer Tiny Dick got to pretend he's a soldier instead.

Holy crap I just clicked on that link of the CATO Institute, jesus almost all of them involved innocent folks and innocent ppl being killed over these stupid raids. You can zoom in on that map and click each story.. and man talk about tragic stories.