Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Lawmakers begin bipartisan push to cut off police access to military-style gear

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 339 posts

Re: Lawmakers begin bipartisan push to cut off police access to military-style gear

#171

Post by namelessoracle »

stdbrouw wrote: post #166
rconti wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pusher bumpers are just standard, and have been forever. A friend got accidentally rear-ended by a cop, no damage thanks to the pusher. The police need to push cars to the side of the road on, I'd venture, a daily basis.

> The police need to push cars to the side of the road on, I'd venture, a daily basis. In what kind of weird and twisted world do police officers need to push cars to the side on a daily basis?

If you are on highway patrol, you regularly need to help move stopped cars to get the highway moving again.

Re: Lawmakers begin bipartisan push to cut off police access to military-style gear

#172

Post by milkytron »

I get that they're trying to address the current issues this nation is facing. But if the issue is related to police officers not facing punishment for their crimes, wouldn't revising qualified immunity[0] be a pretty good solution? It seems to be clear that qualified immunity has been taken advantage of and is potentially the main reason why officers are able to get away with the crimes they commit. This might get burried in the comments, and maybe I'm wrong, but what are others' thoughts on this?

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qualified_immunity

Re: Lawmakers begin bipartisan push to cut off police access to military-style gear

#173

Post by hrktb »

Shivetya wrote: post #28

The equipment issue isn't going to solve anything, this is just lip service to the real problem. Police Unions have effectively created a system by which officers are nearly immune from prosecution and even if successfully prosecuted their record cannot travel with them in many cases. Now one fix that removing some of the equipment will do will reduce the amount of psychological impact it has on those wielding it, as…

> 2) If not 1) then make it illegal for the unions to exist with regards to any public servant who is armed

As a condition that police behavior is better prosecuted, and a lot is done to change their culture, unions have an important role to play IMO.

Regardless of how I feel about police members in general, they also are in a job where they’ll have a hard time negotiating terms. For instance during shelter in place they are on the streets patrolling and cannot refuse to work in time of crisis, don’t have effective striking rights. Getting fair conditions for the sacrifices requested should be granted, otherwise there’s no way to get reasonable people in these jobs.

Excessive power given to unions is of course bad, but no unions could be equally damaging.

Re: Lawmakers begin bipartisan push to cut off police access to military-style gear

#174

Post by bgentry »

milkytron wrote: post #172

I get that they're trying to address the current issues this nation is facing. But if the issue is related to police officers not facing punishment for their crimes, wouldn't revising qualified immunity[0] be a pretty good solution? It seems to be clear that qualified immunity has been taken advantage of and is potentially the main reason why officers are able to get away with the crimes they commit. This might get b…

It's entirely insufficient. Qualified immunity is a concept that protects officers from civil liability. It's part of the puzzle for sure, but the much bigger issue is that officers that violate the law or others' rights almost never face criminal liability.

An officer that chokes a nonviolent person to death for 9 minutes straight, or an officer that kicks an unthreatening protester in the face, or that fires rounds at people peacefully standing in their own home's doorway, or one that knowingly attacks journalists, should be first and foremost be prosecuted and put in jail, and also be subject to civil suits for their actions.

Unfortunately there is a significant structural disincentive for DAs, prosecutors, and Attorneys General to pursue such cases except in the most egregious high-profile incidents so justice is rarely served. Eliminating qualified immunity allows individuals some recourse to sue the perpetrators in these incidents, but it is no replacement for prosecuting and putting them in jail.

Re: Lawmakers begin bipartisan push to cut off police access to military-style gear

#175

Post by namelessoracle »

sandworm101 wrote: post #84
Shivetya wrote: post #28

The equipment issue isn't going to solve anything, this is just lip service to the real problem. Police Unions have effectively created a system by which officers are nearly immune from prosecution and even if successfully prosecuted their record cannot travel with them in many cases. Now one fix that removing some of the equipment will do will reduce the amount of psychological impact it has on those wielding it, as…

5) Change the uniforms. Dress for the job you want. If they all dress like storm troopers some of them will act like storm troopers. NY state patrol uniform: Grey with purple ties. https://northcountrynow.com/sites/default/files/images/Zone2... NYPD (new york city ) police: Black on black with black ties. https://media.timeout.com/images/103899055/image.jpg It seems meaningless, but having interacted with a few polic…

Having gone through police training in another life, you are absolutely correct. I think it's deeper than just what you wear, it's the attitude of the higher ups and overall culture.

The leadership team for police that wants you dressing all paramilitary and in all black is going to have a focus on you acting a different way during training and in what your day to day is like than the other group.

There's also the brittle fact that I still remember the day long fire arms training where i was required to watch officers get shot for an hour and got it drilled into my head that it was better to shoot someone if I felt any risk or danger (and what to say if i had to do it), and that I needed to make sure i got to go home. It was all done in a very deniable way, but police officers are 100 percent indoctrinated during training to shoot if they feel like they are in any danger. I can speak more to what kind of training took place and the attitude of the instructors if people are curious.

Re: Lawmakers begin bipartisan push to cut off police access to military-style gear

#176

Post by HaloZero »

remarkEon wrote: post #49
paloaltokid wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All the more reason to not give the police even more powerful tools with which to brutalize people. If the equipment is not the problem, take it away. That's one less thing to worry about.

This isn't true. Modern tools are significantly less lethal, and give police more options on the spectrum of escalation before having to draw their service pistol. This is why protests were much more deadly in the 1970s.

I don't think any police force needs an armored APC except for the most extreme cases and even then call in the national guard in those situations.

Re: Lawmakers begin bipartisan push to cut off police access to military-style gear

#177

Post by tathougies »

colllectorof wrote: post #120
eloff wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, you're right that this won't achieve real change. I truly like the idea of civilian oversight boards. However, I think any meaningful change or even competent governance is of the table in the US until something is done about the broken and polarized two party system. Right now the two factions are about evenly matched and can hardly agree on anything. Until that changes the US will continue to have their most u…

Multiple choice voting. (I.e. you give 1 point to all candidates you like, the ones with most amount of points wins. Very simple to understand system with no spoiler effect.) It will fix the issue within one set of elections and I don't even think it would require any changes to the constitution.

The constitution is completely silent on voting methodology. States are free to choose whatever they wish so long as it is representative, with the exception of federal Senators (and maybe representatives), I believe.

Re: Lawmakers begin bipartisan push to cut off police access to military-style gear

#178

Post by whatevertrevor »

namelessoracle wrote: post #175
sandworm101 wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

5) Change the uniforms. Dress for the job you want. If they all dress like storm troopers some of them will act like storm troopers. NY state patrol uniform: Grey with purple ties. https://northcountrynow.com/sites/default/files/images/Zone2... NYPD (new york city ) police: Black on black with black ties. https://media.timeout.com/images/103899055/image.jpg It seems meaningless, but having interacted with a few polic…

Having gone through police training in another life, you are absolutely correct. I think it's deeper than just what you wear, it's the attitude of the higher ups and overall culture. The leadership team for police that wants you dressing all paramilitary and in all black is going to have a focus on you acting a different way during training and in what your day to day is like than the other group. There's also the br…

I'm curious, please elaborate.

Re: Lawmakers begin bipartisan push to cut off police access to military-style gear

#179

Post by starpilot »

asdfman123 wrote: post #8
dx87 wrote: post #4

They would need to restrict capabilities, not just cut off access to "military-style" gear. They make the same mistake with gun laws where they ban "military-style" weapons because they look scary, but allow weapons that are just as deadly because they have a wooden stock and don't look as scary as "military-style" weapons.

Why don't impressions matter? It's important that more people see officers and get the impression that they are there to enforce peace, not dole out violence -- while still ensuring they have the tools to maintain safety and order. Large, threatening military-style vehicles don't send a good message to people who are already scared for their safety.

Because Floyd was killed by a knee.

Re: Lawmakers begin bipartisan push to cut off police access to military-style gear

#180

Post by whatevertrevor »

stdbrouw wrote: post #166
rconti wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pusher bumpers are just standard, and have been forever. A friend got accidentally rear-ended by a cop, no damage thanks to the pusher. The police need to push cars to the side of the road on, I'd venture, a daily basis.

> The police need to push cars to the side of the road on, I'd venture, a daily basis. In what kind of weird and twisted world do police officers need to push cars to the side on a daily basis?

I think they mean cars immobilized due to accidents.
Post reply on HN