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

Chicago Police Department shuts down its arrest API

chicagoreporter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 273 posts

Re: Chicago Police Department shuts down its arrest API

#71

Post by mythrwy »

strstr wrote: post #56
vxNsr wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So are you against all government unions? What about quasi-gov orgs like SEC? Or teachers? Just trying to understand where you fall on the “unions for me but not thee” scale

These questions underly a particular argument that I don’t buy. We institute fairly hefty national standards on schools. I can go and look up the average scores for standardized tests for students for the high school I attended, and, afaik, essentially all schools in the US. Why can’t I do the same thing for police departments? Somehow, police unions are able to avoid having similar accountability.

Teachers unions often fight standardized testing as well. They just haven't been as successful.

Re: Chicago Police Department shuts down its arrest API

#72

Post by dragonwriter »

JadeNB wrote: post #66
dragonwriter wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When the SEC and teachers are capable of using the authority of the State to take my life with qualified immunity Teachers are covered by QI just as much as cops, and there is much less past precedent on use of force by teachers. Since QI works on the principle of “the absence of precedent covering similar actors in similar circumstances and ruling it unlawful means you can't be held liable”, they probably are more…

> Teacher are covered by QI just as much as cops, and there is much less past precedent on use of force by teachers. Are they? I think it's hard to answer that question precisely, since qualified immunity is not a law that has been passed but a collection of judicial interpretations. Wikipedia says that it applies to 'government officials', and, even if one takes Wikipedia as definitive, it's not clear to me that tha…

> Are they?

The modern interpretation of QI, while all the current news coverage comes from police officers, comes from a case in which White House advisors in the Nixon Administration were being sued over their involvement in a defense contracting dispute, and applies to government employees exercising any discretionary functions, categorically.

> The only real way to test whether qualified immunity applies to teachers would be to have it be used in a court case. Has it been?

Yes. An extensive discussion relevant to public education, with some case citations, is here: https://mobile.edweek.org/c.jsp?cid=25919821&bcid=25919821&r...

Re: Chicago Police Department shuts down its arrest API

#73

Post by [deleted] »

happytoexplain wrote: post #28
throwaway894345 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fair enough, I should have been more charitable.

I see you edited to remove the accusation of lying, but you left in "this is obviously and overt nonsense", which is pretty hostile and low value. Edit: You also added "as opposed to the more charitable interpretation of their error", which is very passive aggressive and elitist.

[deleted]

Re: Chicago Police Department shuts down its arrest API

#74

Post by fireflies_ »

JadeNB wrote: post #66
dragonwriter wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When the SEC and teachers are capable of using the authority of the State to take my life with qualified immunity Teachers are covered by QI just as much as cops, and there is much less past precedent on use of force by teachers. Since QI works on the principle of “the absence of precedent covering similar actors in similar circumstances and ruling it unlawful means you can't be held liable”, they probably are more…

> Teacher are covered by QI just as much as cops, and there is much less past precedent on use of force by teachers. Are they? I think it's hard to answer that question precisely, since qualified immunity is not a law that has been passed but a collection of judicial interpretations. Wikipedia says that it applies to 'government officials', and, even if one takes Wikipedia as definitive, it's not clear to me that tha…

It has, Safford Unified School District v. Redding is probably the canonical case here. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safford_Unified_School_Distric...

Re: Chicago Police Department shuts down its arrest API

#75

Post by empath75 »

throwaway894345 wrote: post #5
makotech222 wrote: post #2

Everything you know and think about what the cops do and how they do it is built on many, many decades of copaganda you receive from the media. They are a force which exists to terrorize working class people in order to force them to work for minimum wage. They are an investment by the ruling class which allows them to maintain their profits on marginalized workers. They funnel poor people into prison camps where the…

Speaking as a former working-class person from a long lineage of working class people, this is obviously and overt nonsense. The criminal justice system and the (highly distributed) institution of policing in particular must be improved and reformed, but the idea that they "oppress working class people" in any meaningful way is severely disconnected from reality (well, communist countries notwithstanding). EDIT: Wow,…

https://www.jacobinmag.com/2014/01/the-bad-kind-of-unionism/

Re: Chicago Police Department shuts down its arrest API

#76

Post by rednerrus »

save_ferris wrote: post #6

It's crazy to me that in 2020, there isn't comprehensive, mandatory Federal tracking of police-involved shootings. There's no reason that this data shouldn't be mandated to be aggregated and researched, other than to continue propagating a culture of secrecy. From the FBI's Use-of-Force data collection site[0]: > Is it mandatory for law enforcement agencies to contribute to this data collection? > The FBI has no lega…

Wait until you find out about doctors.

Re: Chicago Police Department shuts down its arrest API

#77

Post by monksy »

Latty wrote: post #47
monksy wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For the individual to make a claim that: "They are a force which exists to terrorize working class people in order to force them to work for minimum wage. They are an investment by the ruling class which allows them to maintain their profits on marginalized workers." Is just over the top absurdist. It's easily debunked by asking someone making above minimal wage "are you being forced to work by the police?" Will they…

I'm not saying I agree with the argument necessarily, but your counter-argument here is obviously flawed: oppressed peoples can't speak their mind freely, and may not have the information to be able to understand their situation fully. To claim that just because you ask someone "are you being oppressed" and they say "no", that they are therefore not being oppressed seems naive at best.

> oppressed peoples can't speak their mind freely

They can't? The government is arresting these people for speaking? If so we have a 1st amendment violation.

Private corporations? That's an issue between the person and the corporation. We don't have rights protecting speech there and protecting that agreement [staying employeed]. However, the private insitution do not have the right to imprison someone over speech they do not like.

> may not have the information to be able to understand their situation fully

Are you talking about the education about this? The federal system has a minimum amount of education guaranteed per person. Typically most of the economy is run by people who have the education and skills. As an individual you do have the right to congregate with others and speak with each others about situations. Creating a union is legal. (Although that's an annoyingly controversial practice)

> To claim that just because you ask someone "are you being oppressed" and they say "no", that they are therefore not being oppressed seems naive at best.

That is your judgment and evaluation of the situation. Why should we believe this guy Latty on the internet about a third party's situation?

Re: Chicago Police Department shuts down its arrest API

#78

Post by mthoms »

I'm amazed that someone with the title of "Assistant Director of Communications" actually wrote this meaningless, word salad of gibberish:

>"We looked into this and confirmed with our IT Department that API was a tool that was previously available at one point, but has been discontinued / turned off. The API Access site is stagnant and not being monitored and should have been pulled down once the tool was no longer publicly accessible, and as a result, requests for access were not being reviewed.”

The best translation I can come up with seems to be "The API used to exist, but was turned off because it was turned off".

Re: Chicago Police Department shuts down its arrest API

#79

Post by save_ferris »

nickff wrote: post #8
save_ferris wrote: post #6

It's crazy to me that in 2020, there isn't comprehensive, mandatory Federal tracking of police-involved shootings. There's no reason that this data shouldn't be mandated to be aggregated and researched, other than to continue propagating a culture of secrecy. From the FBI's Use-of-Force data collection site[0]: > Is it mandatory for law enforcement agencies to contribute to this data collection? > The FBI has no lega…

Why should everything be federalized? There is no article in the constitution which mandates (or permits) federal supervision of state powers (such as the police power). The fact that voters fail to hold their lower-level governments to account does not mean that all power (and failure) should be centralized.

The Federal government has the power to apply consent decrees to specific police departments when those departments are found to have used force excessively, per the 1994 Violent Crime and Law Enforcement Act[0]. This essentially opens police departments up to lawsuits if they exhibit a pattern of bad behavior. In fact, this law explicitly requires DOJ to issue an annual report on "the use of excessive force by law enforcement officers", although they haven’t.

> The fact that voters fail to hold their lower-level governments to account does not mean that all power (and failure) should be centralized.

0: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violent_Crime_Control_and_La...

Re: Chicago Police Department shuts down its arrest API

#80

Post by khawkins »

santoshalper wrote: post #49
vxNsr wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So are you against all government unions? What about quasi-gov orgs like SEC? Or teachers? Just trying to understand where you fall on the “unions for me but not thee” scale

I am not op, and I don't get the sense that you are asking the question in good faith based on the snark, but will give you my thought: Our need for accountability and oversight over jobs that involve the ability to use deadly force outweighs their need for collective bargaining power. The greater good, at least presently, is served by being able to scrutinize police conduct with less interference. I don't think poli…

Given that police officers

(a) are first-responders whose central job is public safety,

(b) are regularly sent into situations where their life and safety is on the line (6 have been shot to death in the past two months), and

(c) regularly face violent and hateful prejudice as an identity, just for putting on the uniform,

it's hard to justify that they don't deserve advocacy from a group of people with shared experiences.

It doesn't mean that unions should always get their way or that unions should be officially recognized, but police can and should exercise their rights to collectively bargain and strike if necessary.

Post reply on HN