In a small Virginia town, citizens review police like Uber drivers • Hacker News Board

Re: In a small Virginia town, citizens review police like Uber drivers

#101

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Jun 02, 2022, 5:48 PM UTC

clairity wrote: post #65

sureglymop wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The actual problem is that police are above the law. What I mean by that is, unlike citizens they are in a position where they might break a law without any repercussions or abuse their position of power. The only real way to deal with this would be to police the police in a realistic manner. Bodycam and location data of their every move would need to be available for that. Currently, police can simply turn these off…

no, police are not above the law. they're only "special" in that they enforce the law, which requires exceptional privileges and responsibilities ordinary citizens don't have. but they're otherwise fully under the same legal jurisdiction as the rest of us. some police may act as if they're above the law, but that's projection, not foundational. edit: interesting, seems to have hit a tribal trigger of some sort, but c…

[deleted]

Re: In a small Virginia town, citizens review police like Uber drivers

#102

Post by i_like_apis » Thu, Jun 02, 2022, 5:48 PM UTC

rascul wrote: post #89

i_like_apis wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Who is a scumbag? Easy question. 99% of those arrested are scumbags. This is speaking as someone who has been to jail and met the population that gets arrested. They are the worst, and their opinion in regard to rating cops should be largely ignored.

Speaking as someone who has met the population that gets arrested, they are no more or less scumbags than the population that doesn't.

If you were really speaking from a place of actually knowing the arrest population, you wouldn't say that.

If you spent some time in jail or prison, you would know there is a huge difference between the normal population and the arrest population. Violence, drugs, theft, robbery, rape, (things people get arrested for) ... they're scumbags if anyone is.

Re: In a small Virginia town, citizens review police like Uber drivers

#103

Post by SllX » Thu, Jun 02, 2022, 5:49 PM UTC

ticviking wrote: post #84

karmelapple wrote: post #77

I've always found it interesting that when I'm pulled over for a traffic violation, a police officer can use their discretion on whether to punish me. I've been pulled over a few times for speeding, and a couple times I simply got a warning, and other times I got a ticket and had to pay a fine. If I committed a crime, why should an officer have that leeway? They caught me, I should have to pay the consequences... rig…

Mandating that cops enforce unpopular laws was critical to Teddy Roosevelt's reform of the NYPD to help reduce corruption. That leeway was used to solicit bribes, particularly to let bars open on Sundays. I think that if we removed a lot of the leeway about enforcement we would find ourselves forces to ask, "What laws do we really care about enforcing in the first place?"

Something to consider.

I once decided to see if a type of document existed—this being the internet, it was once amazing to me the things I thought might exist actually existing, maybe I should still be amazed—and the document I wanted to find was a “list of crimes” in my State. California does not (or did not) have such a list. I basically just wanted a number, and to see if there were any interesting ones I never thought of.

Massachusetts actually does have such a document, and while it isn’t my State and at this point I forgot the number, there were some interesting ones at the top that basically had to do with archaeology.

The US Department of Justice also doesn’t have such a list, just an FBI estimate at the time of >4,000 which means they don’t know either.

I wouldn’t call it a political position because that would require further research and more time than I’m willing to commit, but I would say I have a disposition towards reducing the total number of crimes on the books, which would mean compiling a list of what they are and consolidating and repealing many of them. If we can’t be bothered to know what they are in their totality, then we probably don’t need most of them.

Re: In a small Virginia town, citizens review police like Uber drivers

#104

Post by dylan604 » Thu, Jun 02, 2022, 5:50 PM UTC

ticviking wrote: post #84

karmelapple wrote: post #77

I've always found it interesting that when I'm pulled over for a traffic violation, a police officer can use their discretion on whether to punish me. I've been pulled over a few times for speeding, and a couple times I simply got a warning, and other times I got a ticket and had to pay a fine. If I committed a crime, why should an officer have that leeway? They caught me, I should have to pay the consequences... rig…

Mandating that cops enforce unpopular laws was critical to Teddy Roosevelt's reform of the NYPD to help reduce corruption. That leeway was used to solicit bribes, particularly to let bars open on Sundays. I think that if we removed a lot of the leeway about enforcement we would find ourselves forces to ask, "What laws do we really care about enforcing in the first place?"

And I think that is a good conversation to have. If the law is not worth enforcing, it is not worth having. Laws are meant to remove one's freedoms. Sometimes that loss is meant to protect others, but it is still the government telling its citizens they are not allowed to do something. People should have as few goverment imposed restrictions as necessary to have a functioning society.

Re: In a small Virginia town, citizens review police like Uber drivers

#105

Post by photochemsyn » Thu, Jun 02, 2022, 5:50 PM UTC

clairity wrote: post #74

throwntoday wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fines are stupid to begin with. If they are too low nobody will care and the sheer number of people breaking the law makes enforcement pointless. If they are too high, they can send the average person into financial ruin, and the wealthy can continue paying their way around trouble. Even a ticket of a couple hundred dollars insane to the average American. In either case, without any proper oversight, this money just…

> "...and the wealthy can continue paying their way around trouble." this is why tickets should be income-contingent, if not wealth-contingent (much trickier and more invasive, so unlikely).

In Finland, it's apparently the case, and Switzerland as well.

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/06/in-finland-speeding-t...

However, improving traffic infrastructure (separating bicycles and pedestrians from cars and trucks with physical barriers, reducing the flow of traffic through city centers, etc.) is a much more effective way of reducing traffic-related injuries and fatalies, which is what the fines are supposed to encourage.

Re: In a small Virginia town, citizens review police like Uber drivers

#106

Post by actionablefiber » Thu, Jun 02, 2022, 5:51 PM UTC

chrisseaton wrote: post #92

karmelapple wrote: post #77

I've always found it interesting that when I'm pulled over for a traffic violation, a police officer can use their discretion on whether to punish me. I've been pulled over a few times for speeding, and a couple times I simply got a warning, and other times I got a ticket and had to pay a fine. If I committed a crime, why should an officer have that leeway? They caught me, I should have to pay the consequences... rig…

Because the purpose of the fine isn’t the money, it’s getting you to be more safe. If they can achieve that with a friendly chat then isn’t that better for everyone?

Do we achieve that in the status quo, though? Where I live, driving 10 miles over the speed limit at all times is the price of entry and if you do less than that, you'll sooner or later run into a motorist who gets aggressive with you.

Speeding is a constant issue and people are constantly crashing cars into buildings and people.

I have never seen police enforcement make a meaningful difference in safe driving. I've never seen police proactively enforce pedestrian/cyclist safety or remove cars from the bike lanes. Safety is a matter of correctly engineering streets and roads so that dangerous driving feels viscerally unnatural and uncomfortable.

The only thing that it seems to accomplish is A) giving police a way to arbitrarily bring down the hammer on people they don't like while shielding their friends and relatives, and B) fleecing motorists by setting up speed traps at places engineered to encourage speeding rather than re-engineering the roads for calming.

Re: In a small Virginia town, citizens review police like Uber drivers

#107

Post by robonerd » Thu, Jun 02, 2022, 5:51 PM UTC

matthewmacleod wrote: post #60

rayiner wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How a cop treats someone they view as a "scumbag" is a lot more illustrative and important than how they treat those they view as "upstanding people." Why? > A big part of the problem with the current policing system is that cops treat some groups completely differently from how they treat others. And what are those groups?

Why? It’s kind like human rights - the majority of people who are at risk of having them infringed are unpleasant or unsympathetic characters. I’d argue a cliché “upstanding law-abiding citizen” type doesn’t generally have that much to fear from a police interaction. They are generally being dealt with on a presumption of good faith, and have at least some access to leverage and ability to push back against unfair tr…

It seems like treating good people well is the axiomatic virtue, while treating bad people well is a virtue derived from the first.

The determination of who's bad or good is fraught with error and subjectivity; therefore to protect good people, we must protect all people.

Re: In a small Virginia town, citizens review police like Uber drivers

#108

Post by indecisive_user » Thu, Jun 02, 2022, 5:52 PM UTC

derac wrote: post #3

Gave me a ticket 1/5

This seems trivial to control for.

Classify each interaction with cops, e.g. traffic stop, wellness check, house call, etc.

Then compare ratings for each classification to see who's performing above/below average.

Re: In a small Virginia town, citizens review police like Uber drivers

#109

Post by rascul » Thu, Jun 02, 2022, 5:52 PM UTC

i_like_apis wrote: post #102

rascul wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Speaking as someone who has met the population that gets arrested, they are no more or less scumbags than the population that doesn't.

If you were really speaking from a place of actually knowing the arrest population, you wouldn't say that. If you spent some time in jail or prison, you would know there is a huge difference between the normal population and the arrest population. Violence, drugs, theft, robbery, rape, (things people get arrested for) ... they're scumbags if anyone is.

I have spent time in jail. I've also spent time out of jail. There's just as many scumbags outside. Lots of violent and aggressive people are not in jail, and lots of good people who didn't hurt anyone are in jail. There are a whole lot of other things besides what you list that could land you in jail.

Re: In a small Virginia town, citizens review police like Uber drivers

#110

Post by al_borland » Thu, Jun 02, 2022, 5:53 PM UTC

karmelapple wrote: post #77

I've always found it interesting that when I'm pulled over for a traffic violation, a police officer can use their discretion on whether to punish me. I've been pulled over a few times for speeding, and a couple times I simply got a warning, and other times I got a ticket and had to pay a fine. If I committed a crime, why should an officer have that leeway? They caught me, I should have to pay the consequences... rig…

There are times where a law may have technically been broken, but it was done so to prevent something worse from happening.

For a silly example... If I were to run across an empty street (not in a crosswalk) to help steady a ladder someone was about to fall from, then I technically jaywalked. However, it was done with very little risk or downside to prevent someone from getting seriously hurt.

The officer could see that and write a ticket, then let the judge/courts sort it out. But that would clog up the courts with a bunch of trivial cases, while also having citizens upset with unjust laws. It can also lead to people refusing to help others in the name of obeying laws that are well intentioned, but can't be applied universally for society to continue to function.