141–150 of 211 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Self defense isn't "you killed 1,200 people of our people so we're going to kill 60,000+ of your people (majority of which are children), destroy any all your hospitals and educational centers and prevent basics like food, water and medical supplies from getting to you." At what point do you listen to humanitarian organizations and the UN? Amazing that you think 24 people is a genocide but not 60,000+.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The skills for putting out fires is very different from those for investigating fire-related crimes. It's literally a subarea of forensic science...
The fire department is bigger than the guys riding the truck. Those same guys aren't doing the investigation either. It's like saying cops can't investigate crimes because all they do is sit in medians and check for speeders.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Then you should read the article.
I did. I believe this sort of stuff to be, at least morally, a violation of the 4A. It's no secret that the anti-Israel protests have gotten an inordinate amount of attention from the law relative to any harm caused, and overstepping bounds like this even to catch actual criminals (as happened here) isn't worth the price paid in liberty. My comment was targeted at the government/ICE's notorious targeting of anti-Isra…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So adding more responsibilities to police to now also get expert level training in determining causes of fires and finding clues in a fire incident. That's kind of how we got here. Where the police are a panacea making them less effective and more corrupt since they are an even bigger keystone. Separating out duties to experts is more effective. Let the fire department investigate fires and then pass on the informati…
> So adding more responsibilities to police to now also get expert level training in determining causes of fires and finding clues in a fire incident. In Germany, we have the same separation. We have solved the issue by having dedicated units for stuff like political crimes, online crimes, fire/arson investigators, organized crime, property crimes, violent crimes, drug units, you name it. They're all policemen and -w…
Not a bad idea at all. The people from the fire department investigating arson are highly specialized. The only difference between the two systems is which head organization it falls under. So it would be like your fire/arson investigators working under the fire department instead of the police.
US policing has regularly been used to commit abuse and harassment as well as straight crimes. So having that consolidation of power is not good. This store is a perfect example of why they need to be separated because the police cannot be trusted to use facial ID tech responsibly.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The definitions of genocide and war. To be clear: attempting to destroy a people for simply being a type of people is different from focusing on a state. One can be at war and still be committing genocide.
[flagged]
Genuinely curious if anyone can defend their "it's a genocide" position. Seems to me like it is a (very one-sided) war.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The job of the fire department should be to fight fires, not to investigate crimes. Part of the investigation is determining whether the event is actually a crime. I'd much rather have subject matter experts make the determination of arson vs. act-of-god rather than "every nail needs a hammer" police force.
Determining if it was an arson vs act-of-god should be mostly lab work, analyzing how the fire spread, whether there are any traces of flammable substances that should not be there, etc. That's what fire department should do, because they have expertise here. Analyzing security footage for potential suspects should be done by police.
Again, it's not just "potential suspects" it's potential witnesses, or identification of potential casualties. I don't feel great about state actors of any type using facial ID, but I can think of any number of reasons why a FD might use it in the course of their duties, and I would much prefer they have it over the PD.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
The police should follow the rules laid out for them. If they don't, I would very much like to see them in prison.
a) The rights were preserved, the assaulter walks free on account of the NYPD's misconduct. The rock throwers have zero cause to be upset, the law protected them from the police overreach successfully.
b) The student was not charged with "anti-war sentiment". He was charged with assault, for throwing rocks at people.
[flagged]
It is likewise misleading to imply that the fact they are a student protester is irrelevant. They are trying very hard to make an example out of these people.