Live data from Hacker News

The Human Toll of Flashbangs

propublica.org

221–230 of 262 posts

Re: The Human Toll of Flashbangs

#221
post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, keep in mind that we the Europeans had a few oppressors in the last hundred years. We know how it looks.

To be fair, unless you're over 60, you probably don't know how it looks, you only know what you've been told, or what you've led yourself to believe.

You should go and read some history books, assuming you're able to read and comprehend them.

The DDR aka East Germany ended in the 90s, and the Franco regime in Spain ended 1975 with Francos death.

It is debatable if one should also count the Yugoslavian/Serbian government which existed until the mid-90s as oppressive - I certainly do, Miloševic rot in pieces.

Oh, I almost forgot the rest of the Soviet block... so you basically have oppressive regimes as low as 20-30 years ago, leaving a LOT of people with first hand experience.

Re: The Human Toll of Flashbangs

#222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For anyone interested in the video: Warning it's graphical, naturally. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6tpAZObNZfI To summarize, indeed he says 'Im not a murderer' while picking up his bag, just standing around. They fire the grenade, tell him to get down blabla. He never steps forward in any way, charges them or attacks, while the officers close in and put a dog on him. Seconds later he turns away and gets shot mult…

And this is the problem with guns, imagine if the police didn't have any guns and they would have to approach him by first. Obviously they outnumber him but know (unless he has a lethal weapon on him) there shouldn't be any lethal force. Guns escalate the situation way too quickly to a life threatening one ...

Police in Australia carry guns and yet suspects being shot dead is rare enough that when it happens it tends to be headline news (often nationally). Perhaps part of this is that civilians in Australia are far less likely to be carrying weapons themselves, so police do not have to be as cautious as in the US.

Ultimately, I don't believe the problem lies with the firearms but with the culture. As an Australian visiting or moving to the US, you will inevitably be reminded that if a US police officer pulls you over you should not get out of your car. I've had people tell me that if you do get out of the car, the officer will draw their weapon and take aim. Perhaps that is exaggerated, but to me that is an absolutely ludicrous reaction. It paints a picture of US police as having an extremely paranoid, "us vs. them" mindset. What I read in the news and have witnessed since I moved here seems to confirm that.

Re: The Human Toll of Flashbangs

#223
post #220
post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's only a problem if unreasonable, excessive and unwarranted violence is used by the law enforcers. They should use every available indicator of crime in order to focus on problem areas. The alternative means that we're willingly sacrificing safety, peace and security in order to not offend, and that I find absolutely distasteful and negligent. Of course, 100% innocent until proven guilty; I'm not saying we should…

No, there are problems with racial profiling long before things devolve to "unreasonable, excessive and unwarranted violence." What defines a "problem area" as you put it? What is an "indicator"? Am I incorrectly reading between the lines here to say that you believe that it is perfectly acceptable to police black neighborhoods at a higher rate merely because they are black neighborhoods? That is, your "indicator" is…

Yes, I absolutely think the police should not discriminate against crime-heavy neighborhoods by policing them less than they deserve/need. To police them less is the discriminatory thing to do, as they need it more than safer neighborhoods.

Of course, the entire discussion we're having is invalid if we work with the premise that more policing = more convictions, by virtue of the crime being everywhere (across boundaries in whatever criteria you wish, e.g. race) regardless, and convictions being a simple byproduct of policing and not of said underlying factor like race, obesity, education, socioeconomic status, or hair-color.

Re: The Human Toll of Flashbangs

#224
post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find that logic utterly distorted. Give a bunch of humans guns, the right to use deadly force and then for some reason worry about making them 'feel safe' -- oh, and also absolve them if things go wrong (or even if they break the law), as we've seen in recent US news. I think they're already safer than most people. What cops really need is better and more substantive training, not equipment to hide behind.

No, tinco is right about officer safety. You really want those "men with gun and right to use deadly force" to feel safe, so that they don't exercise their killing license prematurely. When the officers feel safe and thus sure of themselves, they're more likely to follow proper procedures instead of being afraid of their own safety. I'm not saying that you should give them armoured troop carriers though. You want the…

I find it ridiculous that anyone worries about officer safety in this way. It seems almost perverse to me.

If we're worried about officers prematurely killing people how does giving them military-style tools make that any better? If they were going to prematurely kill people before, they're still going to do it. The definition of 'safe' simply moves to a new place. If the OP demonstrates anything, it's that if you give law enforcement these kinds of 'toys' they will find any and every excuse to use them (all under the fake banner of 'officer safety').

Edit: Taking some words from your comment, I guess what I'm arguing is that law enforcement is already pretty invincible.

Re: The Human Toll of Flashbangs

#225
post #223
post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, there are problems with racial profiling long before things devolve to "unreasonable, excessive and unwarranted violence." What defines a "problem area" as you put it? What is an "indicator"? Am I incorrectly reading between the lines here to say that you believe that it is perfectly acceptable to police black neighborhoods at a higher rate merely because they are black neighborhoods? That is, your "indicator" is…

Yes, I absolutely think the police should not discriminate against crime-heavy neighborhoods by policing them less than they deserve/need. To police them less is the discriminatory thing to do, as they need it more than safer neighborhoods. Of course, the entire discussion we're having is invalid if we work with the premise that more policing = more convictions, by virtue of the crime being everywhere (across boundar…

My point of contention isn't whether or not we should police high crime neighborhoods more or less, it's whether we should condone the (less-common) explicit or (more-common) implicit police policy of using race as a proxy for the other variables that I mentioned previously. You've danced around my question: is race a valid "indicator" of "problem areas" in your model?

Re: The Human Toll of Flashbangs

#226
post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair, unless you're over 60, you probably don't know how it looks, you only know what you've been told, or what you've led yourself to believe.

You should go and read some history books, assuming you're able to read and comprehend them. The DDR aka East Germany ended in the 90s, and the Franco regime in Spain ended 1975 with Francos death. It is debatable if one should also count the Yugoslavian/Serbian government which existed until the mid-90s as oppressive - I certainly do, Miloševic rot in pieces. Oh, I almost forgot the rest of the Soviet block... so yo…

> assuming you're able to read and comprehend them

Personal attacks are not ok on Hacker News. Please follow the site guidelines.

Re: The Human Toll of Flashbangs

#227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While we should be on guard for police abuses let's not pretend it is anywhere near Mao or Stalin.

It's not "police abuse" anymore, it's police murdering people in broad daylight, for no reason whatsoever (e.g. see that video of a homeless person being shot). And around the whole country, military-grade equipment is widely deployed, to be used against civilian situation. That scares the shit out of me, and I don't even live in the US. Maybe your government is nowhere near Mao or Stalin, but all the required pieces…

> but all the required pieces of oppression are being rapidly put into place

This was the point I was trying to make. No, we aren't there yet, but we're on the slope and it's getting more slippery every day.

Re: The Human Toll of Flashbangs

#228
post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

UK police routinely deal with this by talking the person down, use of TASER, or baton strike. http://www.quora.com/How-do-British-police-officers-manage-t... (There used to be an excellent police blogger who talked about doing this from firsthand experience, but he was de-anonymised and his blog taken down).

As a former UK police officer I can assure you that if armed police officers came across someone with a drawn knife at least one firearm would be aimed at them. One of my officer safety trainers was a qualified close protection officer (i.e. bodygaurd) who ran through one of their scenarios whereby someone with a knife faces off across the diagonal length of a basketball court sized room with someone with a holstered…

This is something that we legally armed US citizens train in, along of course with our police: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tueller_Drill

For others reading this, there are a lot of good videos on the net showing examples of it.

Re: The Human Toll of Flashbangs

#229
I don't even know what to say after reading that article.

How can this be even remotely acceptable to anyone?

I mean they are using them in cases where they know for a fact it is not a dangerous situation - an elderly woman selling beer? They used it TWICE? Really?

Re: The Human Toll of Flashbangs

#230
post #204
post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are correct in that I didn't include early pension. I also didn't include stock options. It's very hard to do a full cost analysis. I would be pleased if you could present better numbers. Spooky23 specifically excluded the Bay Area ("coders outside of the Bay Area") so your point doesn't apply.

Sorry, that was less clear, the same thing that hurts bay area Developers are just as relevant in other areas. Sure, the bay area is a very expensive area, but so are NY and DC which also have lots of software developers. Police are paid more in high cost of living areas, but they are also far more widespread spread. Consider Virginia: Northern Virginia has higher cost of living and a disproportionate share of develo…

All of what you are saying is true, but it's on a different track. I was addressing what I thought and still think were incorrect statements by Spooky23.

I did not restrict myself to state-wide numbers. I also listed information about the metropolitan regions with the highest officer, first-line management of officers, and software developer salaries.

I am unsure as to what your point is. Should I have included cost-of-living adjustments? That seems unduly difficult for the point I was trying to make, which itself was an order of magnitude above the written effort by Spooky23 in making those statements in the first place.

The numbers I reported already seemed tilted since I excluded the two highest paying states (California and Washington). Even then, software developers were still making 15K/year more than the 75 percentile of police officers (patrol and first-line). The full analysis would also have to define what "hick" means; I arbitrarily decided it was the bottom 20 or 30% of salaries. I strongly doubt this is true.

There are 954 people in the Deputy Sheriff Retirement System of West Virginia. this is essentially confirmed with https://www.wvretirement.com/DSRS.html which says "DSRS currently has approximately 990 active members and 299 retired members."

http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_wv.htm#23-0000 says there are 3,500 "Police and Sheriff's Patrol Officers" for West Virginia, and 410 "First-Line Supervisors of Police and Detectives" with median wages of $37,830 and $54,910, respectively.

You can see that Deputy Sheriffs don't make much ( http://woodcountywv.com/page/page149.php says Annual Salary $32,603, http://www.glassdoor.com/Salary/Berkeley-County-Sheriff-West... says $36K, http://www.heraldmailmedia.com/news/tri_state/west_virginia/... says $36,048.)

Thus it cannot be that most of the police officers employed in West Virginia retire in the Deputy Sheriff Retirement System because some 75% of the police officers are not deputy sheriffs.

As a further refinement of your numbers, https://www.wvretirement.com/DSRS.html reports "Active members contribute 8.5% of their gross monthly salary pre-tax and the Sheriff's Office contributes an additional 12.5% of the member's gross monthly salary... A member is vested after completion of 60 months of covered employment. ... A regular retirement benefit, paid in equal monthly installments, is an amount equal to 2.25% of a member's final average salary multiplied by the member's years of credited service." This is in line with what you estimated.

I then went to https://www.wvretirement.com/Forms/2012-CAFR.pdf . On p187 it says that 1 pensioner made over $60K/year in pension, 1 made over $48K, and most (168 of 272) made under $24K/year. It also says that plan is set up to earn 7%/year. The math to see if that all works out is not something I want to do now.

Under my earlier numbers, I estimated a software developer salary of $93,486, which is about 20% higher than the officer salary of $77,683. With access to the same pension savings fund, doesn't that make the two salaries roughly equivalent, and give the software developer a chance to retire after 20 years?

Of course, there are no software development unions in the US to oversee such a retirement fund. Our loss.

Post reply on HN