Law Enforcement’s “Warrior” Problem • Hacker News Board

Re: Law Enforcement’s “Warrior” Problem

#131

Post by bdcravens » Thu, Jun 11, 2015, 7:09 PM UTC

dllthomas wrote: post #87

bdcravens wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The irony is, of course, that being a police officer is not even a very dangerous job. http://www.cnn.com/2015/05/10/us/mississippi-police-officers... Routine traffic stop. Pretty sure I've never heard of a developer being murdered during a pull request. > That leads me to conclude they're just a bunch of cowards with an inferiority complex out to hurt people to make themselves feel better. I'm sure cops exist who…

"Pretty sure I've never heard of a developer being murdered during a pull request." Pretty sure developer isn't the line for "very dangerous job".

I agree, but the feeling I was getting from joesmo was that law enforcement was just another job, with little risk.

Re: Law Enforcement’s “Warrior” Problem

#132

Post by digikata » Thu, Jun 11, 2015, 7:20 PM UTC

nine_k wrote: post #26

ZanyProgrammer wrote: post #7

Cops need to stop dressing like they are mercs in Iraq circa 2004. Tactical vests, cargo pants with a shitload of shit hanging off them-the average (non SWAT) cop now looks like they are ready to go off on a patrol in a hostile village. I'm an Army vet, and cops dressing like that does intimidate me a little bit-I can't imagine that they present the image of a friendly ally to the average person. Men should also grow…

As a complete civilian, I'd say that police in all their gear do not look intimidating to me. Mostly it's the posture, the facial expression, the tone of voice that makes someone look friendly (or not). I look at them as I look at construction workers or garbage truckers: this is what they have to wear to do their job, not best-looking, not most comfortable. I can sympathize. How is all this gear useful is another qu…

The posture and expression is a part of training often referred to as "Command Presence". I sympathize with the need to protect oneself on the job, but applying "Command Presence" to every situation also escalates problems which would have otherwise been non-issues.

Re: Law Enforcement’s “Warrior” Problem

#133

Post by hga » Thu, Jun 11, 2015, 7:25 PM UTC

shit_parade2 wrote: post #123

hga wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And more often right, at least in the tapes I and people I trust have analyzed. In theory (yes, I know, you can stop laughing), per https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tennessee_v._Garner police can only use lethal force in self-defense and in defense of others, no shooting a non-violent fleeing criminal, they have no more rights in that area than us armed civilians. I wonder if you grok the concept of per-capita statistic…

Its bizarre how people will say something when it flies in the face of observable reality. the US police state slaughters more people than is acknowledged, it requires a UK newspaper to get the correct amount. Cite court cases all you want, they directly contradict what the police get away with everyday, you plainly see on tape them beating and killing people, planting evidence, destroying evidence and private proper…

I guess it's too fine a distinction for your tastes; in my book you might say there are are:

Good cops in a few rural places where they're too busy to be bad or thugs.

Bad cops who don't directly commit crimes but are part of the Blue Wall of Silence that covers up for:

Thug cops who assault citizens and their dogs (and see elsewhere in this discussion for a cat executed by a cop, but that seems to be rare).

(There's also dirty cops who e.g. get paid to do stuff like look the other way, but we're not talking about them and I don't think they're now hardly as bad a problem as thug cops, but they are another argument for ending the War On Drugs.)

I believe the majority of cops are "bad cops" per the above, which does not mean there aren't a lot of thug cops, neither of whom I make apologies for their crimes.

Re: Law Enforcement’s “Warrior” Problem

#134

Post by LordKano » Thu, Jun 11, 2015, 7:25 PM UTC

ZanyProgrammer wrote: post #7

Cops need to stop dressing like they are mercs in Iraq circa 2004. Tactical vests, cargo pants with a shitload of shit hanging off them-the average (non SWAT) cop now looks like they are ready to go off on a patrol in a hostile village. I'm an Army vet, and cops dressing like that does intimidate me a little bit-I can't imagine that they present the image of a friendly ally to the average person. Men should also grow…

When you equip men for war, they start to think of themselves as soldiers.

At one time, we at least used to pretend that cops were public servants. We need to go back to that.

Re: Law Enforcement’s “Warrior” Problem

#135

Post by venomsnake » Thu, Jun 11, 2015, 7:28 PM UTC

Jtsummers wrote: post #32

bdcravens wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The irony is, of course, that being a police officer is not even a very dangerous job. http://www.cnn.com/2015/05/10/us/mississippi-police-officers... Routine traffic stop. Pretty sure I've never heard of a developer being murdered during a pull request. > That leads me to conclude they're just a bunch of cowards with an inferiority complex out to hurt people to make themselves feel better. I'm sure cops exist who…

> Congratulations, I think this is the most bigoted and stereotyping post I have ever read on Hacker News. Ever. DamnYuppie: > We have large populations of minorities who feel entitled to behave badly without any consequence because the color of their skin. I dunno. DamnYuppie may be winning. At least joesmo is bigoted against people because of their chosen profession. Unlike DamnYuppie who's bigoted against people f…

Well there is a growing backlash against SJW so accusation in bigotry is not a big deal in growing segment of the population.

Re: Law Enforcement’s “Warrior” Problem

#136

Post by dmfdmf » Thu, Jun 11, 2015, 7:29 PM UTC

curun1r wrote: post #106

dmfdmf wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Beyond how they look, it's like they're at times forgetting these are citizens and not enemy combatants. This can't be stressed enough. What needs to be stopped is the false distinction of civilian vs non-civilian in police work and policy. That is strictly a military distinction in combat and does not apply to civilized enforcement of the law during normal circumstances. Cops are not above the law and are just civ…

It's also important to continually remind citizens that police officers are human beings too and not just implements the state uses to punish people. Stuff like a program a local police department started in cooperation with a local pizzeria where they stop children who are properly wearing helmets while riding their bicycles and give them a coupon for a free personal pizza and a thank you for doing the right thing.…

I think the drug laws are one of the main reason that cops have isolated themselves from non-LEO. When was the last time you went to a party or even a dinner party and an off-duty police officer was present? The LEOs are isolating because they know that if they witness a crime such as drug use they can get in trouble if they don't report it. To avoid this they don't socialize outside other LEOs which I think reinforces the us vs them or citizen vs non-citizen distinction that needs to be broken down. The internet has really helped as some cops do participate in public forums and this type of socializing is crucial so that cops and cop culture are more integrated with civil society.

Re: Law Enforcement’s “Warrior” Problem

#137

Post by CWuestefeld » Thu, Jun 11, 2015, 7:31 PM UTC

jowiar wrote: post #104

maxerickson wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Camden is touting their experiment with it as a success. I don't know how true that is or if Camden is typical enough that the experience would generalize. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/19/us/politics/obama-to-limit...

Camden is plenty "typical enough" in terms of poverty-stricken, gang-filled neighborhoods. What might exist in Camden that doesn't exist elsewhere is that, at least as far as local government goes, Camden doesn't have the governing tensions that exist in other cities, with a rich "governing class" (read: white yuppies) doing all that they can to "protect themselves" from "the others". Like all cities, it gets thoroug…

Like all cities, it gets thoroughly screwed by the State

I'm no expert on this, but I can think of important counterexamples, so I'm not sure this is true at all.

Counterexample #1 - New York. It seems that this name is pretty much synonymous with the city plus a bit of surrounding area, and the upstate regions are completely forgotten. In particular, the areas that have to host NYC's water supply get particularly hosed: their economies are significantly based on tourism and fishing, but the flow of the Upper Delaware is entirely governed by NYC needs, ignoring the fish. Further, the State has banned fracking, largely in order to guarantee the integrity of the reservoirs, and at the expense of the only opportunity that those living on the Marcellus Shale have to escape their rut.

Counterexample #2 - Austin, TX. Again relating to water, it seems that the city gets priority access to water (a scarce commodity in much of TX). Lake Travis and Lake Buchanan were sacrificed, emptying to something around 30% capacity (I forget the exact numbers) until our recent floods, so that Ladybird Lake (the center of the city) could be kept beautiful and full - and they're even talking about building a water park. So suburban and rural interests were subordinated to aesthetics in the city.

Re: Law Enforcement’s “Warrior” Problem

#138

Post by venomsnake » Thu, Jun 11, 2015, 7:34 PM UTC

glimmung wrote: post #29

Horrifying. These guys could do worse than read some Terry Pratchett - his Sam Vimes character had a fine appreciation of the difference between a soldier and a policeman.

The difference between a baton and a sword.

Re: Law Enforcement’s “Warrior” Problem

#139

Post by remarkEon » Thu, Jun 11, 2015, 7:44 PM UTC

lepht wrote: post #127

remarkEon wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Didn't even notice but when I looked again at the subdued flag patch I noticed he's got a mini eotech on the front rail of that gun. My platoon sergeant would have lost his mind.

Mind explaining the "eotech"/platoon sargeant being upset, for us civilians? ;)

Eotechs are, generally, optics designed for close quarters combat (though there are limited instances where it would be appropriate on a gun like that...maybe on a long gun from an unstable platform like a helicopter and you have a big target). Think inside of a building where you're shooting around corners or short hallways and you need both eyes open for depth perception. I was a platoon leader (lieutenant) and the platoon sergeant is the senior enlisted man in the platoon who is the most experienced with the technical side of combat. My platoon sergeant hated when people just tried to "look cool" with the things they put on their kit or gun that made no practical sense.

Re: Law Enforcement’s “Warrior” Problem

#140

Post by stonogo » Thu, Jun 11, 2015, 7:47 PM UTC

bdcravens wrote: post #113

stonogo wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody is saying the job is completely free of danger. We're saying they don't need MRAPs and assault rifles. You don't get to exclude the middle ground here. And fuck your passing dig at accusing me of armchair activism; I've served in actual wars, as infantry, where I was less well-equipped than some of these suburban police departments. I am fully aware that danger exists, and what it looks like. It is being overs…

I was originally address joesmo's comment: "being a police officer is not even a very dangerous job" And I apologize if my words suggested a dig at you - I was still addressing the idea that it's a safe pedestrian job filled with intentional racists. I really was speaking to the general HN'er, rather than you specifically. I think you'll agree that there is a lot of armchair activists who have never seen a battle fie…

It really isn't a particularly dangerous job, regardless of the opinions of social media users. For instance, doing the research you suggested isn't feasible, because no Chicago police officers have been killed AT ALL since 2011.

A brief record search indicates approximately 440 Chicago PD officers died in the entire 20th century -- remarkably similar to the number of murder victims in the city per annum among the general population.

Police officers need training, and they need public support, and they need good leadership and a healthy government to support and oversee them -- but they don't need breathless hyperbole that justifies warfare-grade equipment loadout.