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

Lawmakers begin bipartisan push to cut off police access to military-style gear

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 339 posts

Re: Lawmakers begin bipartisan push to cut off police access to military-style gear

#231

Post by chillacy »

flowersjeff wrote: post #207

Great first (if baby) step. As others have already said here, more is needed. I think another proper move would be to abolish police unions - nationally. This coming from a pro-union individual; however, these organizations have failed the public in my opinion. And it's not really their fault. Unions are tasked with strictly defined goals around protection/advancement of wages, hours, benefits, and working conditions…

It's definitely evidence that unions work at a minimum. It's just as you said, unions advocate for their members above all else. Just like a union of coal miners might be against environmental regulation if it protects the jobs.

Re: Lawmakers begin bipartisan push to cut off police access to military-style gear

#232

Post by rayiner »

eloff wrote: post #70
Shivetya wrote: post #28

The equipment issue isn't going to solve anything, this is just lip service to the real problem. Police Unions have effectively created a system by which officers are nearly immune from prosecution and even if successfully prosecuted their record cannot travel with them in many cases. Now one fix that removing some of the equipment will do will reduce the amount of psychological impact it has on those wielding it, as…

Yes, you're right that this won't achieve real change. I truly like the idea of civilian oversight boards. However, I think any meaningful change or even competent governance is of the table in the US until something is done about the broken and polarized two party system. Right now the two factions are about evenly matched and can hardly agree on anything. Until that changes the US will continue to have their most u…

We agree on violent policing! Seriously, just look at where these cops firing rubber bullets and tear gas work. Almost all working for mayors with D besides their names. The level of police aggression isn’t palpably different whether you’re in Orlando or Minneapolis, and those two cities have vastly different politics.

Re: Lawmakers begin bipartisan push to cut off police access to military-style gear

#233

Post by jacobush »

sxcurry wrote: post #204

Some thoughts: 1) Fire all current police officers 2) Hire back maybe 25% in numbers, but different profile people 3) Stop enforcing drug laws 4) Convert all property crime handling to online recording 5) Take away police guns, tear gas, etc, except in very rare circumstances 6) Have police focus on the very few dangerous situations where they are actually needed.

Getting rid of 75% of the Police force in one go seems like the recipe that the US used in Iraq and which resulted in the creation of ISIS.

(The US civilian administrator fired a HUGE chunk of armed men who could no longer provide for their families. Their services were eventually rendered elsewhere. I’m sure ex-police will find rackets, new and old.)

Re: Lawmakers begin bipartisan push to cut off police access to military-style gear

#234

Post by jacobush »

inetknght wrote: post #107
RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote: post #3

> Mr. Gallego said. “Our neighborhoods aren’t war zones.” Unfortunately, I am not sure that will be the case in a week. I think by the time the actual voting on the bill comes, it is likely that either the protests have died down removing the immediacy of this, or else there is so much destruction in the cities that this becomes not politically viable.

> Unfortunately, I am not sure that will be the case in a week. A week? I think it's already not the case. Maybe not across the entire nation but certainly in some places. I can see an argument that Twitter isn't a source of "quality" journalism. But these things are so widespread that I think it's hard to not only discredit it but even ignore it. In the first link [0] you've got National Guard walking in a neighborh…

The National Guard said it was the MPD who was doing the shooting.

Re: Lawmakers begin bipartisan push to cut off police access to military-style gear

#235

Post by chillacy »

LevGoldstein wrote: post #165
mberning wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not seeing the privacy issue. In most cases the police are interacting with people out in the public rather than in their homes and businesses. In most jurisdictions it is already one party consent to record.

Privacy issues as in "I'm in the middle of my shift and need to use the restroom, but can't shut off the always-on recording" is a common example.

It could just be that police testimony is not admissible without extra video evidence. In this day and age it may make sense. Especially given how the George Floyd and Amy Cooper incidents wouldn't have been known without video evidence since both involved people lying.

Re: Lawmakers begin bipartisan push to cut off police access to military-style gear

#236

Post by pstuart »

Shivetya wrote: post #28

The equipment issue isn't going to solve anything, this is just lip service to the real problem. Police Unions have effectively created a system by which officers are nearly immune from prosecution and even if successfully prosecuted their record cannot travel with them in many cases. Now one fix that removing some of the equipment will do will reduce the amount of psychological impact it has on those wielding it, as…

5) Make police self-insured, backed by their pensions.

Re: Lawmakers begin bipartisan push to cut off police access to military-style gear

#237

Post by chipperyman573 »

ksdale wrote: post #53
in_cahoots wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there any evidence this is true? The vast majority of cops will never aim their weapons at another person or use military gear beyond training. Is the slim chance of getting to use a humvee once in your career really compelling?

A lot of people end up in law school because of courtroom dramas, even though the vast majority of attorneys don't spend much time at all in a courtroom...

You're backing a claim made without any evidence by using another claim without evidence

Re: Lawmakers begin bipartisan push to cut off police access to military-style gear

#238

Post by [deleted] »

mulmen wrote: post #157
mberning wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not seeing the privacy issue. In most cases the police are interacting with people out in the public rather than in their homes and businesses. In most jurisdictions it is already one party consent to record.

Because being recorded can have a chilling effect on speech. Officers recording a peaceful, legal protest could exert undue influence on constitutional rights. It’s a reasonable concern. More cameras is not always good, even in public and even if legal.

[deleted]

Re: Lawmakers begin bipartisan push to cut off police access to military-style gear

#239

Post by AWildC182 »

in_cahoots wrote: post #51
AWildC182 wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's interesting trolling that side of the youtube algorithm. It's abundantly clear that we've shifted from cops just being a mix of individuals who want to help and a substantial number of not-so-ex-high-school-bullies to full on military LARPers. The DHS funding being pumped into the forces have resulted in police being better battle-equipped than the average country's military and this has become a recruiting tool…

Is there any evidence this is true? The vast majority of cops will never aim their weapons at another person or use military gear beyond training. Is the slim chance of getting to use a humvee once in your career really compelling?

Traditionally that was the case, however there's been an increase in incidents where they have been responding with far more gear and weapons than could possibly be reasonable. In short, they're actively looking for excuses to play dress-up and it's getting worse.

Re: Lawmakers begin bipartisan push to cut off police access to military-style gear

#240

Post by throwaway0a5e »

potta_coffee wrote: post #208
mstade wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Clearly you’ve never driven in the US of A. ;o) Facetious commentary aside – and I do apologize for the tongue in cheekness – as a European I’ve always been struck by just how many wrecks and other debris are littered by the side of the roads in the US. Mileage varies I’m sure (no pun intended) but I covered 6660 miles on a road trip through in the US last year and it seemed almost universal to me that you’d see at l…

I don't think many truckers intentionally ignore blown out tires. It's likely they just haven't noticed.

They don't ignore them. They are mashing that skinny pedal to get that truck somewhere they can get a new tire on the double before DOT sees it and puts them in an expensive and time consuming hole it may take weeks to dig out of depending on who they work for and the details of their operation. The incentive structure truckers work under isn't ideal to say the least.
Post reply on HN