291–300 of 369 posts
How is it legal for a police offer to arrest someone without any warning, without even telling them why they're being arrested, and without probable cause? What are the repercussions for these officers for falsely arresting people? Do they suffer any consequences, or do they suffer no punishment for this injustice? This is extremely disturbing, and further evidence that the U.S. is a police state. I've never felt mor…
For police? In the US? Very funny.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This is simply not true. Police may not keep you detained if they do not have probable cause or reasonable suspicion that you have committed a crime. However, in real life, they do this sometimes, even though it's been ruled unconstitutional. They don't have to charge you, so they don't have to prove it. > They don't suffer consequences enough, though, and depend on citizens not knowing that what the police are doi…
Burden of proof is different for detaining, arrest and when in court if one is charged. They have to have PC to arrest someone. Even if you're not charged, PC has to be there for an arrest to be justified.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The crew headed by the white reporter moved when police asked, they were behind “the line”. The crew that was arrested should not have been but it’s not the same scenario. Are you sure it’s as simple as “this guy was black”? If you aren’t sure it seems like a bad accusation to make.
The person you are replying to just pointed out the race of relevant parties. > Are you sure it’s as simple as “this guy was black”? If you aren’t sure it seems like a bad accusation to make. Come again? First, the post doesn't rise to the level of "accusation." In fact, it explicitly leaves open the possibility that it's a coincidence. Second, should we just not mention statistically relevant variables? Not report o…
Except that also arrested was a white guy and a latino guy.
Aren’t those relevant variables?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're right, context is huge. The area had already been cleared of protesters. There was no imminent threat of any kind. The crew of a national news organization showed their valid credentials. There is absolutely no excuse for this.
> You're right, context is huge. The area had already been cleared of protesters. There was no imminent threat of any kind. I'm asking if you or anyone else has video proof of that. Are national news organizations exempt from an order like this to move (I know in some cases they are, but again, the lack of contextual proof here makes me question what they were told prior to what we've seen).
I've been watching what happens, at they always come almost exactly 2 minutes after I post something - on this and another account I use. It's pretty clear that there's some downvote bot activity going on (in addition to the usual "haters").
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If it was because the reporters here were 'too close' then that does kind of fit the narrative the cops gave, except they should have told them where they should go instead of arresting them of course. Still, does not make it racism. Plenty of cops make bad decisions, it doesn't make them all racist.
> If it was because the reporters here were 'too close' then that does kind of fit the narrative the cops gave They were live on TV, so you can tell the cop's explanation was BS. When told they had to move, the reporter asked where was OK, at which point he was arrested. The crew was given no chance to comply with the orders.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ah yes, the NYT is fake news but we should trust a Wikipedia article that is in the process of being deleted because it is fabricated.
The New York Times appears to me and many others misguided on the issue of race. The 1776 Wikipedia page does not appear to be slated for deletion, I'm not sure what you're talking about there.
When a group of white people and a group with a black person are doing the exact same thing (reporting for cable news), positioned equidistant on opposite sides of a group of police offers and one group gets arrested and the other does not, how is that not racism? It is literally a natural experiment with a single variable (race) changed.
Why was this post flagged?
Because it's not on topic. It is almost definitely crime or politics. From FAQ: What to Submit On-Topic: Anything that good hackers would find interesting. That includes more than hacking and startups. If you had to reduce it to a sentence, the answer might be: anything that gratifies one's intellectual curiosity. Off-Topic: Most stories about politics, or crime, or sports, unless they're evidence of some interesting…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's horrifying. Why don't we change the law?
Courts are normally extremely deferential to law enforcement. Coupled with the fact that increasing oversight or increasing restrictions on law enforcement leads to a barrage of "soft on crime" political attack ads, and you get what we have today.
At this point I'm basically waiting for a politician to adopt "soft on crime" as a campaign slogan and rebrand it as a rehabilitation program where you turn drug dealers into docile flower shop owners as opposed to opponents who "make crime tough" by sending people to "crime school" prisons and turning them into hardened career criminals with switchblades and facial tattoos.
The real problem is the same as it is in general -- special interest groups (in this case police and prison guard unions and private prison companies) are the ones who spend the most effort lobbying on the issue. It also doesn't help at all when we disenfranchise "convicts" because we're then disenfranchising the victims of the system whenever it makes a mistake (which is often).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Cannot be the right call. The tax payers lose in the coverage and they lose in the lawsuit. Having police officers paid so little that you put up with 18 violations, or willfully ignore them out of comraderie is fundamentally a system that is not sustainable or worth having pride over.
Police officers make bank. In many places their salaries are public record. Plus, they get overtime and contract work as well. So their salary might be $80,000 per year, but they get overtime at like $60/hr, and they get work doing private security for movie theaters, events, etc. Probably at a similar rate. Then you factor in top tier healthcare and a very generous pension program, and their total compensation ballo…
I once helped to organize a permitted bike race. As part of the permitting process, we needed approval from several city departments, including the police department.
In the prior five years of attending races, I never encountered a situation that would call for on-site security. Despite that, our permit required us to hire 4 security people. Oh, and the security people were required to be officers from the local jurisdiction.
It really felt like paying protection money to the mob.