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

My family saw a police car hit a kid, then I learned how NYPD impunity works

propublica.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

631–640 of 650 posts

Re: My family saw a police car hit a kid, then I learned how NYPD impunity works

#631

Post by Pfhreak »

DenisM wrote: post #593
Pfhreak wrote: post #573

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Outrageous is your word. Have you seen the video? The cop full on decks a woman who gives his arm a light push. It's definitely out of line, he's not trying to defuse the situation, he's grappling another woman and is clearly out of control of the situation. This continues a pattern of excessive force from the dept. From the Justice Department's findings on the SPD: > Our investigation finds repeated uses of excessiv…

The video doesn’t show on my phone. From your description it sounds somewhat excessive, but not outlandishly so. Also I find it odd that decade-old events are being brought up. Yes, it’s pretty much a recorded fact that excessive force was used back then. DOJ forced the the SPD through a reform program, the result of that program should be judged to decide what if anything needs to be done at SPD. Otherwise it’s like…

Footage from the protests shows pretty extreme violence, and SPD shot and killed a black man in lower Queen Anne in May of this year after charging him with a dog. Yes, the suspect had a knife and was very loud, and may have been suffering from mental health or a crisis, but SPD definitely could have handled this differently.

https://komonews.com/news/local/seattle-police-investigating...

Re: My family saw a police car hit a kid, then I learned how NYPD impunity works

#632

Post by WillPostForFood »

StavrosK wrote: post #442
WillPostForFood wrote: post #425

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Homicide rate was 4 per 100k in the 50s, spiked up to 10 through the 60s and 70s, dipped a bit in the 80s, then dropped from 1991 to to now back to around 6. The increase in crime in the 60s and 70s didn't correlate with more guns, the decrease in crime in the late 90's didn't correlate with fewer guns. There is clearly something going on in the US that drives crime that is not guns. Culture, welfare state, war on dr…

Your causation goes the wrong way. The GP didn't say that less crime would cause fewer guns, but that fewer guns would cause less crime. You can't say "but guns stayed the same and crime both increased and decreased at points, which means that guns don't affect crime".

You can't say "but guns stayed the same and crime both increased and decreased at points, which means that guns don't affect crime".

I didn't say they don't affect crime, but if crime spikes, then drops then spikes, while gun ownership remains steady, then it is a piece of evidence that crime is largely driven by something other than the quantity of guns.

Re: My family saw a police car hit a kid, then I learned how NYPD impunity works

#633

Post by StavrosK »

WillPostForFood wrote: post #632
StavrosK wrote: post #442

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your causation goes the wrong way. The GP didn't say that less crime would cause fewer guns, but that fewer guns would cause less crime. You can't say "but guns stayed the same and crime both increased and decreased at points, which means that guns don't affect crime".

You can't say "but guns stayed the same and crime both increased and decreased at points, which means that guns don't affect crime". I didn't say they don't affect crime, but if crime spikes, then drops then spikes, while gun ownership remains steady, then it is a piece of evidence that crime is largely driven by something other than the quantity of guns.

How? The fact that you can stop eating omelettes and still have the same amount of eggs in your fridge doesn't make you can make omelettes without eggs.

Re: My family saw a police car hit a kid, then I learned how NYPD impunity works

#634

Post by DenisM »

Pfhreak wrote: post #631
DenisM wrote: post #593

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The video doesn’t show on my phone. From your description it sounds somewhat excessive, but not outlandishly so. Also I find it odd that decade-old events are being brought up. Yes, it’s pretty much a recorded fact that excessive force was used back then. DOJ forced the the SPD through a reform program, the result of that program should be judged to decide what if anything needs to be done at SPD. Otherwise it’s like…

Footage from the protests shows pretty extreme violence, and SPD shot and killed a black man in lower Queen Anne in May of this year after charging him with a dog. Yes, the suspect had a knife and was very loud, and may have been suffering from mental health or a crisis, but SPD definitely could have handled this differently. https://komonews.com/news/local/seattle-police-investigating...

I clicked on the link you provided and I couldn't locate anything incriminating. Can you provide the video and exact location of what you found objectionable?

Re: My family saw a police car hit a kid, then I learned how NYPD impunity works

#635

Post by freeopinion »

randompwd wrote: post #620
freeopinion wrote: post #469

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I put myself in the place of the constable, he seemed to be calm and polite. I understand how frustrating it is when you are trying to do your job and people won't cooperate. That is not the question. The assertion is that the lady was terrified, the constable failed to acknowledge this, and failed to act appropriately. The constable doesn't seem like a raging racist to me. That makes this video even more import…

The car was stopped by police while she was driving (other aticles mention it was a hard stop- cop car pulled in front of her) > Just chill for 10 minutes Not an option AT ALL. Chill outside the vehicle is what was offered to her, she refused Once stopped, that woman is in police custody. If anything happens her or she injures herself whilst in police custody, it is a MASSIVE deal. As the officer knows nothing about…

It is ridiculous to claim that the woman is safer outside of her vehicle than inside.

Outside her vehicle she doesn't benefit from the HEPA air filter of her car. She could get bitten by a stray dog. She could step on the needle of a careless drug user. She could be struck by a frisbee.

See how stupid it is to make dumb hypotheticals?

Here's a not-so-hypothetical. She could get in a physical confrontation with a police officer.

It seems incredible that anyone would argue she is safer outside her car than inside her car. There is no reason for her to have to get out of her car. If the window is too tinted, write the citation. If the vehicle is unfit for the road, let her call a tow truck or a friend with a trailer without getting out of her car until she feels safe.

You write that is sounds ridiculous. That is because it IS ridiculous. That is why policies and procedures are put in place?

Coppers on the street are not the only people who interact with the public everyday. When their policies and procedures are ridiculous, they should not get a free pass.

Here's a thought experiment for you. Imagine the officer was a librarian instead. A librarian with lots of experience interacting with the public. Imagine that the suspected infraction was an overdue or ruined book. Do the policies and procedures still make sense? Does the officer's behavior still make sense?

Re: My family saw a police car hit a kid, then I learned how NYPD impunity works

#636

Post by freeopinion »

lenkite wrote: post #622
freeopinion wrote: post #503

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's not the job of the police to hold the hands of every paranoid individual and shush them back to a state of tranquility. Umm... It kinda should be. yeah. It certainly shouldn't be their job to shoot those people, or tackle those people, or manhandle those people.

They will need to be trained and paid far higher then!

Are you arguing that it is cheaper to just kill or beat people than to comfort them?

Re: My family saw a police car hit a kid, then I learned how NYPD impunity works

#637

Post by vkou »

runeks wrote: post #630
vkou wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All of these problems come from the department being fully controlled by the police union. I am typically a pro-union person. I even think that police unions, as a concept, should exist. But police unions, as implemented, are the reason that civilian oversight of police is impossible. Typical unions consist of line workers - with maybe line managers. They are then overseen by professional managers, directors, etc, wh…

I’ve heard people suggest that public workers should not be allowed to unionize. To me, it sounds like an extreme position, but stuff like this makes me consider it more seriously. If the ability to cover up criminal acts is a consequence of police unions, there’s no doubt in my mind that they should be abolished. Unions make a lot of sense, unless they can negotiate impunity on behalf of their members. EDIT: Interes…

1. Private sector unions can exert the same kind of authority, by lobbying for regulation of their employer's labour practices.

2. There is no guarantee that the candidate you helped elect in your district will be the person responsible for negotiations. Other politicians are supposed to be a counterbalance to this, if they are doing their jobs, and actually give two figs about conflicts of interest.

This is largely a theoretical concern.

The concern I cited - that management is part of the union is not theoretical. It is one we've seen played out again and again.

Re: My family saw a police car hit a kid, then I learned how NYPD impunity works

#638

Post by shitgoose »

spurgu wrote: post #624
shitgoose wrote: post #597

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not a criminal. Nor a police officer. Why should I get rid of my gun?

I'm not a criminal (for the most part[0]). Nor am I a police officer. Why should I have a gun? [0] WTF is a "criminal" anyways? I use illegal substances sometimes. I drive above the speed limit (like everyone else does) most of the time. Back when I played poker on US sites I didn't pay taxes on my winnings even though I should have. I can think of a ton of examples where I simply do not follow the law and so accordi…

In the context of the above discussion, "criminal" is the person who is using the gun for criminal activities, i.e. murder, extortion, etc. I can see the arguments that such criminals should not be in possession of a firearm. I can also see arguments that power-hungry cops should not be in possession of a firearm either. But as a private citizen, who is neither, why should I surrender a gun? I am not a threat to anyone.

Why should you have a gun? It is a personal preference. Like art or poetry. You are free to want whatever you want. If you do not like/want guns, please do not have them. But, please do not impose your preferences on others.

Re: My family saw a police car hit a kid, then I learned how NYPD impunity works

#639

Post by irjustin »

xg15 wrote: post #615
irjustin wrote: post #589

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There are no bad apples here I don't understand. You're saying that individual police members are not at fault for their actions? That the police institution is rotten (barrel) but stops at the individual officer (apple)? I 100% agree that the barrel is rotten, but there are plenty of bad individuals as a result of the barrel being rotten for so long. A way to test this, change the 'barrel' and see which 'apples' s…

You're driving the metapthor too far, I honestly don't get your point. Are you're saying we shouldn't touch the institution of police and just replace the individual police members? To my knowledge, that is what has been done until now - and it evidently didn't work.

> You're driving the metapthor too far

I'm just trying to understand what the parent comment said because I honestly am confused.

Re: My family saw a police car hit a kid, then I learned how NYPD impunity works

#640

Post by zerealshadowban »

I've seen police abuse innocent people, multiple times, which should be lesson enough. More importantly, I've been falsely accused of assault by a Federal officer, and had to spend all my savings on a lawyer to fight it (one year of fear and hell, until they finally produced the video showing I had done nothing but sit in my car while answering his questions).

I don't want to live in anarchy, but I don't want to live in fear. Help.

Post reply on HN