Ser Scot A Ellison

Reforming police, the Blue Wall of Silence

264 posts in this topic

2 minutes ago, Swordfish said:

I didn't say you said it.  But you certaibnly implied it.  Otherwise, what was the point of your dice analogy?

Try reading what I wrote again and see if you can figure it out. 

2 minutes ago, Swordfish said:

Sure.  Never the less, honest discussion requires actual perspective, not exaggeration and hyperbole.

It also requires reading comprehension.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

6 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

Try reading what I wrote again and see if you can figure it out. 

It also requires reading comprehension.

Ha.  Ad hominem.  Easier than simply admitting you were wrong I gueess.

Either way, Your post here contains too high a sodium content for me.  

Carry on......

Edited by Swordfish

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Swordfish said:

Ha.  Ad hominem.  Easier than simply admitting you were wrong I gueess.

Either way, Your post here contains too high a sodium content for me.  

Carry on......

Okay, I'll try again. It isn't ad hominem; you simply didn't comprehend what I wrote, and then doubled down. That isn't an attack on you; that's an observation that continues to have credence.

Again, I wrote very specifically that you have a 1 in 20 chance of dying for doing nothing wrong at all I put that part in italics, even! I did it again! Here, does  this help?

you have a 1 in 20 chance of dying for doing nothing wrong at all

Does that put the proper emphasis on the right syllable?

I did not just say that you had a 1 in 20 chance of dying. That's ridiculous and unsupported. I said that if you roll a 1 - if you run into that 5% of cops that are horrible - that you have a chance of dying for doing nothing wrong. 

And - here was the really important thing - that this is apparently perfectly fine with most people. (Again, let's see if the emphasis works). It's especially perfectly fine with the rest of the police, given the lack of reporting of these issues and especially the lack of actual successful prosecution. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

Okay, I'll try again. It isn't ad hominem; you simply didn't comprehend what I wrote, and then doubled down. That isn't an attack on you; that's an observation that continues to have credence.

Again, I wrote very specifically that you have a 1 in 20 chance of dying for doing nothing wrong at all I put that part in italics, even! I did it again! Here, does  this help?you have a 1 in 20 chance of dying for doing nothing wrong at all

Um.  Yes.  That's exactly the point I specifically responded to, which you then claimed you didn't make.  So maybe there IS a reading comprehension issue here after all? *shrug*

Anyway, just for fun, go ahead and site your sources for those numbers.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Swordfish said:

Um.  Yes.  That's exactly the point I specifically responded to, which you then claimed you didn't make.  So maybe there IS a reading comprehension issue here after all? *shrug*

Again, didn't say that you have a 1 in 20 chance of dying. I still didn't. I guess I could put it in a way that doesn't trigger you so badly - that every time you have an encounter with a police officer you have a 1 in 20 chance that the police officer will do something that is completely against the law and violates your rights, and for no reason other than they believe they can, with you doing nothing at all to provoke it. 

Is that better?

1 minute ago, Swordfish said:

Anyway, just for fun, go ahead and site your sources for those numbers.

What numbers? The 95%? I was just using what was stated before; ask someone else. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

3 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

Again, didn't say that you have a 1 in 20 chance of dying. I still didn't. I guess I could put it in a way that doesn't trigger you so badly - that every time you have an encounter with a police officer you have a 1 in 20 chance that the police officer will do something that is completely against the law and violates your rights, and for no reason other than they believe they can, with you doing nothing at all to provoke it. 

Is that better?

It would be if you provided citations for those numbers.  Otherwise no, it isn't.

Really, you've just INCREASED the chances here, because you've taken out the '5% of police officers' part.

Edited by Swordfish

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Swordfish said:

It would be if you provided citations for those numbers.  Otherwise no, it isn't.

Again, I was just using what was provided. Someone else can provide citations. If you care, cite something that shows otherwise.

2 minutes ago, Swordfish said:

Really, you've just INCREASED the chances here, because you've taken out the '5% of police officers' part.

I don't see how I've increased the chances. 5% is 1 in 20. I guess we could argue about whether or not bad police are more or less likely to be encountered or what the distribution of bad police is, but me saying 1 in 20 vs. saying 95% vs 5% does not increase or decrease anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

10 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

Again, I was just using what was provided. Someone else can provide citations. If you care, cite something that shows otherwise.

 

Ha.  Uh...  No.  That isn't how this works.  If you're making a claim, it's reasonable to back it up with something.

If you're just making those numbers up, that's cool to, but that makes the claim pretty meaningless.

Quote

I don't see how I've increased the chances. 5% is 1 in 20. I guess we could argue about whether or not bad police are more or less likely to be encountered or what the distribution of bad police is, but me saying 1 in 20 vs. saying 95% vs 5% does not increase or decrease anything.

It's pretty simple, really.  Saying this:

'Your chances of having your rights violated when being stopped by a cop are 1 in 20' 

is implying a MUCH higher probability than saying:

'Your likelihood of having your rights violated is one in 20 if you are stopped by one of the 5% of police who are bad apples'.

 

I mean, I suppose it's possible that 5% of police violate the rights of EVERY person they interact with, but since these numbers are all made up anyway, we are sort of well into the territory of absurdity anyway.

 

 

 

Edited by Swordfish

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/4/2017 at 3:25 AM, litechick said:

As an unsophisticated member of the Minnesota/Twin Cities populace, I remember the days of 2015 when other parts of the country struggled with police violence and racial profiling and I hoped that in Minnesota that would not come up.  We are Nice.  We respect the law and the police, the police don't want to kill anybody.

Surely our law enforcement would take a lesson from broader case studies and be extra careful not to create such a dynamic here.

But here we are and we have back-to-back cases of completely unjustified execution of civilians by police.  Life has taken a turn for the surreal.  We are in an episode of South Park where all they have to do is say "she's coming right for us!" and it is suddenly OK to kill.

Recently I had probable cause to summon the police and I weighed the cost/benefit.  Laws were broken but my life was not in danger.  Bringing the police into it seemed a greater risk than letting the crime slide by.  I can't speak for anyone else but I can no longer look on the police as people who are sworn to protect me.  They are sworn to protect themselves at any cost.

Now we have to protect ourselves from the criminals and the police and that is fucked up.

Well said, and very sad that this is reality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/6/2017 at 11:30 PM, litechick said:

Thank you Guy.  It is reassuring that someone else sees it.

At the core, I still believe that 95% of police are true and honorable and willing to protect and serve.  Nevertheless, since I know that some will kill on the thinnest pretext and suffer no consequences, I can no longer grant the benefit of the doubt when my life is on the line.

From now on I have to assume that any armed police officer may kill me.

P.S. Ever since the police beat up and arrested my father (twice) because he was acting "odd" (he has Alzheimer's), my mom is terrified to call the police for anything. The first time they arrested him, he was walking near the house--we'd just taken his car away, and he was walking and trying to adjust to his new life. It was two days after Christmas. My mom got worried after he didn't come home, she called the police and found out they arrested him. The second time he was arrested because the police thought he was acting strange on my parents back porch which faced the road (right down the street from the police department). He was picking up a flower pot and putting it down repeatedly. My mom was in the house. The police came up, next thing she knows, he is being savagely beaten--broken ribs, arrested again. Video from neighbors showed him standing there doing nothing when the cops attacked him.

It's not worth it to have these people involved in our lives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh my god Simon, I'm so sorry that happened to your dad.  I hope you can find some strategy to protect him in the future.

I wonder if the drop in police reports will register statistically.  Maybe this time next year some jackass politician will proudly trumpet a reduction in crime which is really just less reporting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Besides the police as a whole being a problem, another huge problem is how society responds to police misconduct and brutality. specifically white people just blinding kissing the ass of the police and accepting what they say is fact. Video evidence doesn't even matter at this point because case after case that has video evidence of police misconduct is met with "well what was that person doing before the video was recording?" As if that justifies choking a man to death with a maneuver the PD says is a no no, planting drugs, shooting a man in the back and lying about how he was grabbing for your weapons even though he was quite a distance away, shooting a man 75 feet away from you and saying you feared for your life when he lunged at you, shooting a man in his car when he was being cooperative, and shooting him with his kid and wife behind and next to him. 

Hero worship and white supremacy that is deeply ingrained in our society is a hell of a combination. 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sword, I hear what you are saying and I don't necessarily disagree but I have to also point a finger at Hollywood/American culture. 

There is certainly a sense of white privilege and everyone judges by their own experience.  For middle class white people living in a low crime area, they may have no bad experiences with police at all.  If a (justified) speeding ticket is the worst interaction you have ever had with the police and you can count on them to respond to your emergency call, it is not surprising or unjustified for them to give the benefit of the doubt.

With regards to Hollywood/American culture, it cannot be denied that Americans love a rogue (in theory.)  Starting with John McClane, we love this romantic idea of a hero with impeccable judgement who cuts through senseless bureaucracy and political concerns to save the day and do justice.  (drunk thought:  isn't this really just a fantasy of the benevolent dictator?)

We love it so much that John McCain based his entire presidential campaign on trying to convince people that he was a street smart Maverick who would get things done in spite of all the Capital Hill bullshit.

White people remember Tom Cruise saying, "It doesn't matter what I know, it only matters what I can prove!"  So even video of police planting evidence is OK, the police are street smart and surely they are just trying to get criminals off the street for the greater good.

I probably shouldn't devolve into a stream-of-consciousness statement of how the Philando Castile case affected me but here I go anyway.

I didn't see any video, I didn't have the facts.  Just the description of a guy being executed with SO and child in the car, breaking no laws and following police instructions was enough for jaw-dropping horror.  There were protests but I didn't participate.  I had an elevator conversation with a neighbor where I was frustrated at being unable to express myself in 60 seconds.

Over and over we hear the police saying that this is not based on race.  If we take them at their word then the conclusion is that everyone needs to be afraid.  If race is not a factor then any random traffic stop can lead to execution.  I thought that maybe the most effective protest would be for everyone to grip the wheel and refuse to reach for identification.  If we made routine traffic stops super inconvenient by insisting on not reaching for it, that might reduce the likelihood of senseless death and teach the police that this behavior has consequences regardless of what a jury might say.

I gave considerable thought to what I would do the next time I was pulled over. 

After my poorly constructed argument in the elevator my neighbor said, 'but You don't need to worry, this won't happen to You.'  (I'm a middle aged white woman.)  I thought that was probably true but it missed the point which I had failed to make.

The acquittal in the Philando trial came on the day of the local Iron Maiden concert and certainly put a pall on that happy occasion.  Trevor Noah did a really good job of summing up my frustration and I thank him for it.  I've watched that video numerous times just for the comfort of knowing that someone else feels the same way.

Less than a month after a Minnesota jury said it was OK for a police officer to execute Philano, we had the Australian woman.  In a way, that was a breakthrough because it showed that even if you are a white woman, even if you are the one who summoned the police and not the suspect, you can be shot dead by the police.

As unfair as it is, if the death of this white woman can turn the tide then maybe her death was not in vain.  Maybe it takes the death of a white woman to sweep away benefit of the doubt and evoke real change.  I sincerely grieve for her fiance and family just as I grieve for Philando's SO and that little girl. 

Of course, I have always been hopeful.  I was hopeful that this would not happen in Minnesota.  When it did happen, I was hopeful that justice would be served.  Now it has happened again and I remain hopeful but I suspect that I may just be an idiot and a chump.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/08/2017 at 5:41 AM, Sword of Doom said:

Besides the police as a whole being a problem, another huge problem is how society responds to police misconduct and brutality. specifically white people just blinding kissing the ass of the police and accepting what they say is fact. Video evidence doesn't even matter at this point because case after case that has video evidence of police misconduct is met with "well what was that person doing before the video was recording?" As if that justifies choking a man to death with a maneuver the PD says is a no no, planting drugs, shooting a man in the back and lying about how he was grabbing for your weapons even though he was quite a distance away, shooting a man 75 feet away from you and saying you feared for your life when he lunged at you, shooting a man in his car when he was being cooperative, and shooting him with his kid and wife behind and next to him. 

Hero worship and white supremacy that is deeply ingrained in our society is a hell of a combination. 
 

Well there are clearly people looking at things from different perspectives.

You have those who are a bit like you described, but I certainly wouldn't put it in those terms. The more conservative thinkers who see the police as an institution you should respect, and who often believe that its better to give the police the freedom to do more, if it means catching more criminals and preventing crime. They certainly have no sympathy for criminals and believe they deserve what they get. There is probably an element of racism in there as well, suggestions that black people are more likely to commit crimes and so it makes sense to be stopping and searching them more often.

Then you have another side ( I don't really want to keep calling it sides) who view the police as the enemy, who think the police are a wholly corrupt organisation and have zero respect for any of them. Who cry out about every single incident and claim its racially motivated before there is any evidence,  riot at the slightest opportunity, resist arrest and defend criminals. There is an element of racism involved here too. 

Neither sides are entirely correct and neither side can really accept the others point of view as being accurate. But the harder each side holds onto those convictions the more difficult it is to have real dialogue about the issues. Each incident is viewed through those prisms, and it becomes about sides, not reality. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

2 hours ago, Channel4s-JonSnow said:

Well there are clearly people looking at things from different perspectives.

You have those who are a bit like you described, but I certainly wouldn't put it in those terms. The more conservative thinkers who see the police as an institution you should respect, and who often believe that its better to give the police the freedom to do more, if it means catching more criminals and preventing crime. They certainly have no sympathy for criminals and believe they deserve what they get. There is probably an element of racism in there as well, suggestions that black people are more likely to commit crimes and so it makes sense to be stopping and searching them more often.

Then you have another side ( I don't really want to keep calling it sides) who view the police as the enemy, who think the police are a wholly corrupt organisation and have zero respect for any of them. Who cry out about every single incident and claim its racially motivated before there is any evidence,  riot at the slightest opportunity, resist arrest and defend criminals. There is an element of racism involved here too. 

Neither sides are entirely correct and neither side can really accept the others point of view as being accurate. But the harder each side holds onto those convictions the more difficult it is to have real dialogue about the issues. Each incident is viewed through those prisms, and it becomes about sides, not reality. 

You'll note, perhaps, that your description of the first 'side'...ie, the one you agree with...is loaded with mitigation qualifiers...'who often believe...probably an element of...more often.'

The second is, on the other hand, is loaded with absolutes; 'wholly corrupt...zero respect for any of them...cry about every single incident...riot at the slightest opportunity...' etc.

Maybe most amazing of all is that you admit the probability of racism with regards to the pro-police side but state it as fact in the other.. This is you trying to be reasonable, right?

Edited by James Arryn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, James Arryn said:

You'll note, perhaps, that your description of the first 'side'...ie, the one you agree with...is loaded with mitigation qualifiers...'who often believe...probably an element of...more often.'

The second is, on the other hand, is loaded with absolutes; 'wholly corrupt...zero respect for any of them...cry about every single incident...riot at the slightest opportunity...' etc.

Maybe most amazing of all is that you admit the probability of racism with regards to the pro-police side but state it as fact in the sound. This is you trying to be reasonable, right?

I wouldnt read too much into it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another nasty example of Police abusing their power.  An officer was sent to the hospital to collect blood from a patient who was involved in a very bad car accident.  The officer didn't have a warrant to collect the patients blood, the patient was not conscious and as such couldn't consent to the blood being drawn, and by the officers own admission he lacked probable cause to insist upon a the blood being taken.  

The head nurse calmly explained hospital policy.  Called her supervisor to have her supervisor explain that they couldn't consent to the blood being drawn and the officer after all this was calmly explained grabs the nurse bodily drags her from the burn unit and arrests her for "obstructing an investigation".  

Apparently, the officer was told to arrest the nurse if they refused to allow the blood to be drawn.  At a minumum he and the person who told him to arrest the Nurse and the officer should lose their badges.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/09/01/this-is-crazy-sobs-utah-hospital-nurse-as-cop-roughs-her-up-arrests-her-for-doing-her-job/?tid=sm_fb&utm_term=.37b57a0af478

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Another nasty example of Police abusing their power.  An officer was sent to the hospital to collect blood from a patient who was involved in a very bad car accident.  The officer didn't have a warrant to collect the patients blood, the patient was not conscious and as such couldn't consent to the blood being drawn, and by the officers own admission he lacked probable cause to insist upon a the blood being taken.  

The head nurse calmly explained hospital policy.  Called her supervisor to have her supervisor explain that they couldn't consent to the blood being drawn and the officer after all this was calmly explained grabs the nurse bodily drags her from the burn unit and arrests her for "obstructing an investigation".  

Apparently, the officer was told to arrest the nurse if they refused to allow the blood to be drawn.  At a minumum he and the person who told him to arrest the Nurse and the officer should lose their badges.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/09/01/this-is-crazy-sobs-utah-hospital-nurse-as-cop-roughs-her-up-arrests-her-for-doing-her-job/?tid=sm_fb&utm_term=.37b57a0af478

A college friend, a lawyer in Salt Lake City, is ripshit about this. The nurse is someone she knows. I am glad the case is getting widespread attention. Especially since it seems like the attempt to illegally collect the blood of an innocent victim of a police car crash may be to pre-emptively protect the police against a claim of negligence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, DanteGabriel said:

A college friend, a lawyer in Salt Lake City, is ripshit about this. The nurse is someone she knows. I am glad the case is getting widespread attention. Especially since it seems like the attempt to illegally collect the blood of an innocent victim of a police car crash may be to pre-emptively protect the police against a claim of negligence.

My Mother is an RN.  This is absolutely batshit crazy.  You arrest a Nurse for protecting her patient.  I cannot believe the gaul of these assholes.  Here's a more complete video:
 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Scarily, this is much more normal than abnormal. It's an Us vs. Them mentality ingrained from day one, and discretional authority gets backed by the system much more often than not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now