Ah yes, the problem is the 'good' officers, who are still complicit in abuse of power. It's so clearly institutional. Given the number of abuses of police power that come to light due to video evidence the police weren't aware of and the utter dearth of abuses of power brought to light due to the reports of other officers, I can only assume that, in some forces, there's no such thing as a 'good' officer. They're all complicit. If they aren't it seems, then they are either passed over for promotion or plain just drummed out of the force.

The rate at which uniformed officers report the abuses of their colleagues does not match the rate at which uniformed officers abuse their power.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/inves...4c7_story.html[/quote]


I have to think that the ubiquity of personal cameras is starting to have an effect.

Body cams and dash cams are helping, but there still seems to be a puzzling rate of "equipment malfunctions" when those are the only (known) record of an incident. (Oddly enough, they seem to function much more dependably when the footage supports the cops' versions of events. Go figure.)

It is starting to sink in (Mebbe the fact that they are more often wearing cameras of their own makes them more sensitive to the possibility that others may be around.) that everyone around them who has a smart phone also has a camera, and that nearly everyone around them has a smart phone.

People are getting much better at using those cameras, and doing so quickly. Maybe we owe Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, etc. a vote of gratitude for helping to prime the general public with this sort of ability and reaction. There isn't all that much difference between being quick to record a friend doing something silly and a cop doing something evil. Only the subject is different.

I think it might be the equivalent of red-light cameras, only for cops.

Just like speeders can't be sure if there is a working camera at any given intersection, at least until the ticket comes in the mail, the cops can't be sure that their misbehavior isn't being recorded for posterity by someone they may not even know is there.

The problems of institutional protection of bad cops still remains, and the arrogance which is supported by that, the sense of invulnerability to any accounting for their actions.

But it's getting harder to pretend that nothing happened, at least.

I agree. Whilst cops know they are pretty much safe from prosecution, the deterrent is having their name and face splashed over the media, from you tube to the news to even Wikipedia entries that will last a lifetime.

I suspect it is scary for cops (and their families) to be known as someone who shot and killed an unarmed black person. They may have to watch their backs for the rest of their lives.

Furthermore, killing another is only an insignificant event to psychopaths. Most cops are not that and will be affected. If the event is on film, the cop cannot then try and invent a version whereby he was under genuine threat as he can be reminded of what really happened, by being shown the video.

You underestimate the human mind.

This all sounds great, so long as the cop becomes a pariah in his community. The problem is, "the community" is the Fraternal Order of Police, the Unions, the guys at the precinct/central bookings/whatever, and so forth. It may also be their neighborhood, where cops from all around live. What it usually *isn't*, though, is the friends and family of the person s/he killed. And as we've seen, it's very easy for one to justify a shooting, if one has a network of unquestioning support in place. Hell, even the cop who shot Michael Brown made up a story about how Brown "Bulked up" and ran through bullets like the Juggernaut from the X-Men - and I still think that may well have been a justified shooting. Now, think about Officer Barrel Roll, the guys that killed Freddie Gray, the folks that stuffed Kalief Browder in Rikers for years for no good reason. OR for that matter, that Arizona cop that killed the white guy for Failure to Hokey-Pokey. I'm pretty sure most of them can rest easy at night.

I'll repeat something that people say - the saying is that a few bad apples spoil the bunch. And I'll repeat with Michael Wood Jr. retorts - it's the barrel that's rotten, not the apples. Those cameras help - sometimes. But very often, they don't. The cops that murdered John Crawford III, Eric Garner, Tamir Rice, and on and on - if they're such pariahs, tell me, without looking them up, what their names are.

I read that but it didn't compute.

How can anyone say there isn't a systemic problem when police associations respond like that.

Off-duty police officer pulls a gun in a service station on man he mistakenly suspected of stealing a packet of mints.

No wonder the police have shot more than 300 people already this year.

Is this acceptable procedure?


https://www.ocregister.com/2018/05/0...ealing-mentos/

Saw the video of that on the Washington Post. This guy is a menace. He should at least be fired, be prohibited from possessing and owning a gun.

Even if he was correct and the guy stole a pack of mentos, drawing his gun is completely utterly and absolutely irresponsible in every sense possible. This cop went completely backwards in how to properly escalate the threat and use of force: he effectively began with threatening to shoot and potentially kill him (over a pack of mentos!) even-though the suspected criminal hadn't given any indication of being a threat to life and limb, and then worked backwards to handle the situation with talking.

Pro tip: talking can solve a lot of things.

And even though he said "I'm a police officer", I'm...not seeing a badge anywhere. Or a uniform. You know, things that show that you're and actual cop, whereas a gun just shows you to be a violent threat.

That may be why the clerk didn't speak up - or maybe the guy just kinda froze.

Something from some time ago that is still having an effect today

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...ction=Trending

This is still shocking.

Meanwhile a 2014 video from Portland - with a happy ending

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

It is worth watching the cops shake the hands of the skateborders at the end too.

Here's another video with a happy ending. As in disgusting police negligence, which the department continues to deny, but at least the guy survived. Been following off and on.

Unfortunately that's very typical for KCSO and SPD.

Antwon Rose - shot in the back while running away. Video in the link below.

https://thegrio.com/2018/06/22/5-things-antwon-rose/

Presumably nothing will happen arising from this, but it's worth a look anyway.

"His back was to 'em."

"He was obviously running for his gun. Clearly self-defense."

"You’re going to jail" Officer fired for abuse of power after pulling over daughter’s boyfriend

When makai Coleman asked why he was being detained, his girlfriends police officer father threatened to make charges up "as we go"


https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...rs-boyfriend/?

The question is: what on earth possessed him to shoot a person for running away, so soon after starting his job? Even the "Well cops deal with the worst people all the time" crap simply doesn't work reasonably here.

(I mean, I know why, I've said it again and again, and so have many others...)

He was running away. That's proof he must have been guilty of something. Probably something violent. And thuggish.

It was imperative for the safety of the community that he be shot in the back.

And anyway, the cop probably "felt threatened". That means it's okay to kill the kid.

The law is very clear on that. Don't you follow the news?

Antwon Rose was shot in my city, and while the protests haven't reached national news levels by any means, there has been quite a bit of chaos. Groups of marching protesters shut down roads several times, and there was some sort of confusing incident involving a car driving into a crowd of them on (I think) Friday. It was never made clear if the protesters were waylaying the car or if its driver was attacking them. I haven't heard any follow-up. No one was injured, but it certainly got everybody's hackles up.

Three of my more radical acquaintances have been arrested, I hear. I think a lot of people have been arrested. I doubt most of them will get much more than a wrist-slap.

But yeah, people here are very upset.

The cop was newly sworn in to that police department, but he had eight years of experience with other PDs.

This case and subsequent events (including the funeral today) are being reported fairly thoroughly in the Philadelphia area (same state) even if it hasn't made the national news.

The car that was stopped matched the description of a car seen leaving the scene of a nearby shooting a few minutes earlier, including having bullet damage to its rear window. There's a pretty good chance it was the actual car, and that the occupants and the two guns found inside the car were involved in that shooting. However, the driver was not taken into custody after being questioned, so who knows? (And that's the police version of the story, which may or may not be truthful.) In any case, of course, none of that justifies shooting a fleeing suspect in the back.

In a sane non-racist world, we would be comparably appalled by both of the unjustified shootings that took place that night. Which victim died and which went to the hospital instead was almost certainly a matter of marksmanship and/or pure chance, not differing intent. But we have to deal with the world we're in instead.

At least is was. It is weird the way the police get suspects to do all sorts of movements as if they undergoing a sobriety test and they they fire at them if they get it wrong.

Oh, come on. He was obviously drawing his feet back just before the tasing; clearly he was planning to get his feet underneath him and leap backwards so as to knock the police officer out with the back of his head. Fortunately the police officer had seen plenty of kung fu movies training videos and spotted the move before he could complete it.

Dave

I look forward to the apologetics for this one. Dave Rogers probably went for one that is too plausible.

He was sitting on the curb following all the directions given by the cops ... in a threatening manner.

Obviously the officer was in fear for his own safety. Any reasonable person could see that.

Alternatively, the cop hadn't had a chance to use his taser on anyone for a while, and figured it needed a workout to keep it in tip-top shape.

They probably won't be along unless a separate thread is made, at which point one of the first responses would be to complain about the existence of a new thread.

It must be horrible living in a society where literally one minor move can result in extreme force being used against you.

The police in Scotland are desperate to have most police armed with tazers, despite all statistics showing a huge reduction in violent crime (the police's own stats included). Weirdly, assault on the police are allegedly rising. No one can explain why that is, why is a less violent society assaulting its police officers more? Or is it?

I just fear a similar situation developing here, whereby overly aggressive police are looking for any old excuse to fire a tazer at someone.

"Straighten your legs."

"cross your legs."

To me, these are two opposing commands. When I think of sitting on the ground with legs crossed, I think of what used to be called "sitting Indian style" around here. And that's what dude was trying to do when they tased him for no reason.

Perhaps they should have said "Legs straight, one ankle over the other," if that's what they meant.

ETA: Worth noting, tasers are not actually "nonlethal" weapons, as people have been killed by them before. They're much less lethal than a gun, but still not to be used in a hissy fit because someone has no idea what you want.

Well it is not that bad for american police, they could have set a dog on him, that is always good for a laugh.

A Navy veteran with a valid concealed carry permit was fatally shot by Portland State University police on Friday when he went to pick up his handgun, which slipped from its holster as he tried to break up a fight.

https://www.opb.org/news/article/por...rik-washington

Bad from the cops, but seriously, who would get voluntarily any near a physical confrontation if you had a gun on you, permit or no permit?

That is just asking for trouble

Possibly because the city was full of Proud Boys and other white nationalists and supremacists who were carrying? This is one of the effects of having an armed society.

Funny, in those ancient times when I grew up, the ones the Right claim to miss so much, you never saw people walking around with weapons unless they were coming or going from a hunting trip. People who stockpiled weapons or answered the door holding a shotgun were considered dangerous loonies.

The behavior of a police officer in Killeen TX.
http://www.kwtx.com/content/news/Kil...486994721.html
That's my daughter (middle) in the photo. :)

Ranb

They were twins?

Yeah, the writer of that article needs to take a second look. My daughter's name was spelled incorrectly in one paragraph and correctly in the other.

Is there more to the story besides some kids calling the police because some random stranger dared knock on their door?

Not only does a proud parent and forum member get to show off a bit, it demonstrates the behavior of the vast majority of police officers in the US. What more needs to be in the story?

Which is why the current US setup is so unfair to the vast majority of US police officers, as they are all tainted.

Similarly, see my previous youtube video, which is also a feelgood story from 2014 when a racist calls the cops on a black skateboarder in a multiracial group.

I could watch it again, because the resoponse of the cops, and their conversation with the skateborders at the end was *highly* appropriate.

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

I think that's it.