75
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 15 Sep 2023
75 points (75.2% liked)
THE POLICE PROBLEM
2398 readers
3 users here now
The police problem is that police are policed by the police. Cops are accountable only to other cops, which is no accountability at all.
99.9999% of police brutality, corruption, and misconduct is never investigated, never punished, never makes the news, so it's not on this page.
When cops are caught breaking the law, they're investigated by other cops. Details are kept quiet, the officers' names are withheld from public knowledge, and what info is eventually released is only what police choose to release — often nothing at all.
When police are fired — which is all too rare — they leave with 'law enforcement experience' and can easily find work in another police department nearby. It's called "Wandering Cops."
When police testify under oath, they lie so frequently that cops themselves have a joking term for it: "testilying." Yet it's almost unheard of for police to be punished or prosecuted for perjury.
Cops can and do get away with lawlessness, because cops protect other cops. If they don't, they aren't cops for long.
The legal doctrine of "qualified immunity" renders police officers invulnerable to lawsuits for almost anything they do. In practice, getting past 'qualified immunity' is so unlikely, it makes headlines when it happens.
All this is a path to a police state.
In a free society, police must always be under serious and skeptical public oversight, with non-cops and non-cronies in charge, issuing genuine punishment when warranted.
Police who break the law must be prosecuted like anyone else, promptly fired if guilty, and barred from ever working in law-enforcement again.
That's the solution.
♦ ♦ ♦
Our definition of ‘cops’ is broad, and includes prison guards, probation officers, shitty DAs and judges, etc — anyone who has the authority to fuck over people’s lives, with minimal or no oversight.
♦ ♦ ♦
RULES
① Real-life decorum is expected. Please don't say things only a child or a jackass would say in person.
② If you're here to support the police, you're trolling. Please exercise your right to remain silent.
③ Saying ~~cops~~ ANYONE should be killed lowers the IQ in any conversation. They're about killing people; we're not.
④ Please don't dox or post calls for harassment, vigilantism, tar & feather attacks, etc.
Please also abide by the instance rules.
It you've been banned but don't know why, check the moderator's log. If you feel you didn't deserve it, hey, I'm new at this and maybe you're right. Send a cordial PM, for a second chance.
♦ ♦ ♦
ALLIES
• r/ACAB
♦ ♦ ♦
INFO
• A demonstrator's guide to understanding riot munitions
• Cops aren't supposed to be smart
• Killings by law enforcement in Canada
• Killings by law enforcement in the United Kingdom
• Killings by law enforcement in the United States
• Know your rights: Filming the police
• Three words. 70 cases. The tragic history of 'I can’t breathe' (as of 2020)
• Police aren't primarily about helping you or solving crimes.
• Police lie under oath, a lot
• Police spin: An object lesson in Copspeak
• Police unions and arbitrators keep abusive cops on the street
• Shielded from Justice: Police Brutality and Accountability in the United States
• When the police knock on your door
♦ ♦ ♦
ORGANIZATIONS
• NAACP
• National Police Accountability Project
• Vera: Ending Mass Incarceration
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
The title of the article is "Georgia cops proudly show off ecstasy pills, after high-speed freeway chase over traffic violation, and crash caused by PIT-maneuver"
Read the article. They don’t describe that at all.
The original headline at the news site is "Driver caught with $400K in Ecstasy pills, cash after high-speed I-20 chase."
Read the article. That isn’t what they describe at all.
Cops start a pursuit when the suspect fails to yield. Once they lose visual they stop the pursuit. They don’t say what speed or how long but they stoped perusing
A short time later they see the suspect and pit the car.
The article is poorly written but this doesn’t appear to be bad policing. They knocked off the pursuit when it wasn’t safe and immediately stopped him when they don’t the suspect later.
I love to bash shitty cops but this is how I want them to behave unless I see evidence otherwise.
So since the title has the words high speed chase, but they don't repeat it in the text of the article, the headline can be ignored?
Go back to school and learn to read.
Nice ad hominem.
The article doesn’t describe that headline at all. It describes the opposite of the headline.
You clearly don't know what words mean.
I am very aware what words mean
Can you cite the speed and distance of the chase?
Can you cite the part of the article that contradicts the title?
Already asked and answered
No it wasn't jackass.
'click bait'
Yeah, "high speed" isn't mentioned in the article. It's in the headline, though, and if we're believing the TV station's coverage enough to have a conversation about it, the headline is part of the coverage.
Headlines are to hype the article.
When you read the article the exact opposite is described.
As I said it’s a poorly written article but based on the actual article. I do not see an issue.
I only found one other cite and it was similar.
I have a huge issue with idiotic chases but this doesn’t appear to be one.