this post was submitted on 20 May 2024
1303 points (98.8% liked)

US Authoritarianism

868 readers
240 users here now

Hello, I am researching American crimes against humanity. . This space so far has been most strongly for memes, and that's fine.

There's other groups and you are welcome to add to them. USAuthoritarianism Linktree

See Also, my website. USAuthoritarianism.com be advised at time of writing it is basically just a donate link

Cool People: [email protected]

founded 9 months ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Son_of_dad 159 points 7 months ago (2 children)

For anyone who thinks Canadian cops are nicer, I still remember the G20 in Toronto. The police designated a park as a free speech zone, surrounded it, took off their name tags and put on masks, and began to beat the protesters. They tore a disabled man's prosthetic leg off and dragged him around, they took people away from cameras and beat them. Not a single cop, including the chief in charge, suffered a single consequence. And they wonder why we no longer feel sad when one dies.

[–] lugal 41 points 7 months ago (2 children)

I saw a documentary of G20 here in Germany and one take home message was "it's a miracle no one got killed". They were heavily insured, imprisoned without a trial and stuff. Just for those talking about "European Socialism". There is no such thing.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 7 months ago

Go read up on Genova's G8... Seems like a pattern.

[–] Dasus 5 points 7 months ago (7 children)

Just for those talking about "European Socialism". There is no such thing.

First, ACAB.

Second, systems of government =/= economic systems. Ie you can have socialism with or without democracy.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] Mango 5 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Why don't we regularly kill them?

[–] Son_of_dad 10 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Recently a Toronto resident was acquitted of murdering a cop, the city celebrated and the cops got pissed and expressed that they wished the man deemed innocent had gone to jail.

Long story short, this man was getting his family back into their mini van to go home. Armed, plain clothes cops are looking for an unrelated suspect so of course they draw guns and run towards the innocent man with his family. The man panics, steps on the gas and escapes, running over the cop and killing him. He was then arrested for "intentionally killing an officer", ignoring the fact that all the man saw was two armed men in plain clothes running towards him and his family

[–] Mango 5 points 7 months ago

Jesus fucking Christ! They've done everything short of spelling or a war declaration! Where I'm standing, the guy is extra innocent if he did actually do it.

[–] ThatWeirdGuy1001 141 points 7 months ago (2 children)

I've been saying for years that simply turning it off should be grounds for immediate suspension if not full termination.

The only time those cameras should be off is when they go to the bathroom and even then I'm fuckin iffy.

[–] NotBillMurray 26 points 7 months ago (3 children)

I feel like the solution is a "taking a shit" button which flags that chunk of the video. That way unless there is some suspicion that a crime happened in that chunk of time it goes unwatched.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 7 months ago

Yes your honour, I suddenly needed to take a shit in public just when the suspect was assaulted by someone else

[–] [email protected] 7 points 7 months ago

Yup definitely goes unwatched. It would be immoral to watch that so that's not going to happen.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Just have it time limited so that every sixty seconds they get a quick audible countdown to point away from their exposed body part at the roll of toilet paper or wall of the urinal. They can't beat someone and keep breaking to arrange a fake shot from atop a toilet.

[–] Dicska 7 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Cop walks into the toilet, closes the door, turns off the camera. Immediately exits, jumps into police car to find and beat some people they don't like, then turns around, goes back to the toilet and turns it back on before opening the door to leave.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 months ago (1 children)

If he can do all of that in 60 seconds, he should go to the Olympics

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 127 points 7 months ago

Another thing of note. If you see car hoods up, take out your camera and film. The pigs will pop their hood to block their dashcams.

ACAB

[–] [email protected] 126 points 7 months ago (3 children)

Why is covering the badge number even allowed?

[–] Soggy 131 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Because cops are the violent arm of the ruling class, and it's convenient for them to be immune to legal consequence.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] stress_headache 65 points 7 months ago (2 children)
[–] [email protected] 18 points 7 months ago (6 children)
[–] SmilingSolaris 43 points 7 months ago

Hi. Former prison guard here. It turns out that as a cop you can dictate the reality going forward. Just say what you wanted to happen and everyone with authority will say that's what happened.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 7 months ago

Enforcement and accountability barely exist these days and you think those are going to work on police? The same police working every day with the very same officers, judges and prosecutors that would investigate them?

Tell me another fairy tale...

[–] hydrospanner 16 points 7 months ago (2 children)

...okay...and if the police are breaking the laws, who upholds the laws they're breaking?

[–] isles 15 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Look, we just need more police, obviously. /s

[–] lugal 9 points 7 months ago

The only thing that works against a bad cop is a good cop. Except there ain't no good cops. Police is inherently not reformable.
#defundthepolice

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] GoosLife 15 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

Independent police complaint authority, authorized by the government, but run entirely by people from the community. There is a legal department there who handles cases, paid for through taxes. If you have any relationship to anyone on the force, you're ineligible to serve, and no one can handle a case that concerns anyone they know.

It works in my country, but I am aware that doesn't mean we can translate the solution 1:1 to the US, so I'd be interested to know why you guys think this would or wouldn't work.

It is not a perfect system that will solve all problems immediately. There are thousands of daily cases of harassment and abuse of power on a small scale that might end in the big pile and take forever to process. But it will effectively solve a lot of cases - fx cases about covering badge numbers and turning off body cams. These will be open and shut cases, and the punishments will be decided by the Independent Police Complaint Authority, meaning no bullshit paid vacation. Also cases in general that have an obvious outcome to the public, such as unnecessary police brutality and excessive force would probably be handled better by an independent authority.

[–] AngryCommieKender 20 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Every time one of these oversight committees gets set up in the US, the local police Union infiltrates it and prevents it from doing anything.

[–] RHSJack 10 points 7 months ago

OR the police union just litigates any punitive damages against one of their own and off they go, scot free.

[–] Cornelius_Wangenheim 6 points 7 months ago

Last I checked, a piece of paper with words on it can't carry a gun or force someone into handcuffs.

[–] Phegan 4 points 7 months ago

Laws have had little luck stopping police from doing whatever the fuck they want

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ReluctantMuskrat 9 points 7 months ago

I'm calling the cops!!

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ChonkyOwlbear 113 points 7 months ago (4 children)

Body cams should also work as a time clock. If the camera isn't on, they are off the clock and not getting paid.

[–] Atlas_ 62 points 7 months ago (1 children)

And don't have qualified immunity

[–] T00l_shed 38 points 7 months ago

Well they shouldn't have that to begin with anyway.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 7 months ago

That's actually an interesting idea. Always capturing, perhaps at half-fidelity to save wear and tear on the storage card and full quality when they activate for a call. I don't know why I've never seen anyone suggest this.

[–] cynar 13 points 7 months ago (2 children)

I can see legitimate grounds to switch them off. E.g. talking to a witness, or informant, who doesn't want anything on record.

It should be properly noted in their records however, and viewed with suspicion if overused.

FYI, good police actually love the cameras. They vastly cut down on false accusations, or at least nip them in the bud. It's also, apparently extremely satisfying and effective to show someone exactly how they came across. It really runs in a drunk tank hangover.

[–] captainlezbian 4 points 7 months ago

Also they should never be believed for anything they say happened without the camera on, not just the thing itself, but also the context.

Like, you had the option to record this behavior and chose not to, why should I trust you

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Lemminary 94 points 7 months ago (1 children)

This should void their qualified immunity or whatever you American kids call it these days.

[–] [email protected] 29 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

I don’t think the legal principle is even that important these days. It’s more so that some people are immune to laws because no one will prosecute. It’s just power.

Rights seem to be taken not granted.

[–] breadsmasher 60 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I cant recall it specifically, but I am sure Ive heard of a term which describes this in a legal sense - if whatever accountability that exists is intentionally blocked, its presumed to be worst case scenario

[–] [email protected] 22 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Not sure if it's what you're remembering, but adverse inference can be drawn when a party fails to present evidence known to exist by the court.

[–] breadsmasher 24 points 7 months ago (1 children)

That sounds familiar. “Show us x and if you can’t we will assume its incriminating towards you”?

In this case - show us the body cam footage, and if youve hidden it or otherwise impaired its capture, the adverse inference is taken

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 42 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

Suppose someone who isn't a cop does this and uses a fake uniform? How could anyone be able to tell if the officer is legitimate? That alone should make police departments not want to endorse such practices.

[–] hydrospanner 13 points 7 months ago

The way they're looking at it:

What's more likely? That we do sketchy or blatantly illegal shit, abuse our power, and having our badges and cams (measures created in an attempt to increase police accountability) helps us avoid any and all consequences...

...or people decide to buy fake uniforms and badges in any significant numbers and use these same tactics to confuse the general public...in any way that we, as a police force, actually CARE about?

Keep in mind that police impersonators would have to be impacting the police forces so much and so negatively that it would get to the point that it's not worth preserving their own impunity. That's incredibly unlikely.

[–] disguy_ovahea 18 points 7 months ago

That’s an incredibly valid argument.

[–] Duamerthrax 6 points 7 months ago (1 children)
[–] chemical_cutthroat 5 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

I have never been able to make it all the way through that. It's like Scott's Tots but for fascists.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Snapz 6 points 7 months ago

It is... But it should ALSO be considered a premeditated crime.

[–] Zehzin 6 points 7 months ago
load more comments
view more: next ›