this post was submitted on 15 Jul 2024
446 points (96.1% liked)

THE POLICE PROBLEM

2547 readers
11 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

Real-life decorum is expected. Please don't say things only a child or a jackass would say in person.

If you're here to support the police, you're trolling. Please exercise your right to remain silent.

Saying ~~cops~~ ANYONE should be killed lowers the IQ in any conversation. They're about killing people; we're not.

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

[email protected]

[email protected]

r/ACAB

r/BadCopNoDonut/

Randy Balko

The Civil Rights Lawyer

The Honest Courtesan

Identity Project

MirandaWarning.org

♦ ♦ ♦

INFO

A demonstrator's guide to understanding riot munitions

Adultification

Cops aren't supposed to be smart

Don't talk to the police.

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

So you wanna be a cop?

When the police knock on your door

♦ ♦ ♦

ORGANIZATIONS

Black Lives Matter

Campaign Zero

Innocence Project

The Marshall Project

Movement Law Lab

NAACP

National Police Accountability Project

Say Their Names

Vera: Ending Mass Incarceration

 

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Agent641 161 points 5 months ago (3 children)

Cop: Pardon me sir....

Shooter: Points gun

Cop: Ah, I see you're a busy white man, Ill leave you to it.

[–] [email protected] 63 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Are you willing to get shot for Trump?

[–] Agent641 58 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Only if it means one of my bones deflects the bullet into him.

[–] CodexArcanum 16 points 5 months ago

The hero we needed but truly don't deserve

[–] [email protected] 33 points 5 months ago (12 children)

If you're a cop you should be willing to take a bullet for any citizen. If you're not, find a better job.

load more comments (12 replies)
[–] barsquid 18 points 5 months ago

He probably assumed he knew the guy from a Patriot Front march and didn't realize who the intended target would be.

[–] Dasus 7 points 5 months ago

Brooklyn 99 lol

[–] [email protected] 76 points 5 months ago (2 children)

to be fair if I was on a ladder and got to the top and there was a dude pointing a gun at me, I could be the most elite warrior there is and still know the best option is retreat.

[–] [email protected] 26 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Yea, I'm not sure how this cop getting domed before the dude turned back around and fired at Trump would have helped the situation...

[–] JJROKCZ 8 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I mean, the SS hearing that shot and pivoting that way may have saved Trumps life if the shooter were competent but that’s not the scenario that happened.

But what cop wants to be the guy domed so maybe the SS saves a fascist

[–] [email protected] 17 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I would say the cop startling the shooter and making him rush probably saved Trump's life

[–] JJROKCZ 6 points 5 months ago

I would agree that’s a fair assessment yea, if the shooter had been given time to setup and aim without interruption he probably could’ve hit trump 2/3 times instead of just launching shots in the general vicinity as quick as possible

[–] [email protected] 11 points 5 months ago (1 children)

In medieval times and before, people who went up first on the ladders during an assault either got a huge reward or the right to carry off whatever they found. Fighting up a ladder with no one friendly at the top is hugely dangerous.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] friend_of_satan 51 points 5 months ago (4 children)

So, after this incident with Trump, does anybody really think the best solution to political violence is to allow more people at political rallies to carry guns? Sounds stupid, right? Because thats basically the response with every other shooting.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 40 points 5 months ago (14 children)

You apologists are fucking cowards. ACAB!

load more comments (14 replies)
[–] [email protected] 35 points 5 months ago

Considering the circumstances I'd argue he's one of the few cops to protect and serve. Really the secret service here who dropped the ball. Coulda let em have a second go.

[–] aviationeast 25 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Local police shouldn't be the ones protecting the presenditial candidates, they should be protecting the crowd. Secret Service is there for the candidate.

[–] rhacer 30 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

Alright, so what did this cop do to protect the crowd? I do believe at least once person in the crowd died.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 5 months ago (2 children)

He investigated the report that there was a shooter on the roof?

[–] Agent641 19 points 5 months ago

"Yeah turns out that report was spot on! Anyway, where the donuts at?"

[–] rhacer 10 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

And if the report above is correct, he saw a person with a gun, tucked his tail between his legs and ran.

In this thread we have heard "no big deal, it's the Secret Service's job to protect Trump." We have also heard "it's local police's job to protect the crowd."

Perchance did you see the Secret Service's response to gun shots? A half dozen of them ran into the line of fire and surrounded the person they were charged to protect.

The cop saw a gun, knew there were hundreds of people in harm's way and scarpered. While the secret service put themselves in harms way to do their jobs.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 5 months ago (3 children)

"retreated down the ladder" is all the information we have to go on - presumably the cop was still climbing the ladder - really hard to draw your sidearm and incapacitate someone who has a rifle trained on you while simultaneously holding on to a ladder

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Frozengyro 8 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I think local police are assigned to these events to augment SS in protecting whoever they are protecting.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] veganpizza69 23 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (4 children)

One officer climbed to the roof and encountered Crooks, who pointed his rifle at the officer. The officer retreated down the ladder

"only pointing at a cop" is how you know it wasn't a leftist or anarchist.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] retrospectology 22 points 5 months ago

This seems to be the right-wing's main angle of attack on this issue. Seeing how forcefully they're pushing this fact across social media I'm kind of resistant to going along with any narrative they are trying to build from it until more facts come out.

I saw the interview with the guy who said he saw the shooter and he came off as kind of a doofus, he more or less said the extent they went to alert anyone was just pointing. You've got to remember that this was a rally for some deeply stupid people, I'm sure it adds to the security difficulties to have to suss out what's just idiots being idiots and what is useful info.

I think the reality is more simple; people overestimate the abilities of the Secret Service. I am sure they're experts and highly trained, but they're still human, and the mythos around their abilities is likely overblown to an extent. History has shown that if someone is determined enough, they can get close to the president if they want.

[–] xantoxis 18 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

"Eh fuck it, let him roll them dice"

– this cop, probably

[–] [email protected] 17 points 5 months ago (13 children)

Officer was actually based. "I don't see nothing wrong here, carry on citizen"

load more comments (13 replies)
[–] [email protected] 16 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Tbh, after reading the link, I don't blame anyone with a rifle pointed at them to climb back down, cop or no. The whole situation was handled so poorly tho and is 100% going to increase voilent tensions.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 5 months ago

You can't help a situation if you're dead.

Tactical retreat and getting backup/informing the secret service sniper team was a better play, and safer.

I assume that the message simply took too long to make it through all the interdepartmental channels, and he was able to get shots off.

Realistically, WTF was the cop supposed to do? If he proceeded forward, he'd probably get shot. Without checking in to dispatch to report the presence of the shooter and that he was on scene in the company of a guy with a rifle, then dispatch would have been very slow to respond, if they responded at all.

Talk to the guy? He's clearly deadset on doing something. You don't climb on a roof with a rifle without a plan and the will to execute that plan. Talking to him is going to either agitate him or just get the officer shot.... The chances that the cop could have talked him down, even if the Leo had expert negotiation training, is slim at best.

The standard carry equipment for a police officer is pretty limited. It's not like he has grenades or something, and don't forget, at this point he's on a fucking ladder with a rifle pointed at his dome at point blank range. Calling for someone with the correct equipment and training to get onto the roof to handle the guy, with the correct equipment to do so, and/or, have a fully trained sharpshooter that's already positioned nearby take that shot, is a better way to handle the situation.

Look, I'm not going to defend the police about what happened at Uvalde, or any other school shooting, but in this scenario, given the options, falling back to call reinforcements was the right call.

[–] JJROKCZ 9 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Maybe this is poorly described and the shooter literally turned and shot as the cop ducked back down the ladder… but that cop should’ve been on radio or firing his sidearm into the dirt or SOMETHING immediately after going back down a step or two. But this reads like he just went back down and wandered off.

They could head off a lot of questions by saying he went down a step and radioed immediately so people think the cop at least tried lol

[–] [email protected] 10 points 5 months ago (7 children)

The cop had already lost, the shooter had the high ground!

Seriously though, he was on a ladder - all of your limbs are dedicated to keeping you on the ladder. You have to get off the ladder before you can do anything else, so you either go up the ladder probably getting shot multiple times before you can get to your gun or radio, or go down the ladder where you're not in the line of fire to call for backup, draw your gun, or whatever.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] TropicalDingdong 9 points 5 months ago
load more comments
view more: next ›