How can we stop cops from beating and killing?
This is an interesting article that i thought was comment worthy. It also fits in with the DIY perspective that LMers are going to become famous for.
Comments?
You must be logged in.
You must be logged in.
How can we stop cops from beating and killing?
How can we stop cops from beating and killing?
This is an interesting article that i thought was comment worthy. It also fits in with the DIY perspective that LMers are going to become famous for.
Comments?
I like the idea of the “meta-cop” acting exactly like regular cops do. (Who could complain???)
There was a story recently about a city police force that was disbanded because no insurer would cover them after a multitude of complaints and lawsuits over excessive force and other corruption. Seems like that’s one way to do it. Hammer the insurers by suing over every misconduct.
And, of course, video recording them and streaming it live onto the internet (Bambuser and other apps do this.) Shame them publicly.
When the police becomes a private company , then there could be true responsibility. The market will take care that beating and killing do not happen. Or that if it happens it will be punished accordingly.
As Todd said, the corruption and abuse has to see the light of day and the continued lawsuits and videos can help with that. However, it also requires a change in public perception and that takes a lot longer.
Let’s not forget the people in the Boston area as a whole cheered the lockdown of the neighborhoods and martial law that was implemented to find one person. It happens fairly frequently (stopping long sections of highway and pulling people out of cars is not uncommon anymore) where people are locked out of their own neighborhoods and if you’re home, you’ll be forced to leave your house while the police illegally search it. No public outcry because they’re searching for a bad man and bad men need to be stopped, donchaknow. Of course in Boston, the bad man was found after the ‘lockdown’ was lifted an a guy went into his backyard to have a smoke. Yet the martial law was praised as being successful.
Until the greater public pull the police and The State off the pedestal they put them on, it won’t change.
I’m not sure, over here in the UK its not as aggressive for some reason, but I can tell you that it won’t come through voting for the right politician.
One of the things that i liked about the article was that for the first time I saw someone approaching it from a demand side perspective. At least part of the reason we have police is that its demand driven. If you don’t want the misconduct, stop asking for the services.
I love how it ignores the fact that John Crawford was shot, in part, because someone called in a complaint that was likely a “swatting” by an anti-gun person.
Or that Garner’s death wasn’t caused solely by the take down. (As to the racism charges, wasn’t the supervisor that was standing right there also black?)
Also what percentage of interactions with police end with violence? Especially if you subtract the ones where cops are assaulted. Or do you think that it’s acceptable to start a gun fight to avoid being arrested? I fully agree that selling “singles” or marijuana shouldn’t be a crime, and that the argument can be made that the State initiated the use of force, but is shooting first a justifiable reaction? Especially given the likelihood of other innocents being harmed?
Or do you think we are at war, and thus it’s OK to attack the police? Or do you really know that cops aren’t the Gestapo and thus won’t drag you off in the middle of the night so it’s safe to rant and rave at them?
Really starting to wonder if this is just the section of the forums where the cop haters who call themselves libertarians hang out, or if this is how the majority of you are.
Help me out here. Seriously, tell me how bashing all cops for the actions of a few really helps advance the cause of liberty.
In retrospect, I think your criticism is well placed as the tone of this article was overly negative toward police.
What I found interesting about the article and why I posted it is that its the only article that I’ve seen to date where critics of police misconduct were looking at reduction of the demand for police services.
I’ll try to do better in selecting material to post in the future.
I would reverse your final question. How does never bashing the bad cops and always praising the good ones help advance the cause of liberty? Because, and I’m being totally honest here, that’s what I see. I almost never see anyone bashing all cops as you suggest. But I often see people praising all cops and ignoring the deeds of the bad ones, sweeping it under the rug, covering up. What I see is that anyone who dares suggest even a single officer is bad. If he did in fact strangle an overweight guy unnecessarily. If he did let a simple walking down the middle of the street incident escalate horribly. If he did shoot a 12 year old not after warning him repeatedly as was first reported. If he they do stop people under the guise of the War on Drugs to steal their possessions, anyone who dares point it out is then vilified for being anti-cop. “Maybe we’ll stop patrolling, maybe we won’t come to your house when you are being robbed”. That’s what I see from officers who anyone has the temerity to even question.
Your question reverses the reality.
Honestly, that is what I see. If someone dares suggest even a single officer is bad they are undermining the entire system! They hate cops! They encourage violence. That’s what I see again and again and again.
Tom
No way to say this nicely so I’ll just say it. You sound hysterical or delusional. If you “suggest” wrong doing then you won’t get that response. I think you scream accusations, repeat without fact checking and then when called out on it you suddenly are being oppressed for simply “questioning” the facts.
You can spout off about what its but when the actual facts show that your scenarios are wrong then accept it and move on.
Or you know actually learn what you are talking about. No choke hold used in the Garner case. No racism unless the black Sgt was in on it. Brown assaulted the Ofc and the hands up guy was proven to be lying. But that doesn’t fit your narrative so you continue to rant about conspiracy theories and whine when called out. It’s painfully obvious you are jealous of their so called power and are trying to impress someone with your fervor. That or you are just trolling. Either way its late and I have places to be tomm.
So you rebuttal consists of laughing at one word you cherry picked? Sorry to have bothered you. Thought we could have a reasoned logical argument. Have a nice day.
One of the unfortunate parts of the narrative is that it has devolved into a cops are bad! cops are good! match. The truth as in most things is to be found somewhere in between.
From my perspective, I don’t think cops are particularly bad. Nor do I think they’re angels. They’re somewhere in between. I tend towards looking at the good part of people’s natures so I’m going to err on the good side. The funny thing though is that few people looking at this are looking at it from the perspective of utility. That is, are they an effective or useful deterrent to crime given their cost?
Police as an institution aren’t “bad” per se, I mean a group of people hired to protect the innocent and capture the “predators” (to avoid loaded words like criminal). Cops, the same. Just people hired to do a job.
The problem comes with abuse or misuse. Politicians using the police to advance agendas, or cops abusing their authority.
Blaming all for the actions of some is wrong. Should all libertarians be blamed the next time some brain-damaged “anarchist” blows up a building? Should we blame all Christians for Timothy McVeigh? Or all atheists for Stalin?
In the same vein, lets not blame individual cops for the actions of some. Nor should we shame them for not quitting their jobs when most have families to support. Let’s go after the people who give the orders. Repeal laws so the police can stop focusing on silly things and actually go after “bad guys”.
I wouldn’t say you need to find better articles. Sometimes the best article is the one with the most flaws is the best one to start a discussion.
Ignoring the idea of forcing people to buy stuff, the entity that controls the PD has insurance or is self-insured. (Note said entity since some police are university based etc, and I’ve worked for what was effectively a corporate police force.) So they are motivated financially to vet applicants. Not to mention they generally don’t have as a motive killing people, they generally vet candidates pretty well. When I was hired as a civilian IT position, my background paperwork that I had to fill out was 27 pages long and was shorter than the sworn paperwork. For the record, yes they did contact former girlfriends, my current and former neighbors, landlords etc.
The use of self-defense against agents of the state by a large segment of the population would be the fastest way to curtail abuse by them. This would raise the hazard level of being an agent of the state beyond what most agents of the state would find acceptable, so many of them would go do something productive for a change.
Bear with me a moment. That is about the dumbest thing I have heard in a long time.
Are you seriously advocating shooting at cops because they are attempting to arrest you? If so, then you have some serious mental issues. Killing isn’t justified except to prevent death or serious bodily harm.
As to being productive, given part of their job is capturing people who steal, assault etc I would think that would qualify.
Or are you one of those delusional people who think that we should all handle our own justice? Hunt down the bad guys ourselves? Gee what could possibly go wrong? Not like there are people for whom that isn’t an option, thus lessening the odds of getting caught. Very little chance that amateurs would get the wrong guy. Oh and I’m sure that having people be their own cop, judge, and jury wouldn’t lead to any extreme sentences.
What’s that? People could hire others to do that? You mean like a private security or investigative service? Or in other words exactly what we have now but on a voluntary basis vs being forced to pay.
I really wish I could be there if you ever need a cop. Be interesting to see what happens to your principles.
http://reece.liberty.me/2015/01/09/police-assassinations-versus-the-non-aggression-principle/
http://christophercantwell.com/2014/03/15/violently-overthrow-the-government/
Also, ad hominem and ad lapidem are admissions of defeat and ignorance.
Actually stop it. The thing that stood out for me this last time is they heard this guy say he couldn’t breathe all those times, and the whole time I can’t help but think…you were close enough to the action to hear his muffled and strained words, but did nothing. Until people are willing to stand up to the unjustified thuggery of police they will continue and increase in prevalence and force until we truly do become the enemy. The terribly said thing is, their behavior is what is going to make us their enemy, not the fact that we were their enemies to begin with, if that makes sense. It is time to choose a side, kids, and if you are going to be putting yourself in the way of police, be prepared to do your due diligence to make it worth while.
Police beats the criminals (and non-criminals) because they are nobody to them. They are not clients. When they were clients (what I suggest) police would treat them accordingly. After all one is going to get money from them.
In short: the motivation of the police force is wrong. This is due to the chosen system: Police does not benefit from the good health of the criminal. This is true today and will be present in Anarcho-capitalism (Rothbard’s type) and in Minarchism.
“One of the unfortunate parts of the narrative is that it has devolved into a cops are bad! cops are good! match. The truth as in most things is to be found somewhere in between.”
“The problem comes with abuse or misuse. Politicians using the police to advance agendas, or cops abusing their authority.
Blaming all for the actions of some is wrong. Should all libertarians be blamed the next time some brain-damaged “anarchist” blows up a building? Should we blame all Christians for Timothy McVeigh? Or all atheists for Stalin?
In the same vein, lets not blame individual cops for the actions of some. Nor should we shame them for not quitting their jobs when most have families to support. Let’s go after the people who give the orders. Repeal laws so the police can stop focusing on silly things and actually go after “bad guys”.”
These, to me, should be the two defining comments of this whole thread. Thanks, Chip Marce and Makiaveli.
First, generalization never works in this setting. Second, to paraphrase Aristotle, we must go to the beginning to find our answers. For an officer to wear the uniform, he must be hired by the department. This department is supervised by people chosen by the local government, which is allowed to exist by either the conscious decision or the intentional apathy of the people. In order to solve the problem, we must solve it with the people, not with the local government or the police departments. No other way will work. As Chip mentioned, there is a demand problem, not a supply problem. In the vast majority of areas, with only a very few exceptions, the people are actually getting precisely what they currently demand.
