This is why we don't defund police

Erik Nelson

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Aug 6, 2017
5,117
1,649
46
Utah
✟347,045.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
conservative analyses use whatever they can find to object to doing anything about problems...do nothing.
some "problems" aren't. Many "problems" are just pretexts for politicians to pontificate

And what's the opposite, Gov't does everything ?
 
Upvote 0

ThatRobGuy

Part of the IT crowd
Supporter
Sep 4, 2005
24,642
14,525
Here
✟1,196,039.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
I think you're giving the left way too much credit for strategic thinking about crafting an equivocal slogan.

If "Defund the police" were the only example of semantic overload, then I'd agree that it's just may be a fluke or incidental clumsy wording.

However, there are enough examples of these happening from both sides at this point, (and both sides seem to use the same playbook with regards to when they invoke the particular interpretations based on whether they're speaking to their own base, or trying to make a rebuttal against a criticism) that I think it's become an actual marketing strategy at this point.

IE: they imply the much more sweeping definition when speaking to their own base as to give the impression that they favor aggressive policy action in name of a specific cause

But, they imply the much more toned-down version that gives the impression that "it's just a few minor tweaks to the current system" when called out for the aforementioned definition.
 
Upvote 0

Ana the Ist

Aggressively serene!
Feb 21, 2012
37,388
11,317
✟433,397.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
1. Sweet . Get them fired for negligence then.

Then you have no police.

2. Because in competently executing proper and reasonable policies and enforcing the control contiuum, less people would unjustly die.
This ridiculous hyperbole of "not handling things perfectly" is useless.


View attachment 295837

What's a reasonable margin of error then? At least in regards to shootings....how many "bad shootings" are an acceptable number in a police force of hundreds of thousands amongst 320+ million people who could be armed at any time?
 
Upvote 0

rambot

Senior Member
Apr 13, 2006
24,490
13,110
Up your nose....wid a rubbah hose.
✟361,528.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Greens
Then you have no police.



What's a reasonable margin of error then? At least in regards to shootings....how many "bad shootings" are an acceptable number in a police force of hundreds of thousands amongst 320+ million people who could be armed at any time?
Did you see the chart? I don't need to answer your questions. Its in the chart.

It's not a matter of "how many". It's a matter of did they follow the use of force model above.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

rambot

Senior Member
Apr 13, 2006
24,490
13,110
Up your nose....wid a rubbah hose.
✟361,528.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Greens
some "problems" aren't. Many "problems" are just pretexts for politicians to pontificate.


It is VERY clearly that it is not a problem if it doesn't effect you (the communal you). It's a consist and very sad theme I see.
 
Upvote 0

rambot

Senior Member
Apr 13, 2006
24,490
13,110
Up your nose....wid a rubbah hose.
✟361,528.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Greens
That's rather oversimplified.
I know it may feel that way but it isn't to thousands and thousands of people.

And really should we not have high standards for the one job in society that is permitted to use lethal force? Should that bar not be reaaaally high?
 
Upvote 0

Ana the Ist

Aggressively serene!
Feb 21, 2012
37,388
11,317
✟433,397.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Did you see the chart? I don't need to answer your questions. Its in the chart.

It's not a matter of "how many". It's a matter of did they follow the use of force model above.

If you want to define a shooting as "good" or "bad" according to a chart that's based on officer perceptions.....that's fine.

I'm asking about the reasonable expectation for mistakes and deliberate malfeasance that we know exists everywhere in every job.

What is the level that it has to rise to before we devote so much attention to it?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: rjs330
Upvote 0

Erik Nelson

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Aug 6, 2017
5,117
1,649
46
Utah
✟347,045.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
It is VERY clearly that it is not a problem if it doesn't effect you (the communal you). It's a consist and very sad theme I see.
Like how you don't (seem to) care about millions of small business owners crushed by COVID lockdowns ?
 
Upvote 0

rjs330

Well-Known Member
CF Ambassadors
May 22, 2015
22,257
5,978
64
✟333,182.00
Faith
Pentecostal
1. Sweet . Get them fired for negligence then.
2. Because in competently executing proper and reasonable policies and enforcing the control contiuum, less people would unjustly die.
This ridiculous hyperbole of "not handling things perfectly" is useless.


View attachment 295837

The thing is police are well aware of your nice chart. And the VAST OVERWHELMING MAJORITY of them follow it. Just how many encounters are found to have had inappropriate use of the force continuum? Whats the percentage? Less people would die if officers used the continuum. That's true. But just how possible is it and how realistic is it to expect fewer in a profession like police work and how many fewer? I think you need a bench mark. How many are you willing to accept as a reasonable expectation of human behavior in a violent encounter? 0%? 1%? What would a realistic and reasonable percentage be? And how does that compare to what it is now?
 
Upvote 0

rambot

Senior Member
Apr 13, 2006
24,490
13,110
Up your nose....wid a rubbah hose.
✟361,528.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Greens
Like how you don't (seem to) care about millions of small business owners crushed by COVID lockdowns ?
Except I'm glad the Biden government is spending 350 billionish for small business.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

rambot

Senior Member
Apr 13, 2006
24,490
13,110
Up your nose....wid a rubbah hose.
✟361,528.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Greens
The thing is police are well aware of your nice chart. And the VAST OVERWHELMING MAJORITY of them follow it. Just how many encounters are found to have had inappropriate use of the force continuum? Whats the percentage? Less people would die if officers used the continuum. That's true. But just how possible is it and how realistic is it to expect fewer in a profession like police work and how many fewer? I think you need a bench mark. How many are you willing to accept as a reasonable expectation of human behavior in a violent encounter? 0%? 1%? What would a realistic and reasonable percentage be? And how does that compare to what it is now?
You're right. The vast amount of good cops won't be affected by this. It's the behaviours of the bad cops that will receive the consequences. And I think that's good.
 
Upvote 0

Ana the Ist

Aggressively serene!
Feb 21, 2012
37,388
11,317
✟433,397.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
You're right. The vast amount of good cops won't be affected by this. It's the behaviours of the bad cops that will receive the consequences. And I think that's good.

Every cop makes mistakes.

It's not a job one can do perfectly.

Taking away their only protection from legal retaliation is wrong given what they're asked to do.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: rjs330
Upvote 0

rjs330

Well-Known Member
CF Ambassadors
May 22, 2015
22,257
5,978
64
✟333,182.00
Faith
Pentecostal
You're right. The vast amount of good cops won't be affected by this. It's the behaviours of the bad cops that will receive the consequences. And I think that's good.

No, good cops will suffer. Because once you remove the immunity you open the flood gates for suing cops because you believe your rights have been violated. And a jury could feel sorry for you even though the cop didn't really violate your rights or do anything wrong and give you money. You will be able to sue a cop and they will have to spend a lot of money to defend themselves against frivolous suits.
 
Upvote 0

rambot

Senior Member
Apr 13, 2006
24,490
13,110
Up your nose....wid a rubbah hose.
✟361,528.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Greens
No, good cops will suffer. Because once you remove the immunity you open the flood gates for suing cops because you believe your rights have been violated. And a jury could feel sorry for you even though the cop didn't really violate your rights or do anything wrong and give you money. You will be able to sue a cop and they will have to spend a lot of money to defend themselves against frivolous suits.
I'll catch you on one thing.

You would only be able to sue successfully IF your rights are violated...not if you " believe" your rights are violated.

Body cameras will switch from protecting citizens to protecting the cops.


That's the way it should have been from the start.
 
Upvote 0

Strathos

No one important
Dec 11, 2012
12,663
6,531
God's Earth
✟263,276.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
No, good cops will suffer. Because once you remove the immunity you open the flood gates for suing cops because you believe your rights have been violated. And a jury could feel sorry for you even though the cop didn't really violate your rights or do anything wrong and give you money. You will be able to sue a cop and they will have to spend a lot of money to defend themselves against frivolous suits.

I'd like to think the answer lies somewhere between 'All cops are evil scum and they shouldn't exist' and 'All cops are perfect angels and should be allowed to get away with anything with no accountability whatsoever'.

But that's just me.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: rambot
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

rambot

Senior Member
Apr 13, 2006
24,490
13,110
Up your nose....wid a rubbah hose.
✟361,528.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Greens
Every cop makes mistakes.

It's not a job one can do perfectly.

Taking away their only protection from legal retaliation is wrong given what they're asked to do.
I agree. Every cop makes mistakes. But not every mistake a cop makes ends with death or bodily injury. There are excusable mistakes and there inexcusable mistakes

I can't think of other jobs where you can kill people "by mistake" and gets met with a giant shrug. Frankly I can't think of any circumstance where you kill someone by mistake and literally nothing happens.
 
Upvote 0

Ana the Ist

Aggressively serene!
Feb 21, 2012
37,388
11,317
✟433,397.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
I agree. Every cop makes mistakes. But not every mistake a cop makes ends with death or bodily injury. There are excusable mistakes and there inexcusable mistakes.

Give an example of an "inexcusable mistake"?

At some point you have to accept a perfect police force isn't possible.

I can't think of other jobs where you can kill people "by mistake" and gets met with a giant shrug. Frankly I can't think of any circumstance where you kill someone by mistake and literally nothing happens.

Ummm...soldiers, ER surgeons....
 
Upvote 0

rambot

Senior Member
Apr 13, 2006
24,490
13,110
Up your nose....wid a rubbah hose.
✟361,528.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Greens
Give an example of an "inexcusable mistake"?
[gestures broadly to the incidents that sparked protests over summer 2020]Start with these....

At some point you have to accept a perfect police force isn't possible.
At some point you have to accept that better IS possible.
Ummm...soldiers, ER surgeons....
ER Surgeons....really? Thta's funny because I know doctors pay ridiculous fees for malpractice insurance. And while I thought of soldier, I meant (though didn't express) more of the day to day work in society; not in warfare.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Arcangl86

Newbie
Dec 29, 2013
11,075
7,405
✟343,116.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Green
Give an example of an "inexcusable mistake"?

At some point you have to accept a perfect police force isn't possible.
I'm not looking for perfect. I'm looking for a police force that doesn't instinctively cover for bad behavior. IF these officers truly are rotten apples, get rid of them, don't protect them.

Ummm...soldiers, ER surgeons....
If somebody dies on an operating table most hospitals hold an internal investigation to determine what happened and if the actions of the doctor had anything to do with it. Any death involving a member of the military is investigated to make sure it wasn't murder.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Ana the Ist

Aggressively serene!
Feb 21, 2012
37,388
11,317
✟433,397.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
I'm not looking for perfect. I'm looking for a police force that doesn't instinctively cover for bad behavior. IF these officers truly are rotten apples, get rid of them, don't protect them.

Uh huh...

If somebody dies on an operating table most hospitals hold an internal investigation to determine what happened and if the actions of the doctor had anything to do with it. Any death involving a member of the military is investigated to make sure it wasn't murder.

They investigate themselves...

Thanks for proving my point. Lemme ask you something...can you think of any incentive for admitting a mistake? Do you think the hospital can afford to pay out millions of dollars to everyone they make a fatal mistake on?

In Iraq, Afghanistan, the places of our most recent conflicts...are hundreds if not thousands of well documented cases of "vehicle approaching checkpoint at high rate of speed" and our soldiers killing everyone inside....only to find out that there were no terrorists, no combatants, no bombs, no guns....just elderly people, women and children, etc.

You know, the exact kind of mistakes you're talking about. Killing people based upon perceived threats that turned out to be wrong afterwards. It's an unfortunate fact of reality...but it's almost unbelievably stupid to imagine that we can ask people to judge a high stress life and death situation perfectly without any mistakes over and over again.

If you want to throw people in jail for making those mistakes....then you're essentially telling them that they should avoid those situations altogether.

That means anyone who needs the cops the most shouldn't expect them to show up. They aren't under a legal obligation to do so.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Darkhorse
Upvote 0