OT: and we wonder why there is so much anger.

[no_such_reality]

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/bullet-that-struck-caregiver-was-meant-to-protect-him-police-union-president-says/ar-BBuCQMF?li=BBnbfcL

“Rivera called the officer who shot Charles Kinsey “decorated” and said he was a member of city’s SWAT team.”

“Then, while Kinsey was lying supine with his hands in the air and the autistic man sat beside him, an officer fired three rounds from an assault rifle, according to North Miami police. One bullet found a target — Kinsey.”

They claim they couldn’t hear him, yet he is clearly audible on a cell phone video from further away.

[FlyerInHi]

i can understand the anger of the people targeted (or who feel unjustly targeted) by police. But what about the anger at the anger? It’s a good time to be a sociologist/social scientist.

[svelte]

This is all a result of having so many cameras available in public now: cell phone, surveillance, etc.

Just 10 short years ago, the police would have said it was justified and created some sort of scenario to make their case. The general public would have believed it, since police are generally more trustworthy than the general public. Now, videos tell the real story.

Over the next 10-20 years, the whole environment will change. Police will be much more careful in how they apply force (as they should be), and the cameras will verify the situations where it was justified.

That’s all a good thing. Things are getting better. It’s just going to be a painful transition in the meantime.

Cameras are a good thing. It’s gonna keep people honest – both police and citizens.

[Anonymous]

The deeds themselves are shameful.

The entirely predictable collective self-righteous attempts at justifying the deeds are disgusting.

Common sense tells us that we’ve only seen a fraction of what really happens. And every time, every cop involved compromises their integrity to protect their own.

The definition of a coward is someone who protects themselves at the cost of others.

Until cops start holding other cops accountable for their misdeeds, they are all cowards in my view.

[zk]

Let’s assume for a second that the story the officer is telling is the truth. You have to figure that’s the best case scenario for the officer. But if his story is true:

First of all, to think that the toy was a gun is ridiculous. I can see thinking a toy gun is a gun, but a toy car? Jesus.

And, B: If you really think the therapist is in trouble, you’re going to shoot at the guy you think is the bad guy sitting there while the guy you’re trying to “save” is in your line of fire?

Number 3, I read that he shot him with a rifle. You can’t hit a 3-foot by 2-foot target with a rifle from 30 yards away? In 3 tries? You should never miss that target with that gun from that distance. You should be able to hit his left hand or his right thigh or whatever part you want from that distance with that gun.

D: And this is number 1, really: His reading of the whole situation was outrageously bad.

It’s possible that he’s telling the truth. But if he is, he’s an extremely incompetent officer and should not be in that line of work.

[dumbrenter]

[quote=zk]Let’s assume for a second that the story the officer is telling is the truth. You have to figure that’s the best case scenario for the officer. But if his story is true:

First of all, to think that the toy was a gun is ridiculous. I can see thinking a toy gun is a gun, but a toy car? Jesus.

And, B: If you really think the therapist is in trouble, you’re going to shoot at the guy you think is the bad guy sitting there while the guy you’re trying to “save” is in your line of fire?

Number 3, I read that he shot him with a rifle. You can’t hit a 3-foot by 2-foot target with a rifle from 30 yards away? In 3 tries? You should never miss that target with that gun from that distance. You should be able to hit his left hand or his right thigh or whatever part you want from that distance with that gun.

D: And this is number 1, really: His reading of the whole situation was outrageously bad.

It’s possible that he’s telling the truth. But if he is, he’s an extremely incompetent officer and should not be in that line of work.[/quote]

And a really bad shot even by cop standards. How do they even manage to hire these people?

[scaredyclassic]

[quote=harvey]The deeds themselves are shameful.

The entirely predictable collective self-righteous attempts at justifying the deeds are disgusting.

Common sense tells us that we’ve only seen a fraction of what really happens. And every time, every cop involved compromises their integrity to protect their own.

The definition of a coward is someone who protects themselves at the cost of others.

Until cops start holding other cops accountable for their misdeeds, they are all cowards in my view.[/quote]

true bravery is putting yourself at risk for others. not just making it home safe.

[FlyerInHi]

For sure cameras are bringing old habits to light. Now everyone has portable phone/camera. It won’t be long before there are cameras are everywhere. Even cars will have front facing and rear facing cameras that record on a loop. Now we have proof of police abuse.

The question we have to ask ourselves is why a large portion of the population feels anger and resentment at this new knowledge of police abuse. Why do they try to minimize and justify it by pointing to what they feel are more pressing problems?

Sociologists must be busy doing research and writing papers.

[zk]

[quote=FlyerInHi]
The question we have to ask ourselves is why a large portion of the population feels anger and resentment at this new knowledge of police abuse. Why do they try to minimize and justify it by pointing to what they feel are more pressing problems?

[/quote]

That’s easy. I can sum it up in 4 words: Right-wing noise machine. They’ve been brainwashed into thinking that the view of the world they want to be real (which includes most black people being the bad guys and all cops being the good guys) is reality. And humans get upset when their view of reality is challenged, especially if it’s one they’ve invested a lot of emotional energy in. And they don’t like to be wrong.

[FlyerInHi]

Very interesting ZK. I have a hard time figuring out how that squares ideologically in the minds of those people. Police abuse is government overreach to the extreme. If one cares about the constitution, one should never want the police to hold arbitrary powers over people.

[ocrenter]

[quote=svelte]This is all a result of having so many cameras available in public now: cell phone, surveillance, etc.

Just 10 short years ago, the police would have said it was justified and created some sort of scenario to make their case. The general public would have believed it, since police are generally more trustworthy than the general public. Now, videos tell the real story.

Over the next 10-20 years, the whole environment will change. Police will be much more careful in how they apply force (as they should be), and the cameras will verify the situations where it was justified.

That’s all a good thing. Things are getting better. It’s just going to be a painful transition in the meantime.

Cameras are a good thing. It’s gonna keep people honest – both police and citizens.[/quote]

Agree, +1

[ocrenter]

[quote=FlyerInHi]Very interesting ZK. I have a hard time figuring out how that squares ideologically in the minds of those people. Police abuse is government overreach to the extreme. If one cares about the constitution, one should never want the police to hold arbitrary powers over people.[/quote]

Just authoritarianism using the flag and the constitution as cover for that authoritarian tendency.

http://www.vox.com/2016/5/20/11720276/donald-trump-authoritarianism

[njtosd]

[quote=FlyerInHi]For sure cameras are bringing old habits to light. Now everyone has portable phone/camera. It won’t be long before there are cameras are everywhere. Even cars will have front facing and rear facing cameras that record on a loop. Now we have proof of police abuse.

The question we have to ask ourselves is why a large portion of the population feels anger and resentment at this new knowledge of police abuse. Why do they try to minimize and justify it by pointing to what they feel are more pressing problems?

Sociologists must be busy doing research and writing papers.[/quote]

Who is pointing to these more pressing problems? Everything that I’ve heard suggests that these instances of abuse are investigated pretty thoroughly.

[njtosd]

[quote=zk][quote=FlyerInHi]
The question we have to ask ourselves is why a large portion of the population feels anger and resentment at this new knowledge of police abuse. Why do they try to minimize and justify it by pointing to what they feel are more pressing problems?

[/quote]

That’s easy. I can sum it up in 4 words: Right-wing noise machine. They’ve been brainwashed into thinking that the view of the world they want to be real (which includes most black people being the bad guys and all cops being the good guys) is reality. And humans get upset when their view of reality is challenged, especially if it’s one they’ve invested a lot of emotional energy in. And they don’t like to be wrong.[/quote]

You realize that your answer can be condensed somewhat: Those other guys (who are totally weak minded and prejudiced) are causing this “minimizing” (although no data has been supplied that suggests that any “minimizing” has happened). In other words, even theoretical issues are “the other guy’s fault”.

When are people going to accept that others can disagree with them politically without being stupid racists (conservatives) or hypocritical narcissists (liberals)? And frankly – I agree that conservatives don’t like to be wrong. Neither do liberals. Do you know anyone, zk, who likes to be wrong? There is equal jerkish behavior on both sides of the political fence – it just bugs you more when you don’t agree with the jerk’s politics.

I don’t like the behavior that a lot of these police officers have been accused of. . But when did a virtual jury of the Internet replace a careful and thorough investigation? Police behaving badly makes great copy for the news networks, but there is a reason we pay people to conduct careful investigations before we decide to prosecute.

[outtamojo]

Do they always conduct careful investigations? Are there no loopholes?

http://www.wsj.com/articles/hundreds-of-police-killings-are-uncounted-in-federal-statistics-1417577504

http://harvardlawreview.org/2015/04/enhancing-accountability-and-trust-with-independent-investigations-of-police-lethal-force/

[Author]

Posts