Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Baffler]

America had a great mass transit system going early in the 20th century actually. It literally got bought out and dismantled by the oil and automobile tycoons.

I thought it was mostly outcompeted? Though in the end it ended up getting outcompeted I think.

Basically GM and a few other companies gained control of streetcar services in cities and promptly dismantled them.

[MDFification]

Am I the only one who wants cops to wear cameras while on duty?

It's feasible in our day and age to have cheap cameras attached to their uniforms. If enough effort is put into making them tamperproof, then they both stop cops from abusing their authority and protect cops from getting falsely accused of abusing their authority by providing video evidence of what happened.

[Frumple]

You're not, body cameras are an actual thing. Found to be incredibly helpful in reducing complaints and whatnot in areas they've been implemented in. It's just not everywhere has done so.

[smeeprocket]

Am I the only one who wants cops to wear cameras while on duty?

It's feasible in our day and age to have cheap cameras attached to their uniforms. If enough effort is put into making them tamperproof, then they both stop cops from abusing their authority and protect cops from getting falsely accused of abusing their authority by providing video evidence of what happened.

I agree, but based on the Garner case, cameras are almost irrelevant.

Street cars were absolutely wonderful public transport and were utterly and completely effective. They were cheap and easy to maintain, and just all around good for cities.

Unfortunately, money got in the way of that.

[Sheb]

One thing that has not been brought forward yet is the stupidly huge amount of power prosecutor have in the US system. Remember, 97% of cases ends in plea bargain. So 24 defendants out of 25 don't even go in front of a judge. Also, during plea bargain, prosecutors are all-powerful: they have access to much more information than defendant's lawyer (especially if the defendant is poor and can't afford a lot of lawyer time), and due to minimum sentencing laws and snetencing guidelines, the prosecutor in most case is in effect deciding about the sentence on his own, without the judge's input.

[Rolan7]

Am I the only one who wants cops to wear cameras while on duty?

It's feasible in our day and age to have cheap cameras attached to their uniforms. If enough effort is put into making them tamperproof, then they both stop cops from abusing their authority and protect cops from getting falsely accused of abusing their authority by providing video evidence of what happened.

Definitely needed.  It's good that patrol cars have cameras, but those get circumvented (as people here have pointed out).  I think some officers have helmet cams already, but I don't think that's common.  Maybe mostly a SWAT thing.

This goes along with the need for police departments to report accurate data to the FBI, and for oversight check-ins to make sure that data is being recorded accurately.  One problem with discussing these issues is that the official FBI data is woefully incomplete...  Because apparently local departments aren't required to report it all.  And even if they do, it's self-reporting.

With this lack of concrete information, it's actually pretty reasonable that people assume the worst.

[smeeprocket]

Am I the only one who wants cops to wear cameras while on duty?

It's feasible in our day and age to have cheap cameras attached to their uniforms. If enough effort is put into making them tamperproof, then they both stop cops from abusing their authority and protect cops from getting falsely accused of abusing their authority by providing video evidence of what happened.

Definitely needed.  It's good that patrol cars have cameras, but those get circumvented (as people here have pointed out).  I think some officers have helmet cams already, but I don't think that's common.  Maybe mostly a SWAT thing.

This goes along with the need for police departments to report accurate data to the FBI, and for oversight check-ins to make sure that data is being recorded accurately.  One problem with discussing these issues is that the official FBI data is woefully incomplete...  Because apparently local departments aren't required to report it all.  And even if they do, it's self-reporting.

With this lack of concrete information, it's actually pretty reasonable that people assume the worst.

It's not an assumption. The records that are kept also show this data, though all deaths the FBI lists always lists the dead as "criminals" regardless.

It's just that handing over or even keeping that data is more of a suggestion than anything else.

I mean, how many unarmed black people need to die without any sort of prosecution before it stops being an assumption and starts being accepted fact. Because the list of known cases are pretty lengthy.

[SalmonGod]

One thing that has not been brought forward yet is the stupidly huge amount of power prosecutor have in the US system. Remember, 97% of cases ends in plea bargain. So 24 defendants out of 25 don't even go in front of a judge. Also, during plea bargain, prosecutors are all-powerful: they have access to much more information than defendant's lawyer (especially if the defendant is poor and can't afford a lot of lawyer time), and due to minimum sentencing laws and snetencing guidelines, the prosecutor in most case is in effect deciding about the sentence on his own, without the judge's input.

Not that specific detail, but it does tie into the general sentiment we have discussed that most of the American public is incredibly reactionary when it comes to criminal justice.  The mentality is very much guilty until proven innocent, and harsh penalties for everything.  Anyone who can be identified as a small-time criminal is often seen as responsible for whatever happens in their interactions with police, even if the result of that reaction was horrible and the victim's conduct was 100% perfect outside of that small crime.  Anyone facing serious charges of something like murder or child abuse... well... if any such case turns into a big media story, I can expect to hear gossiping all day everywhere I go about how they should take them out back and shoot them, instead of wasting taxpayer money on due process.

Anyway... I expected my bit about the obstacles to positive change in America to be called out as overdramatic, as it has many times before... but it seems debating the level of horribleness of public transit was deemed a more interesting topic   I find this amusing.

[smeeprocket]

The more specific issue in these instances is that no prosecutor actually wants to convict a cop of anything. They work with them regularly and need police support. They are also probably on good terms with individual cops. In the Brown case, the prosecutor did everything in his power to do the defense's job for them.

Defense for civilians is a serious problem though, one that only gets solved by a higher income bracket. Really, defense attorneys should be state employees and you don't get much choice in who you get. Much like prosecutors. Assuming the whole friendships and working relationships getting in the way of doing their job can be fixed.

edit: incidentally, guilty untiul proven innocent doesn't apply to rape cases, it seems. At least not for a large segment of the population. Or really to cases in which a cop is the perpetrator.

[Baffler]

The more specific issue in these instances is that no prosecutor actually wants to convict a cop of anything. They work with them regularly and need police support. They are also probably on good terms with individual cops. In the Brown case, the prosecutor did everything in his power to do the defense's job for them.

Defense for civilians is a serious problem though, one that only gets solved by a higher income bracket. Really, defense attorneys should be state employees and you don't get much choice in who you get. Much like prosecutors. Assuming the whole friendships and working relationships getting in the way of doing their job can be fixed.

edit: incidentally, guilty untiul proven innocent doesn't apply to rape cases, it seems. At least not for a large segment of the population. Or really to cases in which a cop is the perpetrator.

But there ARE state salaried defense attorneys. They are called public defenders, and are guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment. The US is in fact one of only a handful of countries that does this.. The problem is that they are ridiculously overworked and tend to just advise defendants to plead guilty for one reason or another.

[SalmonGod]

edit: incidentally, guilty untiul proven innocent doesn't apply to rape cases, it seems.

Unless there's a child involved, and then it applies x1000

(of course this attitude is usually reversed for any sort of crime if the accused is a well-liked cultural icon or just rich)

[Phmcw]

Considering it's supposed to be "innocent untill proven guilty" anyway...

[smeeprocket]

The more specific issue in these instances is that no prosecutor actually wants to convict a cop of anything. They work with them regularly and need police support. They are also probably on good terms with individual cops. In the Brown case, the prosecutor did everything in his power to do the defense's job for them.

Defense for civilians is a serious problem though, one that only gets solved by a higher income bracket. Really, defense attorneys should be state employees and you don't get much choice in who you get. Much like prosecutors. Assuming the whole friendships and working relationships getting in the way of doing their job can be fixed.

edit: incidentally, guilty untiul proven innocent doesn't apply to rape cases, it seems. At least not for a large segment of the population. Or really to cases in which a cop is the perpetrator.

But there ARE state salaried defense attorneys. They are called public defenders, and are guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment. The US is in fact one of only a handful of countries that does this.. The problem is that they are ridiculously overworked and tend to just advise defendants to plead guilty for one reason or another.

No I mean ALL defense attorneys. None that are private. That's the only way anyone gets equal representation.

As it stands, you have cases such as where a billionaire raped his children, and they worked the sentence down to child rape, which inexplicably has no minimum sentence, and the judge gave him probation. (though personally I think the judge's palms were greased on that one, and she should have been put under investigation.)

[Baffler]

No I mean ALL defense attorneys. None that are private. That's the only way anyone gets equal representation.

As it stands, you have cases such as where a billionaire raped his children, and they worked the sentence down to child rape, which inexplicably has no minimum sentence, and the judge gave him probation. (though personally I think the judge's palms were greased on that one, and she should have been put under investigation.)

Oh, I see. That sounds like a solid idea, but in the current climate I think it would lead to an increase in convictions, considering how public defenders conduct themselves as it stands, how the deck is stacked against them to begin with, and the increasingly apparent shadiness going on. You mentioned that though, so I guess we're in agreement.

Also, did that actually happen? I'm also wondering what he was charged with before shadiness occurred.

[misko27]

For the US in general, it's worth noting that the US has a much lower population density and, while still spread out, was even more evenly spread in the past then it is now: Public Transport can only be so useful in, say, Mississippi. Doesn't justify the lack in places where it is appropriate, but it's worth bearing in mind that the place that has by far the most extensive system in the US is also the one that has had the most consistently dense population.

Also it interests me how the place that has 1/3rd of the US public transport system riders (and two thirds its rail riders) is never brought up in the debate, as a model or otherwise. The NYC MTA is open twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week, 52 weeks a year, and has the most extensive subway system in the country, among many other things.

The American public? Reacting? You guys don't have public healthcare, or paid holllyday, or affordable superior education, or mass public transit, or a real police fore, or affordable justice, or any kind of government accountability, or ....The American public is the most apathetic in the whole fucking world. Your governement don't offer your the services given by a third world country's one. And your police force seems worst than Brazil's. Let's not forget the absolutely insane incarceration rate and total laxism of the food and drug administration.

I will stop to point out that, in a discussion where statistics are important and nuance is crucial to understanding a deeply complex issue, hyperbole like most apathetic in the world is unhelpful (unless you actually believe that; if you do, please tell me so I can rebut it).

Anyway, I don't think America's worst problem is apathy.  I think it's that we're so divided.  We have to deconstruct and culturally immunize ourselves against the way our politics and media pit the population against itself before we'll ever be able to challenge the authoritarian corruption that plagues us. 

I think America's biggest problem is elected judges.

Biggest by what measure? I certainly disagree with that. I doubt that it is to blame for, well, poor public transportation, and clearly some people are interested in that issue.

Anyway... I expected my bit about the obstacles to positive change in America to be called out as overdramatic, as it has many times before... but it seems debating the level of horribleness of public transit was deemed a more interesting topic   I find this amusing.

You know I was going to do that, up until you mentioned it.