Print

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

[kaijyuu]

The system is corrupt, not everyone in it. Why go after rotten apples when you can go after what's poisoning the tree? (or get a new tree, if you prefer)

All this indignation seems wasted to me when directed at people and not shitty practices/culture. Public outcry can get a couple bad cops, but innumerable more will slip through without notice.

[Truean]

What's really tragic is, asshole politicians have been cutting police department staffing and funding for years now and this is the logical result. They do not receive the training they require and often many officers' first response to what I'm sure was a very mentally disturbed individual would be to think he's a drug user tweaking the hell out. With a lack of proper training and a split second, the difference between someone hopped up on PCP and someone who is merely mentally ill is hard to see. Moreover, "mentally disturbed" most certainly does not mean he isn't on drugs. It's legitimately hard.

Hence why the training matters, but is all too often not funded. I do wonder if the other police officers had the training Officer Tasca had.

Being a police officer is a shitty job, because you have to deal with EVERYTHING and you're pretty much it.... That said how are we and how have we been cutting staffing and training? The problems society faces have not gone down, if anything they've increased. So, how can we possibly think we can do more with less personnel and training? We can't. That said the department's response to Officer Tasca is not just nonsensical, but all too common. The procedures fail in this instance and there is no adequate remedy. What are you supposed to do when two of your fellow officers are misbehaving badly and violently, and there is also a mentally disturbed person involved? Hell I honestly don't know. I'm sure you're supposed to give reprimands and go up the chain of command, but that's practical how?

What we need is an incredibly disciplined force of police officers and what we have are the leftovers from numerous rounds of budget cuts. It isn't fair to the officers. It isn't fair to us and it isn't fair to anyone. Justice is not about profit and is often expensive. It certainly isn't free and I propose shouldn't be limited by a tax base that doesn't wanna pay for it.

[Fenrir]

I do not want officers that require training to know that one does not needlessly punch people in the head.

[Truean]

I do not want officers that require training to know that one does not needlessly punch people in the head.

Who do you think the basic training weeds out when you provide it?

[Fenrir]

I just assumed that basic training was basic information on how to do the job. The head punchers would be weeded out by a system that proscutes violent crimes even if the offender is a white man in a blue uniform.

Of course, in an ideal system, people would stop the excessive punching of heads before they reach adulthood, but it seems that such is not feasible to implement.

[kaijyuu]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=whadmRePr_8

[Truean]

I just assumed that basic training was basic information on how to do the job. The head punchers would be weeded out by a system that proscutes violent crimes even if the offender is a white man in a blue uniform.

Of course, in an ideal system, people would stop the excessive punching of heads before they reach adulthood, but it seems that such is not feasible to implement.

The State has a complete and utter monopoly on force, deadly or otherwise. It may grant a temporary conditional license to use said force in specific instances such as self defense if, and under conditions, it so chooses.

One such license to use force issued by the state is to police officers in the lawful execution of their duties in enforcing the state's police powers. The license of a badge gives them the ability to use force and the training tells them when it is appropriate, or not, to do so: setting conditions for the license to use force. The key aspect of training lacking here includes how to deal with citizens and a subclass of citizens called suspects (and when one becomes the other). Moreover, when the officer is appropriate in using various aspects and levels of force including mere restraint, non lethal, and deadly force (including but not limited to firearms). Finally, how and under exactly what circumstances and procedure said force is used once it is appropriate. <--- Training.

The lack of that training....

[SalmonGod]

So... this doesn't explain why Tasca is at risk of being fired for being a trained non-psychopath.  You say we need training to weed out those recruits who will just randomly attack people.  The department has the opportunity here to weed out those people based on performance on the job, but exactly the opposite is happening... and I see more and more stories surfacing all the time about this kind of thing. 

I could believe that our officers are under-trained.   Actually, I'd argue that they're over-trained on use of force and under-trained on its responsible and disciplined application.  Their increasingly militarized armament also doesn't seem to be lacking in funding...

But that's beside the point.  I just don't understand how cops being punished or fired for being decent people can be chalked up to anything but a corrupt internal culture, or at best a severely fucked up procedural infrastructure.

[Truean]

So... this doesn't explain why Tasca is at risk of being fired for being a trained non-psychopath.  You say we need training to weed out those recruits who will just randomly attack people.  The department has the opportunity here to weed out those people based on performance on the job, but exactly the opposite is happening... and I see more and more stories surfacing all the time about this kind of thing. 

I could believe that our officers are under-trained.   Actually, I'd argue that they're over-trained on use of force and under-trained on its responsible and disciplined application.  Their increasingly militarized armament also doesn't seem to be lacking in funding...

But that's beside the point.  I just don't understand how cops being punished or fired for being decent people can be chalked up to anything but a corrupt internal culture, or at best a severely fucked up procedural infrastructure.

O I'm not defending the department for charging her.... Not at all. You're right, that sounds suspicious. At minimum, the procedure needs severe revamping.

I'd argue training is exactly the point though. What they are being trained in and how they are being trained to use it. This includes the people putting Tasca up on charges. It doesn't sound reasonable to me.

[GalenEvil]

The Occupy Movement is still ongoing? If it is I have thankfully not heard much about it... it makes me sad listening to people whine. The Occupy Movement, as far as I can see, hasn't done anything positive other than giving groundskeepers and maintenance crews something to do... My opinion is: If you want more money, go do something or create something and make money. If you make get far enough that you actually become part of the 1% then, if you still feel the same as you do right now go do something about it. As far as I can tell the Occupy Movement, specifically Occupy Wallstreet, has done nothing but hurt the business in their immediate area. Most if not all of the owners are definitely not in the 1%...

I may be wrong, and if so then the future will tell me... until then I can only hope to be right.
GalenEvil

[kaijyuu]

If you have a movement nearby, I suggest going down and actually listening to the "whines." I assure you you'll find them to be anything but.



As for what it's accomplished... well, pressure. Pressure to shape up and not become a corporate dystopia. Pressure to move toward a more even distribution of wealth. Pressure against police brutality, though that one was unintended.

Whether the pressure has moved anything in the right direction is another matter, though. I suspect it's done some good at least.

[Bauglir]

The problem with telling members of Occupy to go do something to make their lives better is that that's what they're doing. At a certain point, capitalism as a system gets so abusive that in order to keep the market free, you need to take action against the entrenched businesses - all of whom have a vested interest in locking down the market as effectively as possible and preventing as few people as possible from joining the ranks of the wealthy. OWS is not necessarily any sort of attack on capitalism (though some members want it to be so, and sometimes I find myself agreeing with them), but the one thing it seems to me is agreed upon by everyone involved with Occupy is that personal sacrifice, hard work, and cleverness just aren't going to cut it in the economic system that currently exists.

And that's a problem, because most of them would very much like to do what you're suggesting. But they're locked into a system that thinks "Get a degree, you don't want to get a job flipping burgers" is sensible advice paired with "You shouldn't think your degree makes you too good to flip burgers" when all the while unemployment is so high that no amount of fast food could solve the problem. In other words, a system that traps the unlucky, skilled or not, between starvation and wage-slavery.

[GalenEvil]

Well, I am in Alabama so not sure if there are any active Occupy movements going on nearby. I thought that there was one in Atlanta but that may have either been false information or peetered out. Pressure is good, and for that reason the protests are a good thing. Corporate dystopia isn't what I want since in my opinion the larger a corporation gets the less it focuses on the details like customer service and decency (previous experience as an employee in a very major retail chain in the USA). I do not agree on the distribution of wealth... sure the elderly that can't pay for stuff that they need should be addressed and the physically handicapped should get some love too since they are most likely not going to be able to get into entry-level positions above more capable and physically stronger people. The issue I have against the distribution of wealth is that it raises in me the stigma of Communism. Not the Communism that exists on paper, the one that exists in real life where the gov't owns the property and most things are rationed out. If you are willing to work your ass off for something, you should get paid a decent price for the work. If you want a hand-out, go jump in a ditch and lie there until a good hard rain takes you out of the equation. This is, on paper, a free market. You work for what you get here. I have no skills that are normally employable but I try my hardest to get whatever I need by working for it as hard as possible, and am thus paid well despite little work experience to put on my resume for the things that I do. I work several jobs a week since most will not give me more than 16-20 hours a week at minimum wage. I have a job as a "gopher" for some friends in construction and they pay me 8 an hour to procure materials and deliver them on time. The point of this part of the post is that there is no such thing as a free lunch. Work to the best of your abilities and you can survive. The body can be trained to effectively work off of 6 hours or less of sleep a day. And as a bonus, if you really need the money I will gladly pay you to dig up stuff in my yard...will not pay you top dollar but will give you minimum wage, a break or two, and a meal for the hours that you work. The Capitalist society is not a bad thing, it is that people do not know how to take advantage of the opportunities presented to them. If you are poor you have no reason to not to any job in your power to do. If it is legal to do then no job should be below your dignity level. Hard work pays off.

Rereading that I feel like I just wrote an ad, but whatever... on to the next part of your post!

Pressure against police brutality, though that one was unintended

I think that this was addressed earlier in the discussion, but it could do with some extra posts. The Police need to be properly trained to be able to handle situations presented to them on a day to day basis. Most of these situations are easy to be taught, like traffic violations and small scale altercations (yes, altercations... I hate the word but it is the most broad term I could think of that still works).  Things like the Occupy Movement do not end up as small altercations, nor are they traffic violations. They are generally treated as Mob v Police, in which the Police will often take the smallest of small aggressive movements toward their persons as a serious offense and thus react overly harsh, in some if not most instances. The regression in funding and training budgeting has just made this worse. South of me there are areas without municipal police funding and rely entirely on the overstretched and threadbare forces of their neighboring municipalities, or the state police, for protection and response. This leads to even more disturbing issues, but these are not discussable in this topic since it is about the OWS Movement and not general municipal law enforcement.

The pressure may have done some good, but possibly not in the way that is most beneficial to everyone. If/when the government becomes involved most good ideas and solutions fly out the window. This is not because the government is filled with idiots, though partially true, but because the government is filled with super partisans. They will wittle away any good that is in any solution until it becomes distorted from the original purpose.

Example: Say someone in the gov't goes "Hey, I have an Idea! Let's raise taxes for the 1% only!"
Another will follow saying, "Aye, good idea thar!"
And so will follow until the "other party" becomes involved who says "but that's not 'fair'! We need to raise the taxes for all or we would be singling out the 1%!"

This would continue, compromises would be made, and eventually the outcome could come to this:
"We are going to raise everyone's taxes, just the top 20% will have to pay and extra X% in taxes above what the rest pay."

While this would seem like an okay thing, and everyone in gov't agrees on it, it is not because then the little guy would still have less money coming in each month and the top 20% can probably afford to pay that extra X% anyway. This would then begin the cycle over again of "The 1% must pay MORE!" and that's something I just don't agree with.

Again I say, the future will let me know what's the truth and what is false
GalenEvil

Addendum because of Bauglir whom posted while I typed this up:

Your post actually gives me a little pause to think about things. It is right to think that the Status Quo isn't good enough anymore and that action should be taken against it. But why attack Wallstreet of all places? There are much better places to attack... Silicon Valley, Wal-Mart headquarters, Google, Microsoft, the gods of Apple? Sure, every large company that worked for their marketshare wants to keep it. Simple as that. They want to keep what they have, and maybe grow it by a few percent a year in an ideal world. Think about what would actually happen if all of the entrenched high-marketshare business suddenly went under. Microsoft, Apple, Hewlett-Packard, T-Mobile, AT&T, Ma'Bell, HughsNet, DirectTV, DishNet, the people who make half the damn candy in the US, P&G, Wal-Mart, "Big Tobacco" in general, all gone, poof overnight (in this example)... there would be an economic vacuum so great that no number of new ideas would be able to penetrate and fill it even if several years were allowed before any country-wide economic repercussions. Several of these companies are what keeps prices at a certain level even if that level is not where we think it should be. All of the large businesses and conglomerates each provide a large amount of tax revenues at the municipal, state, and federal levels. While at the corporate level they may not pay all that much in taxes (despite the US being currently #1 in highest corporate tax rates), the products all have a taxable amount attached to them that pays into the budgets of the economy as a whole. If all of these companies were to disappear overnight, within a year there might be some extreme economic turmoil...

I think I might be spewing a little bit too much... need to cut back on my drinking tonight >.> hope that this stays a civil conversation ^_^

[SalmonGod]

The Occupy Movement is still ongoing? If it is I have thankfully not heard much about it... it makes me sad listening to people whine. The Occupy Movement, as far as I can see, hasn't done anything positive other than giving groundskeepers and maintenance crews something to do... My opinion is: If you want more money, go do something or create something and make money. If you make get far enough that you actually become part of the 1% then, if you still feel the same as you do right now go do something about it. As far as I can tell the Occupy Movement, specifically Occupy Wallstreet, has done nothing but hurt the business in their immediate area. Most if not all of the owners are definitely not in the 1%...

I may be wrong, and if so then the future will tell me... until then I can only hope to be right.
GalenEvil

Have you had any exposure at all besides mainstream media or other people who also have no personal experience with the movement?  You sound like you've never actually interacted with it and your only source of information is outdated stereotypes.

Bauglir described me pretty well.  I've basically resigned myself to the idea that America is going to implode soon, and there aren't going to be any real opportunities for me (or most of my generation) until that happens.  I have a job (where the employees are treated like shit) that, along with my wife's student loans, barely gets my family by... and yet I only personally know one single person beneath the age of 40 who is more financially successful than I.  He has a PhD AND a Master's degree, and just recently got his first good job at 31, which in my opinion is way too late in life to be just landing on one's feet.  Not to mention the vast majority of people do not come from a background that allows them so much educational opportunity and/or simply do not have the talent to advance so far into hard sciences.

I have plenty of talents and ideas that could take me places, but I do not have the time or resources to make them happen.  I have a couple hours of free time at the end of the day, which kicks in around 6 am when I start getting very tired, and very little disposable income.  I spend that free time de-stressing, because I am very afraid of damaging my health with too much stress.  My dad, who suffered a stroke in his late-40's due to stress, named me after his dad, who I never met because he worked himself to death in his mid-30's.  I've had two very dangerous MRSA infections, which both occurred during two of the most stressful periods of my life.

So really... does it make sense for me to do anything but root for the Occupy movement and try to predict and be ready for when the whole system is going to come crashing down?

The issue I have against the distribution of wealth is that it raises in me the stigma of Communism. Not the Communism that exists on paper, the one that exists in real life where the gov't owns the property and most things are rationed out. If you are willing to work your ass off for something, you should get paid a decent price for the work. If you want a hand-out, go jump in a ditch and lie there until a good hard rain takes you out of the equation. This is, on paper, a free market. You work for what you get here.

Disclaimer:  My views here do not reflect those of the Occupy movement as a whole (where there is no real consensus on these points), and I am also not a believer in statist communism.  I see late game capitalism as functionally identical to statist communism, which I can explain if you want.

Anyway, it's not fair to compare one system's worst historical manifestations (what I think you mean by "not the communism on paper") with the ideal of the other system (capitalism as it is "on paper"), so here is how I see a fair comparison of both their ideals.  If you really believe in all that rhetoric about earning your keep, then it would make more sense for you to be a communist.  In capitalism, unless you inherit substantial privilege, you are born into a situation where you have to choice but to work for the profit of another.  You're earning more for someone else than for yourself.  If they don't profit from your labor, then they will not employ you, which by definition means that you are earning less than the value of your labor and reducing your own bargaining power in society by contributing to wealth consolidation.  At least in communism you are granted an equal share in the bounty of society, meaning that you are (on paper) guaranteed to advance your own well-being in proportion to your contribution to society.  In capitalism, yes you can advance your status and become comparatively wealthy, but this is by definition statistically unlikely and becomes more and more unlikely over time, according to the principles of wealth consolidation, the profit motive, and the way quality of life develops across economic classes due to goods and services being targeted at the middle class and above who can afford them.  It always confuses me how capitalism is labeled the system that most rewards hard work, when I see it as exactly the opposite.  Most of the hardest working people I know are also the poorest and the least likely to ever improve their situation.

Your post actually gives me a little pause to think about things. It is right to think that the Status Quo isn't good enough anymore and that action should be taken against it. But why attack Wallstreet of all places? There are much better places to attack...

Wall St is just where it began, and the name kind of stuck.  Most people who are involved or sympathetic with the movement have been calling it simply "Occupy" for at least 6 months already.  The movement is everywhere, including hundreds of thousands if not millions of participants outside of the U.S..  Wall St is far from the only target.  In fact, one of the most ambitious gatherings was in D.C. a couple months ago.

I think there is a general agreement that we're trying to cut at the very fabric of society.  There is no single corrupt organization or locality to blame for the state of the world.  It's systematic.  There need to be some very fundamental changes made to the way civilization works.  There is no general agreement on what changes need to be made or what the end result should look like.  The goal so far has been to shift public consciousness and get the dialogue rolling so we can figure it out, instead of careening blindly into catastrophe as we have been.

Think about what would actually happen if all of the entrenched high-marketshare business suddenly went under. Microsoft, Apple, Hewlett-Packard, T-Mobile, AT&T, Ma'Bell, HughsNet, DirectTV, DishNet, the people who make half the damn candy in the US, P&G, Wal-Mart, "Big Tobacco" in general, all gone, poof overnight (in this example)...

I don't think anyone has called for such a thing.  Demanding ethical behavior from any organization is not the same as demanding that it disappear.

While at the corporate level they may not pay all that much in taxes (despite the US being currently #1 in highest corporate tax rates), the products all have a taxable amount attached to them that pays into the budgets of the economy as a whole. If all of these companies were to disappear overnight, within a year there might be some extreme economic turmoil...

Are you talking about sales taxes (paid by consumers), or what?... because most major businesses these days are paying little to no taxes on their revenue.

[GalenEvil]

Truth be told I have only the concepts and opinions expressed to be my others. I live out in the boonies and don't really have a lot of access to the internet. I usually can only get online for about an hour or so a day with a halfway decent connection so it is rather difficult for me to do proper research into the subject. It is saddening to me that I am unable to do research in a proper way, and so often rely on others to do that research for me during conversations with them.

I am resigned to the idea that the US will eventually collapse under its weight of debt which now is close to or passing the GDP in interest payments. I pretty much just live with as little money as I can and squirrel away the rest in nonperishable goods and gaining skills in various occupations so that I can live on after the collapse happens without relying on others for help. I am a believer in earning my own keep, but I will also not help most people with their own living. I guess I could be considered a bad person to some for that but I do not think that I should have to give my money to anyone if I earned my money. I want to keep my bounty for myself. If I find myself on hard times financially it is because either I have not prepared well enough in advance or because I have gotten lazy about the amount of work that I do.

It shows just how little I hear about or read about the Occupy movement as I did not even know that there was one going on in DC until just now. Society as a whole is flawed in so many ways that it is laughable. The Tax Code for corporations is just the tip of the iceberg. I know that most major businesses pay little to no taxes on their revenues and that is pretty screwed up when tied into the amount they are supposed to pay. Why does this country even have a corporate tax when the loopholes allow corporations to disregard it for the most part? Yes I was talking about the sales taxes paid by consumers. Without consumer taxes municipal, state, and government revenues would be much lower and then many more areas would be considering bankruptcy and may actually declare it like Jefferson County, AL did earlier this year or maybe it was last year... not sure as I don't watch the news very often.

I am enjoying this dialog SalmonGod and hope to keep it up My mind isn't really set in any one direction and hopefully this discussion will cement me on one side or the other so that I am not on the fence any longer.

GalenEvil