|
|
Post by abbey1227 on Jul 3, 2022 16:49:36 GMT
Police have killed 286 people in the US this year, according to Mapping Police Violence, a project tracking the number of fatal encounters with police. Black people are far more likely to be fatally shot by police than white people, and data from the project found that in 2022 so far, only four days have gone by without someone being killed by police.
|
|
|
|
Post by Prometheus on Jul 4, 2022 0:22:42 GMT
About 1,000 people are killed every year by police. 45 to 49% of them are white 23 to 25% are black 20 to 23% are "Hispanic" which means they could be white or black ![[giveup]](//storage.proboards.com/7182076/images/FSYefibmKqtatIXMgHZg.gif) The rest are "other" or "unknown" These numbers don't jibe well with percentages of residents of the US... which is what the major complaint is usually about (13%!!!!) but if you put them up against the percentages of "violent crime by race," they match up rather nicely. In fact, you'd see that white people are getting shot by cops more often. Now, this is where the whole, "But more 'innocent' black men are being killed," argument will rear its ugly head. That's why each incident needs to be taken on its own merits and not simply as an indictment of the police as a whole. It's also when we should examine our own rationality and empathy. If police are chasing a suspect and that suspect suddenly turns on police with anything in their hands, that suspect is going to get shot. If a suspect rushes the police (armed or not), they are going to get shot. If the suspect is running away and there is reasonable cause to believe that person is a threat to others, then they are going to get shot. If they are holding something that looks like a gun and refuse to drop it (given a reasonable amount of time) then they are going to get shot. And - like it or not - in all of the above scenarios, 99 times out of 100, we should rationally side with the police. You'll notice that I used the word "reasonable" quite a bit. Jumping out of a police car, yelling, "drop it," while already unloading your firearm is not "reasonable." When you already have a suspect on the ground (struggling or not), shooting them in the back of the head or choking them out is not "reasonable." The vast majority of police in the US are not well-educated, well-trained, or well-vetted. Many (most?) of them seem to think of the job as a vector to punish under the guise of "serving justice" rather than to ensure public safety. This also not to say that the police are the only problem with the equation. After decades of understanding how the "cycle of poverty" works and decades of failure trying to break it, you'd think we'd actually have eliminated most or all of the "wrong ways" to do it by now and be well on our way to diminishing or eliminating it, but we aren't. Part of the problem is that there are some poor people who simply cannot be dragged out of their situation, but the bigger problem is a power structure that simply doesn't want them to be because poverty is exploitable. More importantly, civil unrest is exploitable. Meh. I'm not in the mood to write a book right now. /Monday Morning Rant |
|
|
|
Post by abbey1227 on Jul 4, 2022 8:35:28 GMT
About 1,000 people are killed every year by police. 45 to 49% of them are white 23 to 25% are black 20 to 23% are "Hispanic" which means they could be white or black ![[giveup]](//storage2.proboards.com/7182076/images/FSYefibmKqtatIXMgHZg.gif) The rest are "other" or "unknown" These numbers don't jibe well with percentages of residents of the US... which is what the major complaint is usually about (13%!!!!) but if you put them up against the percentages of "violent crime by race," they match up rather nicely. In fact, you'd see that white people are getting shot by cops more often. Now, this is where the whole, "But more 'innocent' black men are being killed," argument will rear its ugly head. That's why each incident needs to be taken on its own merits and not simply as an indictment of the police as a whole. It's also when we should examine our own rationality and empathy. If police are chasing a suspect and that suspect suddenly turns on police with anything in their hands, that suspect is going to get shot. If a suspect rushes the police (armed or not), they are going to get shot. If the suspect is running away and there is reasonable cause to believe that person is a threat to others, then they are going to get shot. If they are holding something that looks like a gun and refuse to drop it (given a reasonable amount of time) then they are going to get shot. And - like it or not - in all of the above scenarios, 99 times out of 100, we should rationally side with the police. You'll notice that I used the word "reasonable" quite a bit. Jumping out of a police car, yelling, "drop it," while already unloading your firearm is not "reasonable." When you already have a suspect on the ground (struggling or not), shooting them in the back of the head or choking them out is not "reasonable." The vast majority of police in the US are not well-educated, well-trained, or well-vetted. Many (most?) of them seem to think of the job as a vector to punish under the guise of "serving justice" rather than to ensure public safety. This also not to say that the police are the only problem with the equation. After decades of understanding how the "cycle of poverty" works and decades of failure trying to break it, you'd think we'd actually have eliminated most or all of the "wrong ways" to do it by now and be well on our way to diminishing or eliminating it, but we aren't. Part of the problem is that there are some poor people who simply cannot be dragged out of their situation, but the bigger problem is a power structure that simply doesn't want them to be because poverty is exploitable. More importantly, civil unrest is exploitable. Meh. I'm not in the mood to write a book right now. /Monday Morning Rant
Nice rant anyway.
My few points of contention.......HOW educated do you feel the police should be? Most have at least 2 years college or police academy training. no?
Ensure public safety? Isn't that for their superiors or voting district to decide on policy-wise? It's clear the soft on crime DAs all over the US are failing to ensure public safety, imo. And those people are usually full blown lawyers......more educated than most. Too many elite social studies classes for them, perhaps? Totally out of touch with reality?
That's usually my point......after decades of failures......we aren't any closer to curing poverty. Mostly because we can not force people to do things to that extent. Whether we should or not is up for debate.
Exploitable poverty? Another totally up for debate argument/discussion. The things that I have witnessed over the years.
I look forward to the next chapter in your book  |
|
|
|
Post by Prometheus on Jul 4, 2022 23:32:19 GMT
About 1,000 people are killed every year by police. 45 to 49% of them are white 23 to 25% are black 20 to 23% are "Hispanic" which means they could be white or black The rest are "other" or "unknown" These numbers don't jibe well with percentages of residents of the US... which is what the major complaint is usually about (13%!!!!) but if you put them up against the percentages of "violent crime by race," they match up rather nicely. In fact, you'd see that white people are getting shot by cops more often. Now, this is where the whole, "But more 'innocent' black men are being killed," argument will rear its ugly head. That's why each incident needs to be taken on its own merits and not simply as an indictment of the police as a whole. It's also when we should examine our own rationality and empathy. If police are chasing a suspect and that suspect suddenly turns on police with anything in their hands, that suspect is going to get shot. If a suspect rushes the police (armed or not), they are going to get shot. If the suspect is running away and there is reasonable cause to believe that person is a threat to others, then they are going to get shot. If they are holding something that looks like a gun and refuse to drop it (given a reasonable amount of time) then they are going to get shot. And - like it or not - in all of the above scenarios, 99 times out of 100, we should rationally side with the police. You'll notice that I used the word "reasonable" quite a bit. Jumping out of a police car, yelling, "drop it," while already unloading your firearm is not "reasonable." When you already have a suspect on the ground (struggling or not), shooting them in the back of the head or choking them out is not "reasonable." The vast majority of police in the US are not well-educated, well-trained, or well-vetted. Many (most?) of them seem to think of the job as a vector to punish under the guise of "serving justice" rather than to ensure public safety. This also not to say that the police are the only problem with the equation. After decades of understanding how the "cycle of poverty" works and decades of failure trying to break it, you'd think we'd actually have eliminated most or all of the "wrong ways" to do it by now and be well on our way to diminishing or eliminating it, but we aren't. Part of the problem is that there are some poor people who simply cannot be dragged out of their situation, but the bigger problem is a power structure that simply doesn't want them to be because poverty is exploitable. More importantly, civil unrest is exploitable. Meh. I'm not in the mood to write a book right now. /Monday Morning Rant
Nice rant anyway.
My few points of contention.......HOW educated do you feel the police should be? Most have at least 2 years college or police academy training. no?
Ensure public safety? Isn't that for their superiors or voting district to decide on policy-wise? It's clear the soft on crime DAs all over the US are failing to ensure public safety, imo. And those people are usually full blown lawyers......more educated than most. Too many elite social studies classes for them, perhaps? Totally out of touch with reality?
That's usually my point......after decades of failures......we aren't any closer to curing poverty. Mostly because we can not force people to do things to that extent. Whether we should or not is up for debate.
Exploitable poverty? Another totally up for debate argument/discussion. The things that I have witnessed over the years.
I look forward to the next chapter in your book  1. 18 weeks in the police academy is enough in your mind? And is that two years of community college where they got an associates degree in "criminology" or they dropped out of their bachelor's program after 2 years?
2. I'm talking about mindset. When you walk out of your door in the morning looking for trouble, you'll find it. Similarly, when you walk out of your door in the morning looking for ways to help people, you'll find them.
3&4. We're no closer to curing it because the money interests that own the USA don't want it.
|
|
|
|
Post by abbey1227 on Jul 5, 2022 2:45:20 GMT
1. 18 weeks in the police academy is enough in your mind? And is that two years of community college where they got an associates degree in "criminology" or they dropped out of their bachelor's program after 2 years?
2. I'm talking about mindset. When you walk out of your door in the morning looking for trouble, you'll find it. Similarly, when you walk out of your door in the morning looking for ways to help people, you'll find them.
3&4. We're no closer to curing it because the money interests that own the USA don't want it.
1. You're the one who brought up all of the 'College Degree Required' job postings. 
2. That's true about the mindset.......but at the same time, it's not like it isn't a relentless and endless stream of people with bad attitudes and behaviors wanting to be caught. I used to think police work was a bit more challenging in discovering crime.......but it ain't.
3. I've had similar thoughts on the money interests and war. If they shifted their assets into peaceful cooperation.........instead of weapons and military spending.......isn't growing wealth the same regardless?
|
|
|
|
Post by Prometheus on Jul 5, 2022 3:31:47 GMT
1. 18 weeks in the police academy is enough in your mind? And is that two years of community college where they got an associates degree in "criminology" or they dropped out of their bachelor's program after 2 years?
2. I'm talking about mindset. When you walk out of your door in the morning looking for trouble, you'll find it. Similarly, when you walk out of your door in the morning looking for ways to help people, you'll find them.
3&4. We're no closer to curing it because the money interests that own the USA don't want it.
1. You're the one who brought up all of the 'College Degree Required' job postings. 
2. That's true about the mindset.......but at the same time, it's not like it isn't a relentless and endless stream of people with bad attitudes and behaviors wanting to be caught. I used to think police work was a bit more challenging in discovering crime.......but it ain't.
3. I've had similar thoughts on the money interests and war. If they shifted their assets into peaceful cooperation.........instead of weapons and military spending.......isn't growing wealth the same regardless?
1. I'm not saying that they should be required to have a college degree. I'm saying that they should be better trained. Maybe the police academy should last 2 years with graduates getting a degree and a badge...?
2. Of course there's a lot of crime. As YOU have mentioned: we've criminalized everything. However, that doesn't mean cops should be out looking for trouble (a little action... a chance to play tough guy... throw some guy up against the wall for a rough frisk... the chance to draw that weapon...)
3. Elaborate
|
|
|
|
Post by abbey1227 on Jul 5, 2022 3:53:37 GMT
1. You're the one who brought up all of the 'College Degree Required' job postings.
2. That's true about the mindset.......but at the same time, it's not like it isn't a relentless and endless stream of people with bad attitudes and behaviors wanting to be caught. I used to think police work was a bit more challenging in discovering crime.......but it ain't.
3. I've had similar thoughts on the money interests and war. If they shifted their assets into peaceful cooperation.........instead of weapons and military spending.......isn't growing wealth the same regardless?
1. I'm not saying that they should be required to have a college degree. I'm saying that they should be better trained. Maybe the police academy should last 2 years with graduates getting a degree and a badge...?
2. Of course there's a lot of crime. As YOU have mentioned: we've criminalized everything. However, that doesn't mean cops should be out looking for trouble (a little action... a chance to play tough guy... throw some guy up against the wall for a rough frisk... the chance to draw that weapon...)
3. Elaborate
1. Aside from seriously indepth mental health treatment......or advanced hypnosis techniques.......I don't know how much more training is required to get other people to behave when their under the influence or simply anti-social?
2. There should definitely be a cleansing of the law books. You might be surprised by how often it's simply a Grant/Funding for a specific task on a weekly or monthly basis. Drunk drivers, drug stings, speeding, etc
3. Well, let's say you're an evil Haliburton or Lockheed Martin owner........couldn't you transform your business into peaceful ventures? like car building? or home building? or a wide variety of other avenues that do not involve weaponry?
My point is isimply that there's ways of making money that do not involve killing millions of people. Just look at what Ray Kroc accomplished. |
|
|
|
Post by Prometheus on Jul 5, 2022 4:09:10 GMT
1. I'm not saying that they should be required to have a college degree. I'm saying that they should be better trained. Maybe the police academy should last 2 years with graduates getting a degree and a badge...?
2. Of course there's a lot of crime. As YOU have mentioned: we've criminalized everything. However, that doesn't mean cops should be out looking for trouble (a little action... a chance to play tough guy... throw some guy up against the wall for a rough frisk... the chance to draw that weapon...)
3. Elaborate
1. Aside from seriously indepth mental health treatment......or advanced hypnosis techniques.......I don't know how much more training is required to get other people to behave when their under the influence or simply anti-social?
2. There should definitely be a cleansing of the law books. You might be surprised by how often it's simply a Grant/Funding for a specific task on a weekly or monthly basis. Drunk drivers, drug stings, speeding, etc
3. Well, let's say you're an evil Haliburton or Lockheed Martin owner........couldn't you transform your business into peaceful ventures? like car building? or home building? or a wide variety of other avenues that do not involve weaponry?
My point is isimply that there's ways of making money that do not involve killing millions of people. Just look at what Ray Kroc accomplished. 1. How about we train them not to see every word or action as "anti-social"? That would go a long way in dealing with #2
2. And cops shouldn't be bullies looking to make a person's bad day even worse.
3. You think the moneyed interests in the US are only the weapons manufacturers?
|
|
|
|
Post by abbey1227 on Jul 5, 2022 4:14:13 GMT
1. Aside from seriously indepth mental health treatment......or advanced hypnosis techniques.......I don't know how much more training is required to get other people to behave when their under the influence or simply anti-social?
2. There should definitely be a cleansing of the law books. You might be surprised by how often it's simply a Grant/Funding for a specific task on a weekly or monthly basis. Drunk drivers, drug stings, speeding, etc
3. Well, let's say you're an evil Haliburton or Lockheed Martin owner........couldn't you transform your business into peaceful ventures? like car building? or home building? or a wide variety of other avenues that do not involve weaponry?
My point is isimply that there's ways of making money that do not involve killing millions of people. Just look at what Ray Kroc accomplished. 1. How about we train them not to see every word or action as "anti-social"? That would go a long way in dealing with #2
2. And cops shouldn't be bullies looking to make a person's bad day even worse.
3. You think the moneyed interests in the US are only the weapons manufacturers?
1. I really wonder if China is so very, very different when it comes to how behaved people are in general? You figure jpat was exaggerating his environment?
2. Agreed. deescalate if you can. BUT.......there's tons of people who have no interest in that maneuver.
3. No, there's money to be made everywhere........which is why I do not get the longevity and persistence of the MIC. Granted, it's a pretty sure bet the US will continue to mess about somewhere on the planet leading to more and more weaponry needed.
|
|
|
|
Post by Prometheus on Jul 5, 2022 8:24:10 GMT
1. How about we train them not to see every word or action as "anti-social"? That would go a long way in dealing with #2
2. And cops shouldn't be bullies looking to make a person's bad day even worse.
3. You think the moneyed interests in the US are only the weapons manufacturers?
1. I really wonder if China is so very, very different when it comes to how behaved people are in general? You figure jpat was exaggerating his environment?
2. Agreed. deescalate if you can. BUT.......there's tons of people who have no interest in that maneuver.
3. No, there's money to be made everywhere........which is why I do not get the longevity and persistence of the MIC. Granted, it's a pretty sure bet the US will continue to mess about somewhere on the planet leading to more and more weaponry needed.
1. In China, everyone expects everyone else to be a lying, cheating son-of-a-bitch, so most of them pretty much act as expected since actually being honest will never change the perception. That's why they haggle and argue over every, little, fucking thing. There are plenty of honest Chinese, but they struggle harder than most since their honesty is just perceived as a "long con."
2. But far too many don't know how to de-escalate a situation (not enough training) and don't have the patience for it because they want to punish rather than help.
3.
|
|
|
|
Post by abbey1227 on Jul 5, 2022 10:02:46 GMT
Iron Man, while entertaining as F with Robert playing the part........ is an interesting character. By the end of that flick he feels horrible about the weapons they've created and sold. But at the same time, he's more than happy to keep advancing his own suit which gives him incredible fire power.
And that young lady? I've only seen her in a few things, but each are memorable.......she's the proud indignant liberal minded reporter after Stark, but then sleeps with him even though he's an evil capitalist war pig....... she was Rickie Bobbie's wife, Shake N Bake............and she was the cute taken aback tour guide for NBC studios when Howard Stern had the woman who could swallow an entire kielbasa.
|
|
![[giveup]](http://storage.proboards.com/7182076/images/FSYefibmKqtatIXMgHZg.gif)
![[giveup]](http://storage2.proboards.com/7182076/images/FSYefibmKqtatIXMgHZg.gif)
![[cheers]](http://storage.proboards.com/7182076/images/engyBVslEdpmpmdnBwZQ.gif)
