Police out of Control?

Skarekrow

Skarekrow

~~DEVIL~~
MBTI
Ni-INFJ-A
Enneagram
Warlock
[video=youtube;3kEpZWGgJks]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=3kEpZWGgJks[/video]



So the topic of civil asset forfeiture was on the John Oliver HBO show…(you should watch the video before commenting…it’s really funny besides).

It seems that just within a very short amount of time…the police have gotten more and more ‘above the law’ (to cite a bad Steven Seagal movie).

They seems much more trigger happy and this seems to be especially true with our mentally ill portion of society in the US.

They are for sure much more militarized thanks to actual military surplus being sent to the police departments…and we have seen this in action such as the Occupy demonstrations in Oakland, CA. where that young Iraq war-vet sustained a head injury from a tear-gas canister being shot at close range (clearly the person firing the canister would understand that from that range it is no longer ‘less than lethal’).

I’m sorry, but I don’t feel safe around cops….and it isn’t because I’m guilty of doing anything against the law. In fact, I’m a rather law-abiding good citizen.
So why do I and many others feel this way? What can we do about it?
When is enough enough? Now they can just take your shit and you can’t do anything about it!
At the very least, help get the word out so people are informed.
Thank you.
 
The canadian government has actually advised its citizens against carrying cash in their vehicles south of the border because cops are just grabbing it
 
Has anyone ever had anything seized by the cops?
 
Did not watch the video.
What is the alternative to having cops?
What are solutions to monitoring them but still allowing them to do their clearly need job?
 
Eventhorizon said:
Did not watch the video.
What is the alternative to having cops?
What are solutions to monitoring them but still allowing them to do their clearly need job?
Click to expand...
I for one am in favor of them wearing the buttonhole type camera system that a handful of police departments have gotten…for me, it is simple - it will show if the criminal is doing what he/she is being accused of…or it will show where cops are abusing their power. At the very least, it creates the reminder to the cop that they need to always act as a professional, and not shake people down for money they earned and saved to buy a new car or need to move across the country.
 
Skarekrow said:
I for one am in favor of them wearing the buttonhole type camera system that a handful of police departments have gotten…for me, it is simple - it will show if the criminal is doing what he/she is being accused of…or it will show where cops are abusing their power. At the very least, it creates the reminder to the cop that they need to always act as a professional, and not shake people down for money they earned and saved to buy a new car or need to move across the country.
Click to expand...
I agree with that.
 
Skarekrow said:
Has anyone ever had anything seized by the cops?
Click to expand...

Yeah, I cant confirm your personal bias here, you're going to have to ask someone else.
 
Eventhorizon said:
Did not watch the video.
What is the alternative to having cops?
What are solutions to monitoring them but still allowing them to do their clearly need job?
Click to expand...

The cops are basically trained in a military way now as if they are entering the marine corp. This is creating a culture of antagonism

The cops are behaving like soldiers going out into hostile occupied terrority...which it is...it is occupied by the bankers who want the police to act as an enforcer against the people as they rule with an iron fist

Its like being projected back in time a thousand years to when the normans came in and took things over and built castles that they ruled from. This is where the stories of robin hood come from with the oppressive taxes being taken by armed thugs

[video=youtube;u_cuSjd1s0c]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u_cuSjd1s0c[/video]

Lots of marine style yelling in trainee faces

This then translates onto the streets where the cops start yelling at the civilians. Watch this clip below of a perfectly calm and polite civilian talking to cops when one of the cops yanks the door open and starts yelling in his face like a human hairdryer!

[video=youtube;MQ84fG2-kAg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MQ84fG2-kAg[/video]

The cops are being militarised and trained to perceive the public as the enemy and they ARE out of control
 
I sponsor our special units when at all possible.
 
Skarekrow said:
I for one am in favor of them wearing the buttonhole type camera system that a handful of police departments have gotten…for me, it is simple - it will show if the criminal is doing what he/she is being accused of…or it will show where cops are abusing their power. At the very least, it creates the reminder to the cop that they need to always act as a professional, and not shake people down for money they earned and saved to buy a new car or need to move across the country.
Click to expand...

They turn off cameras all the time

Examples in the following clip:

http://www.vox.com/2014/10/6/690525...e-powerful-video-clips-show-why-recording-the
 
http://www.thedailysheeple.com/us-c...efuse-to-hire-someone-who-is-too-smart_092014

US Court Says it’s Okay for Police Departments to Refuse to Hire Someone who is Too Smart

http://www.alternet.org/civil-liber...ake-millions-settlement-money-out-cop-budgets

[h=1]To Stop Police Brutality, Take the Millions in Settlement Money Out Of Cop Budgets[/h]
If settlements for police misconduct on citizens came out of the funding for police, incidents of abuse would be reduced, experts say.



October 2, 2014 |











As the national conversation around racism and police brutality quickly fades–ramped up briefly in the wake of Michael Brown’s death–U.S. taxpayers remain stuck footing the bills for their local law enforcement’s aggressive behavior. This week alone, Baltimore agreed to pay $49,000 to man who sued over a violent arrest in 2010, Philadelphia agreed to pay $490,000 to a man who was abused and broke his neck while riding in a police van in 2011, and St. Paul agreed to pay $95,000 to a man who suffered a skull injury, a fractured eye socket, and a broken nose in 2012.
In 2013, Chicago paid out a stunning $84.6 million in police misconduct settlements, judgments, and legal fees. Bridgeport, Connecticut, paid a man $198,000 this past spring after video footage captured police shooting him twice with a stun gun, then stomping all over him as he lay on the ground. And in California, Oakland recently agreed to pay $4.5 million to settle a lawsuit a man filed after being shot in the head, leaving him with permanent brain damage. You get the picture.
“That’s why these enormous financial penalties do not seem to actually impact what police do,” said David Harris, a law professor at the University of Pittsburgh who specializes in criminal justice issues. “Conceivably, if cities didn’t want this to happen, they could say this will come out of your [police] budget.”The thing is, these steep payments rarely come from the police department budgets–instead they’re financed through the city’s general coffers or the city’s insurance plan. It’s the taxpayer, not the law enforcement agency, who pays the price.
Other scholars have proposed this, too. Between 2006 and 2011, the total number of claims filed for offenses like false arrest and police brutality in New York City increased by 43 percent. So Joanna Schwartz, a law professor at UCLA, suggested the city could take money from its police budget to pay the associated legal costs. “Perhaps if the department held its own purse strings, it would find more to learn from litigation,” Schwartz wrote in the New York Times. This past June, Schwartz published a study that concluded individual cops almost never pay for their misconduct–rather, “governments paid approximately 99.98 percent of the dollars that plaintiffs recovered in lawsuits alleging civil rights violations by law enforcement.”
But the politics of pushing police departments to change or make concessions can be difficult. A recent Gallup poll found that across the country, 56 percent of adults hold “a great deal or quite a lot of confidence” in the police as an institution. If a majority of Americans feel positively about law enforcement, gathering the political will needed to compel change becomes tough.
“Most political leaders don’t have the guts for it, or the stomach for it, so we go around and around and cities pay out buckets of money from their own funds or they buy insurance,” said Harris. “As a result, the settlement costs do not act as a deterrence.”
Video footage might help to change this: The vast proliferation of video recording devices–ranging from individual cell phones to police surveillance cameras–have forced many citizens to watch incidents they might have otherwise tried to deny ever happened. Law enforcement and city officials, too, can’t as easily obfuscate brutal incidents from the record.
It’s possible that the combination of accessible video footage and increasingly expensive lawsuits might at last force cities to re-evaluate the cost of police brutality. This month, a disturbing video surfaced of a Baltimore police officer repeatedly punching a man in June; a $5 million lawsuit was then filed against the cop and the footage will be used as evidence. After seeing the video, Baltimore Mayor Stephanie Rawlings Blake criticized the police department and directed the commissioner to develop a âœcomprehensive” plan to address his agency’s systemic brutality.

for part 2 click on link above
 
Eventhorizon said:
Right obviously theres the possibility of doing that but there have to be consequences for it. If you camera is turned off when x happens your are reprimanded etc...
Click to expand...

This is where the out of control aspect comes in

It's all coming from above

So for example during the occupy protests when people were getting kettled and beaten and pepper sprayed it was always by officers in white tops ie officers rather than the regular blue shirt guys

This is because the officers are responding to orders from above
 
Skarekrow said:
I for one am in favor of them wearing the buttonhole type camera system that a handful of police departments have gotten…for me, it is simple - it will show if the criminal is doing what he/she is being accused of…or it will show where cops are abusing their power. At the very least, it creates the reminder to the cop that they need to always act as a professional, and not shake people down for money they earned and saved to buy a new car or need to move across the country.
Click to expand...

Yeah, if there's anyone being shaken down they're usually shadey as fuck, like dealers who sit pretty among the impoverished they have rendered dependent upon them for fixes, evading taxes or any other responsibilities because they have no declared or declarable income.

That said I'm not endorsing this kind of vigilante moves or street justice on the part of police, here in the UK because of rampant liberal attitudes constantly ramping and ramping attitudes antithetical to authority and any sort of policing what so ever most police request things like the chest mounted cameras.

They do so because they are doing an increasingly difficult job, attempting to discourage really serious anti-social behaviour, recognising that most communities are full of people who identify with anyone other than time, sometimes much like a domestic violence scenario because they have the mistaken belief that if they "hate the cops" they may be spared the attentions of other people, with greater and more sinister reasons for hating law enforcement and policing.

The flip side of the liberal blame the authorities first mindset is the libertarian one which I believe is totally feeding this sort of thing, the rich dont support policing, not any more than they support benefits, tax funded medicine, tax funded social services or social care, its all seen as a drain on their wallets for services they never personally use anyway and cant possible consider as being of even an indirect benefit in these days of spending much of the year at sea for tax purposes. I fully believe that all the attacks on the police and policing are about attempting to make the service so unpopular that privatisation will seem like the logical next step on from cutting spending on it.

And I think that in this scenario the liberals and other pseudo-radicals have been suckered incredibly easily.
 
Eventhorizon said:
Right obviously theres the possibility of doing that but there have to be consequences for it. If you camera is turned off when x happens your are reprimanded etc...
Click to expand...

More common than that is that officers are not issued with cameras, which is a matter of resourcing, most of the good police, and I will say that they do not take any shit and I am actually fine with that as both in my work role and as a private citizen I have put up with a lot of shit from others which I dont believe anyone should rightly have to, want those cameras.

In a litigatious society who would not? I know of one officer who told me that they attended the scene of a disturbance in a public hospital, a guy had been giving verbal abuse to other patrons of the facility and nurses and staff all morning, started to tear the place up and wreck it, then became threatening and violent towards staff, people he knew full well would risk a serious reprimand if they so much as responded to his verbal abuse in any way construable as challenging or tantamount to aggressive. The cop told him once that he felt threated by his behaviour and if he didnt desist he would have to stop him, the guy behaved as he had been all morning to which the cop shouted once more STOP before using physical force to subdue the guy. That was that.

Now the guy who had been behaving criminally lodged complaints and was provided with a tax funded legal team to mount litigatious challenges of that officers conduct before he'd even answered in a court of law for his own.

Luckily the officer in question was wearing a camera for just such an instance and it was in evidence that he'd told the guy twice to cease and desist, then had taken the necessary action, things no one else were in a position to do.

There are two sides to this, the police are not the enemy, more often than not they are public servants and anyone working in public service will be fit to tell you that.
 
Lark said:
Yeah, if there's anyone being shaken down they're usually shadey as fuck, like dealers who sit pretty among the impoverished they have rendered dependent upon them for fixes, evading taxes or any other responsibilities because they have no declared or declarable income.

That said I'm not endorsing this kind of vigilante moves or street justice on the part of police, here in the UK because of rampant liberal attitudes constantly ramping and ramping attitudes antithetical to authority and any sort of policing what so ever most police request things like the chest mounted cameras.

They do so because they are doing an increasingly difficult job, attempting to discourage really serious anti-social behaviour, recognising that most communities are full of people who identify with anyone other than time, sometimes much like a domestic violence scenario because they have the mistaken belief that if they "hate the cops" they may be spared the attentions of other people, with greater and more sinister reasons for hating law enforcement and policing.

The flip side of the liberal blame the authorities first mindset is the libertarian one which I believe is totally feeding this sort of thing, the rich dont support policing, not any more than they support benefits, tax funded medicine, tax funded social services or social care, its all seen as a drain on their wallets for services they never personally use anyway and cant possible consider as being of even an indirect benefit in these days of spending much of the year at sea for tax purposes. I fully believe that all the attacks on the police and policing are about attempting to make the service so unpopular that privatisation will seem like the logical next step on from cutting spending on it.

And I think that in this scenario the liberals and other pseudo-radicals have been suckered incredibly easily.
Click to expand...

People in the US wouldn’t stand for a privatized police force…there would be serious blowback.
Sadly, it isn’t just shady people getting taken…why on earth would the police ask you how much money you have?
There is no good reason.
And the system to try to complain or retrieve your property has been set-up for the common man to fail.
I would call that a serious conflict of interest at the very least.
 
Can I just ask a question by way of a reality check here, in the last fortnight who has spoken with a police officer? In the last fortnight who has made a report to the police service or spoken to an officer about a crime?

Now who can say their opinions of policing and police officers are based upon their own tangible and direct contact with police and who can say their opinions are based completely or partially upon media sources or internet opinion pieces?

The thing about conclusions based wholly or partially upon theory or the media rather than direct experience is that they are less falsifiable because they are not actually based upon evidence, this is what has made the calibre of public political discourse go into sharp decline while the popularity of novel conspiracy theorising, usually very abstract (who is going to accidentially meet a Rothschild?), has increased.

None of this particularly hit upon by the people it should apparently be in evidence to, the loudest complainers about propaganda are often the most susceptible to it.
 
A lot of the regular beat cops are good hard working people but there are also people in the police force who are the absolute scum of the earth and unfortunately that often goes right to the top of the police

For example there have been disgusting cover ups of high level peadophile rings by the freemasonic police here in the UK

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...llegations-against-ex-MP-Greville-Janner.html

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/51...e-12-new-suspects-police-officers-politicians

[h=1]Operation Yewtree investigating 12 new suspects including police officers and politicians[/h]
 
Lark said:
More common than that is that officers are not issued with cameras, which is a matter of resourcing, most of the good police, and I will say that they do not take any shit and I am actually fine with that as both in my work role and as a private citizen I have put up with a lot of shit from others which I dont believe anyone should rightly have to, want those cameras.

In a litigatious society who would not? I know of one officer who told me that they attended the scene of a disturbance in a public hospital, a guy had been giving verbal abuse to other patrons of the facility and nurses and staff all morning, started to tear the place up and wreck it, then became threatening and violent towards staff, people he knew full well would risk a serious reprimand if they so much as responded to his verbal abuse in any way construable as challenging or tantamount to aggressive. The cop told him once that he felt threated by his behaviour and if he didnt desist he would have to stop him, the guy behaved as he had been all morning to which the cop shouted once more STOP before using physical force to subdue the guy. That was that.

Now the guy who had been behaving criminally lodged complaints and was provided with a tax funded legal team to mount litigatious challenges of that officers conduct before he'd even answered in a court of law for his own.

Luckily the officer in question was wearing a camera for just such an instance and it was in evidence that he'd told the guy twice to cease and desist, then had taken the necessary action, things no one else were in a position to do.

There are two sides to this, the police are not the enemy, more often than not they are public servants and anyone working in public service will be fit to tell you that.
Click to expand...
I’ve worked side-by-side with the police when I was a paramedic…and of course there are police who are doing the right things and are there for the right reasons…but more and more here in the US were hear about police having to meet ticket quotas, arrest quotas, property seizure, and you have to step back and ask, ‘what has changed?’.
Clearly people will abuse the system…and there will always be bad cops…but if you are in a role where you have the power to end someone’s life in an instant…and the public demands better accounting because it has reached a noticeable level of error - then just wear the fucking camera, and keep it on, or don’t be a cop.
 
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-09-24/canada-warns-its-citizens-not-take-cash-usa

Canada Warns Its Citizens Not To Take Cash To The USA


Submitted by Tyler Durden on 09/24/2014 23:34 -0400

The Canadian government has had to warn its citizens not to carry cash to the USA because the USA does not presume innocence but guilt when it comes to money. Over $2.5 billion has been confiscated from Canadians traveling to the USA, funding the police who grab it.
If you are bringing cash to the land of the free, you will find that that saying really means they are FREE to seize all your money under the pretense you are engaged in drugs with no evidence or other charges.
It costs more money in legal fees to try to get it back so it is a boom business for unethical lawyers to such an extent than only one in sixth people ever try to get their money back and the cops just pocket it. That’s right. Money confiscated is usually allowed to be kept by the department who confiscated it.
This is strangely working its way into funding police and pensions.
This is identical to the very issue that resulted in the final collapse of Rome when the armies began to sack cities to pay for their pensions. We are at that level now with respect to seizing whatever they want knowing you will have to spend more in legal fees to assert your rights that do not really exist.
Those trying to flee tyranny elsewhere can not bring money with them for the police get to take it on this end.
This pretend war on terrorism is really a wholesale war against the people. It serves as the justification to seize whatever they desire ever since 9/11 as reported by the Washington Post.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top